# Stereotypes



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

Do thet work?

Are they offensive? 

Why are some so offended by them?

There are in my opinion some stereotype that are universal to most men,and women

But as soon as someone says something like most women are scared of spiders. There will someone saying I'm a women and I love spiders how dare you say that!


Or if someone would say most men hold back their feeling there will be someone saying I'm a man and I cry all the time.


Were are so worried about offending people tody it makes mr sick!


Maybe the way to hand it is to teach thicker shin.


Thoughts?


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

This will go over well.


----------



## Jus260 (Mar 24, 2016)

I'm a man and I don't cry unless there is a death. I have never cried while watching a movie. It's a gift.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

Stereotypes are at best lazy, at worst they perpetuate incorrect assumptions. Incorrect assumptions are a great way for those that refuse to challenge themselves or take responsibility for their own actions to cop out and blame others.

The problem on TAM is that some use a one off (their wife or husband) to create stereotypes. So instead of saying their partner was xyz, they say all/most men/women are xyz. Yes that is offensive and lazy.


----------



## Adelais (Oct 23, 2013)

I agree with you in general. I had written a long treatise supporting you.

But then I had vision of a cartoon from pre WWII flash through my mind. It was of a Jew with a huge hooked nose, grabbing a child.

That was a stereotype that while partly true (some Jews have large noses, just like some Atheists have large noses) was patently false (Jews don't kidnap children to drink their blood.)

That stereotype hardened a lot of people's hearts against Jews and cost millions of people their lives. Not only Jews died because of false stereotypes, but people from all over the world, including non Jews, died because of the Nazi hatred toward Jews.

So now I have to say that while some stereotypes are based on partial truths, and are harmless, others can be dangerous.

While I believe there should be no laws passed eliminating people's right to have and discuss stereotypes, we as individuals must have discernment and assess each stereotype as we come across them.

And in the case of some stereotypes, yes, people need to have thicker skin.


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

X


----------



## marriageontherocks2 (Oct 4, 2017)

Generalizations and stereotypes exist for a reason sure. But I've learned to go into each situation with a clean slate and treat everyone as an individual and try to not let bad experiences with certain groups, races, genders in the past effect the way I treat someone I just met.


----------



## Middle of Everything (Feb 19, 2012)

Agree that while some stereotypes can appear harmless and all in good fun, they can be very hurtful for some. And as MrsHolland said they are lazy. 

Lastly what good can come from them? I can think of plenty of bad. But what good really comes from stereotypes?


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Stereotypes can be statistically accurate, but can generate a bias that results in unfair treatment of people. 

In most cases I think the harm outweighs the good.


----------



## Slartibartfast (Nov 7, 2017)

I think you have to view stereotyping through the lens of evolution. Survival under more primitive conditions could often depend on rapid reaction, rapid decision making. Stereotyping is essentially detecting some set of characteristics of appearance, behavior, etc., and using those observations in making a rapid decision about your own behavior. It can be very effective, but it's a cold-blooded process that doesn't care much about the consequences of an aggressive reaction that turns out to be inappropriate. If you react in a way that promotes survival, it worked, even when it didn't need to work. 

Now, there are a lot of our behaviors that are the product of evolved behaviors that were needed in the past, but in a more modern society, the consequences of them misfiring, so to speak, are now significant. Remember, it's the general process of stereotyping that's inherited, not the specific characteristics it observes. It functions, even when it's not needed. And the reaction behaviors were generally learned from elders. If you had to learn them for yourself, a lot of people would die while learning they should have run. 

Plus, things more general than experience go into creating a stereotypical reaction. Through much of human history, warfare was the default condition. The peaceful savage is a myth. Humans fought or prepared to fight in any given situation, because failing to do so, even once, was the end of your group. So differences mattered. People who looked or dressed or spoke differently were presumed more dangerous according to how different they were. There simply hasn't been time for stereotyping as a desirable behavior to fade from the gene pool. 

And it is exactly because it is a product of a time when an defensive reaction was the only acceptable kind that we have to work on being conscious of when it's triggered inappropriately today. And it doesn't help that it's so often used to manipulate people and their beliefs. Because even under primitive conditions, the reaction urged by stereotyping very often wasn't really a necessary reaction. It just happened to be the only assuredly safe reaction. We can, because we can thoughtfully alter our behaviors with practice, disregard many stereotype reactions. And the ones we most often need to discard are not even really survival type reactions. They're just predisposed mode of reacting. Primitive man surely also had useless stereotypes, but it didn't matter too much in simple, sparsely populated societies. Today, poor use of stereotyping is actively harmful, one way or another. And to imagine that they are just unavoidable and so no one should take offense at being labeled according to a stereotype is just boorish and lazy. You can't give examples of exceptions to stereotypes and then complain that they're found to be offensive, because the process of stereotyping was designed to produce a negative reaction, and every stereotype you apply implies something unpleasant about the subject. Although you seems to think there's something wrong with both the person whose character agrees with the stereotype and the person who is the exception. That's not even rational.


----------



## Slartibartfast (Nov 7, 2017)

uhtred said:


> Stereotypes can be statistically accurate, but can generate a bias that results in unfair treatment of people.
> 
> In most cases I think the harm outweighs the good.


I was all set to rebut that with a simple challenge to produce one statistically accurate common stereotype. 

(Statistical accuracy does have a meaning. But it's only when the statement claims the stereotype for a specified number of subjects. If the stereotype is that Muslims, meaning all of them, are terrorists, the stereotype is obviously not accurate; the number is specified - it is however many Muslims are in the world, but there is no supporting statistical truth. If the stereotype is that one percent of mosquitoes carry the West Nile virus, the stereotype is accurate. You don't get to avoid this by saying "some" to make it accurate. You can always find at least two that it applies to, although it's hardly a stereotype for any purpose.) 

Then, it occurred to me that there are two kinds of common stereotype. One is the completely invalid statement, "Jews are monetarily avaricious." There's no valid evidence that all Jews are avaricious, and we can say with high confidence that if such a study could be undertaken, it would fail to support the stereotype statement. 

There is another type that is, strictly speaking, statistically accurate but doesn't really state what it implies and is invalidated through analysis of the implications. "Black males are more likely than White males to be in prison for having committed crimes." The plain statement is accurate. The implication, that "Black males are more likely to commit crimes than White males", is not statistically supportable, if for no other reason than you simply cannot know who committed the majority of crimes and cannot even be aware of a great many crimes that are committed but don't come to light. 

So, I guess I'm still looking for a common stereotype that is actually, in the implication it is being used to promote, statistically accurate. I tentatively doubt we can find one, because if it was truly statistically accurate and actually correct in what it means, it would be too trivial to mention and therefore not qualify as a stereotype and would be merely a tautology. 

In other words, if you actually know what some characteristic genuinely means, your recognition of that meaning is not a stereotype. It's not a stereotype to believe that all rattlesnakes are dangerous. There aren't any tame ones. Their little reptile brains don't work that way. Any healthy rattlesnake will bite you if you mess with it. "All snakes are dangerous" is a (rather silly) stereotype. It probably wasn't a bad one when we lived in trees. And it's arguably useful today when it's a snake you just stepped on and haven't identified. Leaping away is the right response, because it might be a rattlesnake. But it's statistically inaccurate. 

So, absent a valid example, I'm going to say that the very nature of a stereotype is that it is inaccurate on its face. I'm open to a counter-example, but I haven't thought of one that was accurate and still properly called a stereotype. Remember, I'm not saying there aren't any useful stereotypes, just no accurate ones.


----------



## David Darling (Oct 22, 2016)

Six stereotypes about men and women that are scientifically true


----------



## Tiggy! (Sep 9, 2016)

MrsHolland said:


> Stereotypes are at best lazy, at worst they perpetuate incorrect assumptions. Incorrect assumptions are a great way for those that refuse to challenge themselves or take responsibility for their own actions to cop out and blame others.
> 
> The problem on TAM is that some use a one off (their wife or husband) to create stereotypes. So instead of saying their partner was xyz, they say all/most men/women are xyz. Yes that is offensive and lazy.



:iagree:
I find stereotypes more inaccurate/misleading than offensive.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

I think this quote is apropos here...

"_I don't believe in stereotypes. I prefer to hate people on a more personal basis_"

But yeah, stereotype at your own risk. 


Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Ey? Meh, I try to treat people on an individual basis, but if they act the stereotype, they earn the stereotype.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

chillymorn69 said:


> Do thet work?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I think I figured it out: as long as you phrase and start a sentence with ‘some women...’ or ‘some men...’, you should be ok...It’s when you give out the impression that you mean all of the sex and start to generalise.
And to be fair, that would also not be fair or true.
But then there will always be people who will only read two words from a post, trigger and start cutting the testicles off no matter what (both sexes are sometimes guilty of it...just to be clear). 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Arbie2008 (Nov 9, 2017)

We're a mixed bag when it comes to stereotypes. Some we fit, some we bust. Some we laugh at, some we take offense to.

If you want to annoy my husband real quick, tell him, "You men are all alike." That's what his last girlfriend used to say every time she was mad at him. And I agree with him. I would hate to hear him say, as my ex-husband used to say any time I was physically weaker or more emotional than he was, "Isn't that just like a woman?" (There are good reasons why my ex is my ex, and my now is my now.)

A big stereotype we fit is that he's the one who earns the income, and I'm a stay-at-home. It has to be this way because I am disabled. I feel it is fair to consult him on financial matters, since he is the one who earned it, and because he's more knowledgeable and experienced than I am. There are also things I do better than he does, and yes, most of those things are domestic skills. So, we are very much a 1950's kind of married couple. This works best for us, in our circumstances, but obviously we don't feel that the old-fashioned breadwinner/homemaker kind of marriage is a must for everybody.

Another stereotype we fit is that he is far less emotional than I am. That isn't because I'm a blubbering mess all the time, but because he's a freaking Vulcan.

Stereotypes we bust: He couldn't care less about sports, and he prefers cats over dogs. I couldn't care less about talk shows or soap operas, I hate most chick flicks, and I don't watch Lifetime. I don't goof around and make him run late all the time (as his first wife did.) He isn't messy around the house, and he doesn't go through life trying to prove he's Alpha.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

MrsHolland said:


> Stereotypes are at best lazy, at worst they perpetuate incorrect assumptions. Incorrect assumptions are a great way for those that refuse to challenge themselves or take responsibility for their own actions to cop out and blame others.
> 
> 
> 
> The problem on TAM is that some use a one off (their wife or husband) to create stereotypes. So instead of saying their partner was xyz, they say all/most men/women are xyz. Yes that is offensive and lazy.




Yes, that is very true...But also: aren’t there some truisms? 
Like: 
- Many men worry more about the size of their penis than women do...
Or:
- more women are insecure about their looks/weight/boobs etc than men...
There will always be exceptions but to completely ignore certain commonalities...would that not be a bit ignorant?
Or is the opinion that these things are all manmade (or women-made) constructs and are inherently untrue?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## marriageontherocks2 (Oct 4, 2017)

The real problem with stereotypes is, even if it's true 70-80% of the time it's not fair to the 20-30 people out of 100 who don't fit the stereotype. 

White people don't really have to deal with stereotypes so much anymore. Irish are drunks, French are stinky cowards, Italians are organized criminal greaseballs, etc... These are basically tongue in cheek at this point, no one really cares or takes them seriously. Stereotypes for blacks; lazy, welfare, criminals, less intelligent, gang members, aggressive, abandon their kids, sexually predatory, etc.. add in probably 100 different racial epithets that they're known by and you can see how unfair it is to apply these stereotypes to all black people because they are not only very serious, but routinely accepted as true by a lot of people in America. Many black people don't fit into any of those categories and they shouldn't have to prove that they're not these things. It's a ridiculous burden.


----------



## Mr The Other (Feb 1, 2014)

chillymorn69 said:


> Do thet work?
> 
> Are they offensive?
> 
> ...


Stereotypes are fine in themselves.

It is far easier than starting from scratch. The fifty year old English man is more likely to be into reggae and punk than the fifteen year old American boy. 

The problem is when you start blaming the person you see for your worst assumptions.



MrsHolland said:


> Stereotypes are at best lazy, at worst they perpetuate incorrect assumptions. Incorrect assumptions are a great way for those that refuse to challenge themselves or take responsibility for their own actions to cop out and blame others.
> 
> The problem on TAM is that some use a one off (their wife or husband) to create stereotypes. So instead of saying their partner was xyz, they say all/most men/women are xyz. Yes that is offensive and lazy.


Sexism often seems to come from wanting to excuse your partner. 

A woman who says "You know how men are, they get violent after a beer or two" is clearly trying to excuse her partner. 

A man who says "You know how hard it is for women to control themselves" is clearly doing the same.

And, my impression is we tend to want to say we have a great deal in common.

We also see the same types. 

When I first started dating post-divorce, I gained a very negative impression. Most of the women were unattractive, convinced I was lucky to have their time and took for granted that I would want to take care of their emotional, sexual and financial needs. Of course, the women I was seeing were the ones who were married, convinced they were too good for their men and went to upgrade, only to linger on the dating circle for ages. They would complain about how terrible men were.

Meanwhile, I eventually started to meet women who had been let down in relationships. As they only heard bad things, they assumed their experiences were typical.

The men who are most keen to give relationship advice seem to me to be ones who were the most useless. Men who were useless at chatting up women, find one who likes them anyway and proclaim they are a guru. Men who were lazy and useless, but had very accommodating wives, suddenly stop being useless and think they are relationship experts. This all adds to an impression of useless men.

I have lived in a few countries, the stereotypes often have a great deal of truth, but are cultural. (oddly, women in Britain are often confused at checkouts, but this is a British thing rather than global)


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Stereotypes don't usually come out of thin are, there is usually some sort of basis/truth to them (whether or not that applies to most or few within the group will of course vary). I don't see stereotypes as inherently bad. We all stereotype in one form or another. When you first meet a person, you may form an initial impression on them based on how they dress, how they talk, etc... all based on some sort of stereotype. The problem is when you are unable to look past the stereotype to see who the person actually is. The bigger issue is when stereotypes are used to form hatred towards.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Middle of Everything said:


> Agree that while some stereotypes can appear harmless and all in good fun, they can be very hurtful for some. And as MrsHolland said they are lazy.
> 
> 
> 
> Lastly what good can come from them? I can think of plenty of bad. But what good really comes from stereotypes?



Isn’t it all about how to use ‘stereotypes’ or in what context?
Sometimes, it is quicker to make someone of a completely different mindset understand where they are coming from, using a stereotype. I agree, it is lazy and there are more inaccuracies that can come with it...but if something is a little alien to someone:
For example: ‘men need to understand that emotional connection and empathy can make all the difference for women during sex’.
Being purist, this sounds ‘stereotypical’. But it could be very helpful if someone is completely unable to relate to a different mindset (different than their own). Plus every single article on relationships has a sentence like that!

More to the point: how can one possibly write anything about relationships and not bring ‘gender’ issues into the discussion?
I’m not sure it is even possible...I’m pretty sure every other post on TAM contains something ‘stereotypical’ (either deliberate or by chance. Some is malicious and deliberately provocative, some is helpful or some is just chance).

We can all talk what is right or wrong, but the reality is ‘in print’ for everyone to see...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

marriageontherocks2 said:


> The real problem with stereotypes is, even if it's true 70-80% of the time it's not fair to the 20-30 people out of 100 who don't fit the stereotype.
> 
> 
> 
> White people don't really have to deal with stereotypes so much anymore. Irish are drunks, French are stinky cowards, Italians are organized criminal greaseballs, etc... These are basically tongue in cheek at this point, no one really cares or takes them seriously. Stereotypes for blacks; lazy, welfare, criminals, less intelligent, gang members, aggressive, abandon their kids, sexually predatory, etc.. add in probably 100 different racial epithets that they're known by and you can see how unfair it is to apply these stereotypes to all black people because they are not only very serious, but routinely accepted as true by a lot of people in America. Many black people don't fit into any of those categories and they shouldn't have to prove that they're not these things. It's a ridiculous burden.




I think we should limit the discussion to gender-specific stereotypes perhaps since this directly relates to TAM and the many fights that result from someone getting offended? 
Racial stereotypes are a whole different ball game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Slartibartfast (Nov 7, 2017)

David Darling said:


> Six stereotypes about men and women that are scientifically true


Once they're proven true, they're not stereotypes. I think it's pointless to talk about a "stereotype" in an evolving social context unless you can say, "No. That's just a stereotype." Granted, there are truths that are still attacked as stereotypes. There are, of course, differing definitions of stereotype, and some disciplines would agree with you. 

And is the first one even a common stereotype? The running joke has always been that men refuse to ask directions and are therefore often lost until the woman takes the matter in hand.


----------



## marriageontherocks2 (Oct 4, 2017)

inmyprime said:


> I think we should limit the discussion to gender-specific stereotypes perhaps since this directly relates to TAM and the many fights that result from someone getting offended?
> Racial stereotypes are a whole different ball game.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


My post was trying to show with a different example how unfair stereotyping can be. The point of that post was to show how unfair stereotypes against black people in America are. You can correlate that to stereotyping the sexes too, it's just not going to be as impacting. Saying all women are emotional doesn't have the same gravity that stereotypes against blacks carry. It's for effect on the general discussion on stereotypes.


----------



## Slartibartfast (Nov 7, 2017)

EllisRedding said:


> Stereotypes don't usually come out of thin are (sic),...


True, and it's worth thinking about. (I know. I'm violating the above suggestion, but it's for the sake of demonstrating a development dynamic, and I'll later move off to gender.) For instance, color bias was once not a thing in European culture. It's a relatively recent development. There may have been a preference for blondes, but there was no particular disability assigned according to skin color. There was not even any blanket presumption of native inferiority on account of being a slave. Slaves also came in all colors. There may have been cultural stereotypes. It's easier to justify being a lord when you believe the peasants aren't fit to rule. 

It seems to me that the present form of color bias arose first as a cultural bias when slavery had become an active controversy. Once there was a prominent argument that it was immoral, a counter was required that justified it. And a broad assignment of cultural inferiority fit the bill. And because, by this time in the west, slaves were Black, it soon became a color bias, as in, "Blacks are better off being kept by their owners." 

It was also a period when empire was being questions and huge resources were being spent to keep up the commercial empire. And that also required the same kind of cultural stereotypes, which quickly became color stereotypes, since the subject peoples could be recognized by color. (Color in all this obviously means physical type, since actual skin color cannot exempt one from the prejudice.) 

And it was always sitting there primed to fire. The most primitive use of stereotype must surely have been by appearance. "Whoa! They're not us!" 

There are others. The "money-hungry Jew" stereotype is easily traced. And like most all stereotypes, it's fear-based. 

It's not too hard to see parallels in the development of gender stereotypes. And a lot of them become highly visible here, because there are people wanting to make declarations and who have only the barest second-hand information, which is fertile ground for stereotypes that are essentially used as substitutes for actual knowledge. Gender relations have always been a place of conflicting powers and desires and physical attractions. And, as we know so well, it's a most confusing landscape. Stereotypes provide some sort of guide, if not always a reliable one. But even going the wrong way feels a lot better than feeling totally lost.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

A real world example that just happened might help perhaps:

My wife just came back from a workout, showered, put on her clothes, I said to her: "you look amazing, have you put on some weight?". (Some context: she has been quite thin for the last year or so from not getting enough sleep due to baby. But I never said anything to her about looking too thin.) She went ballistic: "How can you think it's ok to tell a woman 'she is fat', are you out of your mind?!!"

I immediately clarified that I meant that she is in much better shape and looks more toned/curvy - is what I meant etc - but that seemed to make things worse...The fact that I didn't apologize straight away meant that it went on for another half hour till she calmed down. (I don't even believe she was really that upset, she was just upset because it's not something you say to a woman...Because gaining a bit of weight is actually a positive thing in her case!)

The point is not that I completely ****ed up (which i did - I put it down once again to one of my more 'awkward' flirting attempts that cost me my balls), the point is that I said it without thinking, wanting to compliment her because if anyone said anything like this to me (and I am also too thin), I would not think anything of it at all and would have taken it as a compliment, 100%, as would any other man (who is too thin/not overweight) - there is just no other way. And that comes 100% back to gender-related stereotypes: how can we avoid it completely when giving advice?

Anyone here (probably female) would probably say: "yeah, you don't say that kind of stuff to a woman, are you nuts?"...The guys might say: "at least you had some sex beforehand" (which I did).

Is it lazy? Is it harmful to understand that as a general rule, you don't mention "you" and "fat" in one sentence to a woman?


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

marriageontherocks2 said:


> My post was trying to show with a different example how unfair stereotyping can be. The point of that post was to show how unfair stereotypes against black people in America are. You can correlate that to stereotyping the sexes too, it's just not going to be as impacting. Saying all women are emotional doesn't have the same gravity that stereotypes against blacks carry. It's for effect on the general discussion on stereotypes.


I know of course you are right and I am sure that most people here are aware why racial stereotyping is inherently harmful/completely wrong and ignorant - there is all the horrible history to attest why it is wrong etc.
Women have not been persecuted/killed/enslaved for being of a different gender (nor have men, except perhaps in Amazons, or maybe that was from a book of myths I read, I can't remember now). Women have been disadvantaged in many other ways by some crazy regimes (and still are, in some countries) but not because of a stereotype, I would argue.


----------



## marriageontherocks2 (Oct 4, 2017)

Slartibartfast said:


> For instance, color bias was once not a thing in European culture. It's a relatively recent development. There may have been a preference for blondes, but there was no particular disability assigned according to skin color. There was not even any blanket presumption of native inferiority on account of being a slave. Slaves also came in all colors.


The origin of the word slave came from middle English and French during the dark ages because they typically took their slaves from the Slavic countries. In ancient Rome there were slaves of all colors, they held property (couldn't be passed down though) and could earn money. If they were freed then they were Roman citizens some holding high ranks in the military and politics, many were North Africans, Germanic, Slavic, etc... 

In ancient Rome a dark skinned Roman citizen from North Africa dressed in a tunic or toga would attract no attention. A lilly white German barbarian dressed as himself would look like an alien from another planet. They definitely weren't as uptight about skin color as we are today.


----------



## peacem (Oct 25, 2014)

I think NOT generalising and stereotyping makes communication very difficult. It is virtually impossible to make an observation about every single person in the world. It is easier to make an observation on the people we know and have met. I think most people know there are exceptions to everything and it sometimes gets tiresome having to make a special statement of intent before saying anything in case anyone gets offended. I watch a lot of feminist debates and lectures and they (thank goodness) stereotype ALL the time. Good - at least they can get their point across clearly so we can get an overview of the type of thing they are talking about. 

Most comedy I go to see is based upon stereotypes. If a comedian decided not to stereotype anyone, ever, there would be nobody left to laugh at. I would also say we are all social constructs so to some extent we do fall into stereotypes and generalisations. I DON'T like false stereotypes...stuff made up like women drivers...drives me nutty. 

But I am scared of spiders (though my daughter is not - she is the flat spider catcher because ALL the other girls are frightened of spiders) and the only time in 22 years I have seen my husband cry is when our dog died. I would actually say I have never seen any male members of my family cry, but then we are tough northerners. There you go I have stereotyped northerners. :grin2:


----------



## Slartibartfast (Nov 7, 2017)

inmyprime said:


> A real world example that just happened might help perhaps:
> 
> My wife just came back from a workout, showered, put on her clothes, I said to her: "you look amazing, have you put on some weight?". (Some context: she has been quite thin for the last year or so from not getting enough sleep due to baby. But I never said anything to her about looking too thin.) She went ballistic: "How can you think it's ok to tell a woman 'she is fat', are you out of your mind?!!"
> 
> ...


Sorry. That's the funniest thing I've ever read here. Show her this post. I dare you. I want to see if she's got a sense of humor. (And, of course, she can't get to me from there.)


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

peacem said:


> I DON'T like false stereotypes...stuff made up like women drivers...drives me nutty.


Well, maybe if you didn't drive nutty the stereotype wouldnt exist :wink2::grin2:


----------



## Tatsuhiko (Jun 21, 2016)

I like stereotypes. I look at this question mathematically and logically. "Stereotype" is just a bad word for "generalization". Generalizations, when accurate, are valuable tools that all of us employ 24 hours per day. 

Do I want to walk outside in a bad neighborhood at night? No, because generally it's a bad idea. 
Should I order the ribeye steak at this restaurant? Yes, because I've generally had a good experience with ribeye steak. 
Should my daughter attend the frat party? No, because I've heard that bad things happen at frat parties, generally. 
Should I take Main Street to get to my destination? Probably not, because traffic is generally bad on Main Street at this time of day. 
Should I get the Labrador Retriever for my children, or the Pit Bull? I'll take the Lab. 

The issue arises when you're unable to overcome your generalizations about a fellow human and not see someone for the individual they are without employing the stereotype. But absent any information about an individual person, the generalization is very normal, natural, and useful. 

Ironically, one cannot criticize generalizations without making one.


----------



## leon2100 (May 13, 2015)

the words "most", "some" "few" "many" are not stereotyping words
the words "every" and "none" "all" are stereotyping words"


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Slartibartfast said:


> I think you have to view stereotyping through the lens of evolution. Survival under more primitive conditions could often depend on rapid reaction, rapid decision making. Stereotyping is essentially detecting some set of characteristics of appearance, behavior, etc., and using those observations in making a rapid decision about your own behavior. It can be very effective, but it's a cold-blooded process that doesn't care much about the consequences of an aggressive reaction that turns out to be inappropriate. If you react in a way that promotes survival, it worked, even when it didn't need to work.
> 
> Now, there are a lot of our behaviors that are the product of evolved behaviors that were needed in the past, but in a more modern society, the consequences of them misfiring, so to speak, are now significant. Remember, it's the general process of stereotyping that's inherited, not the specific characteristics it observes. It functions, even when it's not needed. And the reaction behaviors were generally learned from elders. If you had to learn them for yourself, a lot of people would die while learning they should have run.
> 
> ...


This is getting to the heart of it. Stereotypes are quite frequently misused and misapplied because most people don't understand what they actually are. Stereotypes are nothing more than an analysis of groups of people. They say nothing about individuals, and should not be applied to individuals, and here is the key part...they should not be applied to individuals when there is evidence to the contrary as it relates to the individual, or the ability to find out how it applies to the individual.

Stereotypes are all about percentages, and taking one piece of known information, and extrapolating the likliness of other pieces of information also being true.

As a fairly clear cut, and hopefully minimally offensive example...take a 25 year old white female who regularly does meth as the only known things. From that, in the face of no other evidence, it is reasonable to predict that she is likely not gainfully employed, has or is likely doing other drugs, likely has a criminal record, has likely exchanged sex for drugs. THose are all things that are very present among those who do meth.

Or another less obvious example, and how some stereotypes are so widely accepted and considered good, that people wouldn't even think they are a stereotype...genetic predispositions to certain health concerns such as breast cancer. Just because one has the markers does not guarantee that they will develop the condition, but preventative health decisions are made all the time based on stereotype.

Or the stereotype that white suburban schools are better than inner-city black schools. That's a stereotype that few would argue with, but it's a stereotype none the less.

What it really boils down to is that this becomes an issue when people misuse and misapply a stereotype, either will willful intent, or ignorance, AND THEN refuse to change their view of a person or situation based upon the information they have, or not bothering to put in any effort to obtain additional information when it comes to an individual...people are lazy.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Slartibartfast said:


> Sorry. That's the funniest thing I've ever read here. Show her this post. I dare you. I want to see if she's got a sense of humor. (And, of course, she can't get to me from there.)


She knows! It JUST happened exactly as described. I would say she has 'selective' sense of humour...but she does have it (not about me screwing up, she doesn't).


----------



## UnicornCupcake (Dec 8, 2016)

Isn't the entire (prestigious) school of study known as social behaviour and psychology pretty much a collection of stereotypes, backed up with years of data and longitudinal studies? 
I've never had a problem with stereotypes. I believe there is science backing up some of them. Not all of them, but some. 

I do find the only people who get bothered about stereotypes are those in the inferior position. They kind of worrk like Amazon reviews: The people who complain are the people who review. The happy customer rarely reviews.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Slartibartfast said:


> Sorry. That's the funniest thing I've ever read here. Show her this post. I dare you. I want to see if she's got a sense of humor. (And, of course, she can't get to me from there.)


Oh you mean show her *your* post: she will think that I am trying to make fun of her by doing this: there will be many levels of punishment waiting for me:

1. the fact that I post about a personal situation online in a semi-humorous way - she will not find it funny.
2. by having strangers laughing about it - definitely not find it funny.

But generally, she has a good sense of humour!


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Young black men in the united states having a lower employment rate than young white men is a statistic, and probably true. 

Seeing a young black man and assuming that he is unemployed is stereotyping.

Providing poor service to a young black man in your restaurant because you assume he can't afford a good tip is bias.

Believing that young black men are employed at a lower rate because they are fundamentally inferior whit men is racism


Of course these ideas can all blend together. Some may not even be held consciously.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

Conservatives are racists.

I am willing to talk about this.


----------



## naiveonedave (Jan 9, 2014)

Slartibartfast said:


> Once they're proven true, they're not stereotypes. I think it's pointless to talk about a "stereotype" in an evolving social context unless you can say, "No. That's just a stereotype." Granted, there are truths that are still attacked as stereotypes. There are, of course, differing definitions of stereotype, and some disciplines would agree with you.
> 
> And is the first one even a common stereotype? The running joke has always been that men refuse to ask directions and are therefore often lost until the woman takes the matter in hand.


However even stereoptypes have exceptions to the rule. To me, stereotypes are fine as long as you are adult enough to realize that they are generalizations and many exceptions to the stereotype exist.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Stereotypes are for groups of individuals, be the individuals people, objects, situations. The smaller the group, the more information is needed to see if the stereotype applies to the smaller subset, all the way down to the individual.

Take my schools example above. Take 1000 white suburban schools and 1000 black inner city schools, and the comparison is based on standardized test scores. The statistics do support the stereotype that white suburban schools are better than black inner city schools at that sample size. However, as the sample size gets smaller, all the way down to individual schools, while statistically, it is more likely that any individual white suburban school will have higher scores than any individual black inner city school, the confidence level is much lower to the point where the only valid way out it to compare directly as individuals.

I think part of the issues with stereotyping is that as a society, there is a shift toward individualization, and the desire for individuals to stand out, to be special, and an increased defensiveness and sensitivity towards being included in a group, no matter what that group is, as it is perceived as reducing ones specialness.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

inmyprime said:


> A real world example that just happened might help perhaps:
> 
> My wife just came back from a workout, showered, put on her clothes, I said to her: "you look amazing, have you put on some weight?". (Some context: she has been quite thin for the last year or so from not getting enough sleep due to baby. But I never said anything to her about looking too thin.) She went ballistic: "How can you think it's ok to tell a woman 'she is fat', are you out of your mind?!!"
> 
> ...


I've never had any problems with mentioning weight (skinny, fat etc and remarking on changes). Or telling any of my sexual relationship partners, that I didn't or don't like what they were or are wearing etc or anything else either.

None of them have reacted like your wife with me, none of them got angry, none of them got upset, or sulky and none of them ended their relationship with me because of it.

When asked by the few who asked the following "do I look fat in this", I have said "yep" to those it applied to, without any explanatory caveats. I have also not attempted to tip toe around them, or say what I think they want to here. This has also applied to my wife as well.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

peacem said:


> I think NOT generalising and stereotyping makes communication very difficult. It is virtually impossible to make an observation about every single person in the world. It is easier to make an observation on the people we know and have met. I think most people know there are exceptions to everything and it sometimes gets tiresome having to make a special statement of intent before saying anything in case anyone gets offended. I watch a lot of feminist debates and lectures and they (thank goodness) stereotype ALL the time. Good - at least they can get their point across clearly so we can get an overview of the type of thing they are talking about.
> 
> Most comedy I go to see is based upon stereotypes. If a comedian decided not to stereotype anyone, ever, there would be nobody left to laugh at. I would also say we are all social constructs so to some extent we do fall into stereotypes and generalisations. I DON'T like false stereotypes...stuff made up like women drivers...drives me nutty.
> 
> But I am scared of spiders (though my daughter is not - she is the flat spider catcher because ALL the other girls are frightened of spiders) and the only time in 22 years I have seen my husband cry is when our dog died. I would actually say I have never seen any male members of my family cry, but then we are tough northerners. There you go I have stereotyped northerners. :grin2:


Are you free-folk or do you live south of the Wall?


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

FrenchFry said:


> Conservatives are racists.
> 
> I am willing to talk about this.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Its possible to to make statements about the behavior /beliefs of a group that are not stereotypes, but the examples I can think of all involve members of "voluntary" groups:

Neo-Nazis and KKK members are racists. I think this is almost universally true since I can't imagine deciding to join either group if you were not a racist. Racism is a core value of each group.

Conservatives are not quite the same. There might be a statistical correlation between conservationism and racism, but racism is not a core part of conservationism, so many people can be conservatives without being racists.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

uhtred said:


> Its possible to to make statements about the behavior /beliefs of a group that are not stereotypes, but the examples I can think of all involve members of "voluntary" groups:
> 
> Neo-Nazis and KKK members are racists. I think this is almost universally true since I can't imagine deciding to join either group if you were not a racist. Racism is a core value of each group.
> 
> Conservatives are not quite the same. There might be a statistical correlation between conservationism and racism, but racism is not a core part of conservationism, so many people can be conservatives without being racists.


However, if all you knew was that a person was a conservative, there is an increased probability that that person is a racist. Additionally, if the person is a neo-nazi KKK racist, there is a very high probability that they are a white conservative christian. Not many black, atheist liberals in the KKK.

Just as if I see someone at the minimart in a muddy, jacked up pickup truck, with an American Flag back window tint, and a bumper sticker that says Put God back in our schools, there are a lot of very reasonable, yet stereotypical conclusions that can be drawn from that.

To make it even more fun, at that same minimart, there is also a powder blue prius, and a chrysler town and country minivan. I bet dollars to donuts that walking inside, it would not be too difficult to match the drivers to their vehicles just by looking.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

marriageontherocks2 said:


> My post was trying to show with a different example how unfair stereotyping can be. The point of that post was to show how unfair stereotypes against black people in America are. You can correlate that to stereotyping the sexes too, it's just not going to be as impacting. Saying all women are emotional doesn't have the same gravity that stereotypes against blacks carry. It's for effect on the general discussion on stereotypes.


Actually the stereo type that women are emotional has a huge impact on women. And maybe that's why women are sensitive to it. Women are often dismissed at in public, at work, and in their personal lives because when women bring up their concerns, they are dismissed because women " are just emotional" or "wives are just nags".

Generally people are lazy. Stereotypes help us act in a lazy manner in that people use stereo types as a filter.

I can think of a stereo type that really hurts men... men are violent. Someone calls 911 because there is a domestic disturbance going on next door. The cops show up and assume that the man is the one being violent. Well it just might be that he's married to violent woman and she's actually the abuser. But the cops often just assume that it's him.

At one point my FOO lived in Ft. Worth, Texas. My two little brothers and sister were the only Catholics in their school. The teachers put them at the back of the room because they were Catholics and they had the stereo type that Catholics are evil. The kids used to corner them on the play ground, and demand that they show them their tails... Why? Because the kids were taught in their Baptists church that Catholics were devils and they knew that devils had tails. 

How about when I first started working as an engineer. I'd go to meetings and be the only woman. The men would ask me to make coffee, make copies and do other 'secretarial' chores. They assumed that I was not an engineer. They were operating on a stereo type that caused me problems in my job. 

I am sure that all of you could come up with times when someone used a stereotype as their mental filter in interacting with you and that stereotype ended up causing you a problem or had you very wrongly judged.

It's really not hard to break away from using stereo types. Instead talk about your wife/husband or whom ever the situation is... not "Men are..... " or "Women are ... ". And if you see someone on TAM using stereotypes, you can easily change the tone of the thread by pointing out that a stereotype is not the basis of their problem. Their spouse (or whomever) and relationships problems specific to them are the problem that needs to be addressed.

After all, what can a person do with a stereo type? Wives just nag. Ok, so I guess that's just what wives do and there is nothing the poor, victim man can do. Maybe he should just go hide under the bed. Or Men are violent... well then why complain about your violent husband? Instead just learn to wear body armor. See you cannot fix a stereotype. They make problems to big to fix. In relationships, they are used as an excuse to not address the problems, a passive aggressive excuse.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

samyeagar said:


> However, if all you knew was that a person was a conservative, there is an increased probability that that person is a racist. Additionally, if the person is a neo-nazi KKK racist, there is a very high probability that they are a white conservative christian. Not many black, atheist liberals in the KKK.
> 
> Just as if I see someone at the minimart in a muddy, jacked up pickup truck, with an American Flag back window tint, and a bumper sticker that says Put God back in our schools, there are a lot of very reasonable, yet stereotypical conclusions that can be drawn from that.
> 
> To make it even more fun, at that same minimart, there is also a powder blue prius, and a chrysler town and country minivan. I bet dollars to donuts that walking inside, it would not be too difficult to match the drivers to their vehicles just by looking.


Stereotype much?

"We looked at eight questions from the General Social Survey. First, how many white Americans say they wouldn’t consider voting for a black presidential candidate? In the 2010 edition of the survey, the most recent version to ask this question, 6 percent of white Republicans and 3 percent of white Demorcats said they would not. However, it’s possible that these responses have something to do with Obama himself. In 2008, when Obama was a candidate rather than a president, the numbers were about equal among Republicans and Democrats. And at earlier times, white Democrats were more likely than white Republicans to say they wouldn’t vote for a black president. In 1988, for instance, when Jesse Jackson was running for the Democratic nomination, 23 percent of white Democrats said they wouldn’t vote for a black president, compared to 19 percent of white Republicans."

http://talkaboutmarriage.com/mod-chat/400522-difference-how-men-women-treated-tam.html#post18654282


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

samyeagar said:


> Stereotypes are for groups of individuals, be the individuals people, objects, situations. The smaller the group, the more information is needed to see if the stereotype applies to the smaller subset, all the way down to the individual.
> 
> Take my schools example above. Take 1000 white suburban schools and 1000 black inner city schools, and the comparison is based on standardized test scores. The statistics do support the stereotype that white suburban schools are better than black inner city schools at that sample size. However, as the sample size gets smaller, all the way down to individual schools, while statistically, it is more likely that any individual white suburban school will have higher scores than any individual black inner city school, the confidence level is much lower to the point where the only valid way out it to compare directly as individuals.
> 
> I think part of the issues with stereotyping is that as a society, there is a shift toward individualization, and the desire for individuals to stand out, to be special, and an increased defensiveness and sensitivity towards being included in a group, no matter what that group is, as it is perceived as reducing ones specialness.


This is the point, you make it well. However, just to be clear, a stereotype is not something that is supported by data. Instead it's a "a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing." So a stereotype is much loser than your example here of information that is supported by actual data. But that aside....

On TAM we are talking about our own relationships. So what matters is the individuals involved, not the larger group.

Just like in your example, where if we compare two individuals at each of the schools, we might just find that they do not represent to collected data; in a marriage, we have to look at the individuals.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

EleGirl said:


> Actually the stereo type that women are emotional has a huge impact on women. And maybe that's why women are sensitive to it. Women are often dismissed at in public, at work, and in their personal lives because when women bring up their concerns, they are dismissed because women " are just emotional" or "wives are just nags".
> 
> Generally people are lazy. Stereotypes help us act in a lazy manner in that people use stereo types as a filter.
> 
> ...


Yes, people very often take the lazy way out and use stereotype to specifically address an individual situation, where addressing the individual situation specifics is far more helpful, where stereotypes may or may not apply.

Though things like the cheaters script, and the outcome following I love you but am not in love with you are stereotypes as well.

And online, personally, I am not going to want to get into a discussion about politics or religion with a person if I see them use terms like Killary or Obummer. Again, stereotyping, but likely quite accurate.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

samyeagar said:


> Yes, people very often take the lazy way out and use stereotype to specifically address an individual situation, where addressing the individual situation specifics is far more helpful, where stereotypes may or may not apply.
> 
> Though things like the cheaters script, and the outcome following I love you but am not in love with you are stereotypes as well.






samyeagar said:


> And online, personally, I am not going to want to get into a discussion about politics or religion with a person if I see them use terms like Killary or Obummer. Again, stereotyping, but likely quite accurate.


I don't think it's a stereotype believe that a person who uses terms like Killary or Obummer, libtard, etc are coming from a very biased anti-Hillary anti-Obama point of view. It's also not a stereo type to believe that people who call all whites racist or who use the many derogatory nicknames used for Trump are coming from an anti-conservative and anti white point of view. It's current jargon used by people who use those terms to let you know right off the bat what their political stance is. They have clearly stated using current jargon. To be honest, I'm not interested in talking to anyone who use any of those types of terms. I'm sick of the hate going on in politics. And I think this is not really what this thread was crated to talk about.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

EleGirl said:


> I don't think it's a stereotype believe that a person who uses terms like Killary or Obummer, libtard, etc are coming from a very biased anti-Hillary anti-Obama point of view. It's also not a stereo type to believe that people who call all whites racist or who use the many derogatory nicknames used for Trump are coming from an anti-conservative and anti white point of view. It's current jargon used by people who use those terms to let you know right off the bat what their political stance is. They have clearly stated using current jargon. To be honest, I'm not interested in talking to anyone who use any of those types of terms. I'm sick of the hate going on in politics. And I think this is not really what this thread was crated to talk about.


It is stereotyping to consider and even assume that if a person exhibits a certain behavior in one instance, that it is likely that they will in other instances as well. Clusters of behaviors and beliefs.

This thread by the general nature of its title is about stereotyping. A natural extension of that would be making assumptions based upon limited information. The political examples I gave are just very easy to demonstrate, with very little nuance needed to see it. And in my case, a while back, I was interviewing people for a couple of positions open on my team, and there was one applicant in particular that I did not call for an interview because they frequently used those types of terms in their social media posts...even though their political leaning were more in my direction...the clusters of behaviours associated with that would not have been good for team cohesion.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

EleGirl said:


> Actually the stereo type that women are emotional has a huge impact on women.


You mean women get more emotional because of the stereotype that they are more emotional? :scratchhead: Isn't that a stereotype? :wink2:



EleGirl said:


> I can think of a stereo type that really hurts men... men are violent.


Actually that stereotype doesn't really exist here in Europe anymore. There are plenty of other stereo types though...




EleGirl said:


> I am sure that all of you could come up with times when someone used a stereotype as their mental filter in interacting with you and that stereotype ended up causing you a problem or had you very wrongly judged.
> 
> It's really not hard to break away from using stereo types. Instead talk about your wife/husband or whom ever the situation is... not "Men are..... " or "Women are ... ". And if you see someone on TAM using stereotypes, you can easily change the tone of the thread by pointing out that a stereotype is not the basis of their problem. Their spouse (or whomever) and relationships problems specific to them are the problem that needs to be addressed.
> 
> After all, what can a person do with a stereo type? Wives just nag. Ok, so I guess that's just what wives do and there is nothing the poor, victim man can do. Maybe he should just go hide under the bed. Or Men are violent... well then why complain about your violent husband? Instead just learn to wear body armor. See you cannot fix a stereotype. They make problems to big to fix. In relationships, they are used as an excuse to not address the problems, a passive aggressive excuse.


I am not sure that when referring to stereotypes, it automatically excuses an individual. Using a stereo type sometimes makes it easier to grasp a problem and understand the other person better. Can you really not think of a single scenario where using a stereo is actually productive?

Just google ANY article about relationships between men and women:

https://www.narcity.com/ca/on/toron...-men-and-women-when-it-comes-to-relationships

(The first one that came up in google). ANY relationship advise is completely 'infested' with stereotypes because it makes it easier to bring across points across to understand the other sex better. And this is a relationship/marriage forum and of course the goal is to help and address the *individual * but how on earth is one supposed to give advice without resorting to using a stereo type here and there, if all the articles, books and literature about men and women, how they act, pitfalls and so on are ALL based on stereo types!


----------



## Steve1000 (Nov 25, 2013)

uhtred said:


> Young black men in the united states having a lower employment rate than young white men is a statistic, and probably true.
> 
> Seeing a young black man and assuming that he is unemployed is stereotyping.
> 
> ...


For Line three (bolded), I think that word should be "discrimination" instead of bias. A bias is more of a feeling as opposed to an action.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

inmyprime said:


> You mean women get more emotional because of the stereotype that they are more emotional? :scratchhead: Isn't that a stereotype? :wink2:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


For instance, someone comes here with a spouse who frequently drinks and occasionally punches holes in the wall. The drinker has been on and off the wagon for years, but has always gotten back on the booze. Up to this point, there has never been any physical abuse directed at the poster. Almost to the last person, I suspect that the advice would be to find a way out of the marriage because it is only a matter of time until that physical violence against the wall is directed at the person. Do we know for sure that it will? No, but we apply the stereotype for the stereotypical abuser and come to that conclusion. Anyone who suggested that the poster had nothing to worry about would be met with strong resistance, yet it was all based on a stereotype.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Maybe we should define what 'stereo type' means to people first before arguing at cross purposes. Is it:
1. A widely held image of a particular type of person or thing that is wrong OR
2. A widely held image of a particular type of person or thing that is not necessarily wrong

Because those two are very different things. The second one is more of a 'generalisation'. If it's the first, then obviously no stereo types are particularly useful at all - and there's no argument really. If it's the second, then maybe it's more interesting to talk about whether generalisations can be useful...


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

ster·e·o·type
a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing.
"the stereotype of the woman as the carer"
synonyms:	standard/conventional image, received idea, cliché, hackneyed idea, formula
"the stereotype of the rancher"


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

inmyprime said:


> Maybe we should define what 'stereo type' means to people first before arguing at cross purposes. Is it:
> 1. A widely held image of a particular type of person or thing that is wrong OR
> 2. A widely held image of a particular type of person or thing that is not necessarily wrong
> 
> Because those two are very different things. The second one is more of a 'generalisation'. If it's the first, then obviously no stereo types are particularly useful at all - and there's no argument really. If it's the second, then maybe it's more interesting to talk about whether generalisations can be useful...


The term "stereotype" carries a negative connotation in every day language. People tend to only complain about stereotypes, or even name something as a stereotype if they feel a personal affront regarding the topic it is being applied to. Typically, if they agree with it, they will call it a generalization, or simply not categorize it at all.

Yes, there are very nuanced definitional differences between a stereotype and generalization, but like many other things, in the vernacular, the two terms are used interchangeably, and maintaining the technically different definitions would not change the discourse as it applies to many of the topics here on TAM.


----------



## UnicornCupcake (Dec 8, 2016)

uhtred said:


> Young black men in the united states having a lower employment rate than young white men is a statistic, and probably true.
> 
> Seeing a young black man and assuming that he is unemployed is stereotyping.
> 
> ...


Ah, well said. Context is important, too.

For example, you're trying to set your friend up with your other friend who happens to be black. If she says: "Does he have a job? Because I only want to date men who are employed..." Do you consider that a stat, stereotype, bias or racism?

(Not trying to poke the bear, I'm just genuinely curious.)

Personally, I wouldn't think she's stereotyping, bias or racist. I'd think she was aware of the economic situation in her area, knows what's important to her and asked an important question from the get-go. But I'm curious what others think.

ANother example: My co-worker keeps dating women with kids. Even though he hates kids. He's always complaining about how they ruined their night or whatever. Finally, I asked him why he's dating women with children if he doesn't liek children. His response? "At my age, most women have children so I just have to accept it."
I wanted to be like "Uh, no. Maybe women YOU know in YOUR circle YOUR age have children, but not every 30 year old woman has a kid trailing after her lol id consider his comment a stereotype.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

UnicornCupcake said:


> Ah, well said. Context is important, too.
> 
> For example, you're trying to set your friend up with your other friend who happens to be black. If she says: "Does he have a job? Because I only want to date men who are employed..." Do you consider that a stat, stereotype, bias or racism?
> 
> ...


Ahh...and here is the statistical mistake...his group and your group are different, so one can't be applied to the other. It is quite likely that most of the women he has reached out to for the purpose of dating indeed have children. That has nothing to do with the group of women you are selecting. The stereotype holds true for him, but is equally false for you.

This also leads to related factors and clusters of behaviour and traits. There could be other things he is looking for in a relationship that happen to coincide with a higher chance that the woman will also have children, so there could be statistical bias in his group because of factors he is considering for his base group, that you are not considering.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

uhtred said:


> Its possible to to make statements about the behavior /beliefs of a group that are not stereotypes, but the examples I can think of all involve members of "voluntary" groups:
> 
> Neo-Nazis and KKK members are racists. I think this is almost universally true since I can't imagine deciding to join either group if you were not a racist. Racism is a core value of each group.
> 
> Conservatives are not quite the same. There might be a statistical correlation between conservationism and racism, but racism is not a core part of conservationism, so many people can be conservatives without being racists.


I'm sorry. Most conservatives are racist. That makes it better, I said most.

Nope, nope.

Some. Some conservatives are racists and those who say they aren't are outliers.

(My tongue is firmly in my cheek.)


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

FrenchFry said:


> ster·e·o·type
> a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing.
> "the stereotype of the woman as the carer"
> synonyms:	standard/conventional image, received idea, cliché, hackneyed idea, formula
> "the stereotype of the rancher"


Yes, I looked up various definitions before asking (including the one you posted), they contradict each other or there are different nuances, for example:

"a set idea that people have about what someone or something is like, *especially an idea that is wrong*:"

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/stereotype

That last bit in bold is critical. Otherwise we should discuss 'generalizations', not stereotypes.


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

samyeagar said:


> For instance, someone comes here with a spouse who frequently drinks and occasionally punches holes in the wall. The drinker has been on and off the wagon for years, but has always gotten back on the booze. Up to this point, there has never been any physical abuse directed at the poster. Almost to the last person, I suspect that the advice would be to find a way out of the marriage because it is only a matter of time until that physical violence against the wall is directed at the person. Do we know for sure that it will? No, but we apply the stereotype for the stereotypical abuser and come to that conclusion. Anyone who suggested that the poster had nothing to worry about would be met with strong resistance, yet it was all based on a stereotype.


The advice given in this situation is based on statistical data and not on a stereotype.


----------



## VladDracul (Jun 17, 2016)

Slartibartfast said:


> There is another type that is, strictly speaking, statistically accurate but doesn't really state what it implies and is invalidated through analysis of the implications. "Black males are more likely than White males to be in prison for having committed crimes." The plain statement is accurate. The implication, that "Black males are more likely to commit crimes than White males", is not statistically supportable, if for no other reason than you simply cannot know who committed the majority of crimes and cannot even be aware of a great many crimes that are committed but don't come to light.


I hate to stereotype you may man but the way you handled that example makes me think you'd have to be a politician (or would make a damn good one):wink2::grin2:


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

"a set idea that people have about what someone or something is like, especially an idea that is wrong"

Who gets to determine the idea is wrong?

If I say to you, personally, that I don't mind getting told that I am gaining weight--is the idea now wrong? Did I bust the stereotype?

How many people would you need to determine if a stereotype is wrong or right? How much data?

I don't understand why a conservative would get mad if I told them they were racist when I can find data and people that support my personal experience.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Red Sonja said:


> The advice given in this situation is based on statistical data and not on a stereotype.


Which study/statistical set of data would that be? 
And will all the TAM members have read these statistics before giving that advice or would they comment from their gut feeling?

You can find statistical data to support almost any stereotype...Even science will back up stereo types (don't shoot the messenger):

Women BORN to be moody: Female brains wired for increased anxiety and depression | Daily Mail Online


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

David Darling said:


> Six stereotypes about men and women that are scientifically true


Oh dear, I can navigate (land, sea and air), I don't "talk, talk, talk" and I return spiders and snakes back into the "wild" instead of killing them.

I must not be a woman according to "science".


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

One of the more fascinating stereotypes to me is this simple one that is regularly thrown out here on TAM, and is a subset of the mommy wars...

Being a mother is a 24/7 job.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

FrenchFry said:


> "a set idea that people have about what someone or something is like, especially an idea that is wrong"
> 
> Who gets to determine the idea is wrong?


The mods? :wink2:



FrenchFry said:


> If I say to you, personally, that I don't mind getting told that I am gaining weight--is the idea now wrong? Did I bust the stereotype?
> 
> How many people would you need to determine if a stereotype is wrong or right?


The majority I would have thought. There are always outliers in any data set.



FrenchFry said:


> I don't understand why a conservative would get mad if I told them they were racist when I can find data and people that support my personal experience.


Can you find data that the majority are racist? In which case the 'stereo type' is probably true then.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Red Sonja said:


> Oh dear, I can navigate (land, sea and air), I don't "talk, talk, talk" and I return spiders and snakes back into the "wild" instead of killing them.
> 
> I must not be a woman according to "science".


Well, supposedly there are something like 87 different genders so who knows what any of us really are lol ??? :grin2:


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

inmyprime said:


> Which study/statistical set of data would that be?
> And will all the TAM members have read these statistics before giving that advice or would they comment from their gut feeling?
> 
> You can find statistical data to support almost any stereotype...Even science will back up stereo types (don't shoot the messenger):
> ...


Please, I was pointing out the difference between so-called "facts" based on assumptions (stereotypes) and true facts based on pier-reviewed scientific studies containing logical conclusions (data).

You can find junk-science anywhere ... oh look, you found some.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

EllisRedding said:


> Well, supposedly there are something like 87 different genders so who knows what any of us really are lol ??? :grin2:


And it all depends on what we are identifying as on that particular day?


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

inmyprime said:


> The mods? :wink2:


The mods, amazing as they are are enforcers. The heavies.



> The majority I would have thought. There are always outliers in any data set.


Absolutely.





> Can you find data that the majority are racist? In which case the 'stereo type' is probably true then.


I can! Not gonna, I am supposed to be "working." Also, those sources will be mostly from my personal bookmarks which I've found to support my experiences.

What do you think the ramifications of me treating all conservatives as racist would be?


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Red Sonja said:


> Please, I was pointing out the difference between so-called "facts" based on assumptions (stereotypes) and true facts based on pier-reviewed scientific studies containing logical conclusions (data).
> 
> You can find junk-science anywhere ... oh look, you found some.


But it is 'peer' reviewed: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080213111043.htm

An it is not the only study that found the same thing. How many peer-reviewed studies would it take until it becomes fact out of interest?

https://www.stress.org/why-do-women-suffer-more-from-depression-and-stress/

I am not claiming any of this is true or useful information btw just that substituting 'stereo type' with 'statistical data' to suit an argument is kinda...a weak argument.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> The mods, amazing as they are are enforcers. The heavies.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Depends upon how you act on it? Given the fact that you are a strong, outspoken, black woman. it would probably be pretty smart for you to at least keep the fact that the other person is a conservative in the back of your mind when it comes to interacting with them, until you find out additional information to help clarify them as a person.

A different scenario...

Take a woman who is outspoken and staunchly pro-life. What other things can be reasonably suspected about her? Religious, traditional gender and family roles, conservative, votes republican, etc


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

FrenchFry said:


> What do you think the ramifications of me treating all conservatives as racist would be?


I dunno, they will probably loose your vote? (unless you are into racism :laugh:


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

FrenchFry said:


> I'm sorry. Most conservatives are racist. That makes it better, I said most.
> 
> Nope, nope.
> 
> ...


What about all the Black, Hispanic, and Asian conservatives? Are they racist? 

What about all the liberals who pander to minorities with promises of everything from expanded affirmative action to reparations? Are they not racist?

Which is more racist; meritocracy or quotas?


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

samyeagar said:


> A different scenario...
> 
> Take a woman who is outspoken and staunchly pro-life. What other things can be reasonably suspected about her? Religious, traditional gender and family roles, conservative, votes republican, etc


Isn't that more to do with prejudices?
Stereo types, generalisations, prejudices...the English language is too limited for such an emotional place like TAM :slap:


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

inmyprime said:


> Yes, that is very true...But also: aren’t there some truisms?
> Like:
> - Many men worry more about the size of their penis than women do...
> Or:
> ...


Of course some people fit into a generalisation. Where people lose credibility on TAM is when they come in and say "all women are xyz" because their wife is xyz. So it is not the stereotype it is the way it is used to slam a whole group/gender/race and that is offensive.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> What about all the Black, Hispanic, and Asian conservatives? Are they racist?
> 
> What about all the liberals who pander to minorities with promises of everything from expanded affirmative action to reparations? Are they not racist?
> 
> Which is more racist; meritocracy or quotas?


This is the funniest response to me and stereotypically---the one I was expecting.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

samyeagar said:


> Depends upon how you act on it? Given the fact that you are a strong, outspoken, black woman. it would probably be pretty smart for you to at least keep the fact that the other person is a conservative in the back of your mind when it comes to interacting with them, until you find out additional information to help clarify them as a person.
> 
> A different scenario...
> 
> Take a woman who is outspoken and staunchly pro-life. What other things can be reasonably suspected about her? Religious, traditional gender and family roles, conservative, votes republican, etc


Right? What does that woman look like, where does she live and hypothetically speaking--not working at all-- what would be the best way to get that woman to consistently buy xyz brand?


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

FrenchFry said:


> This is the funniest response to me and stereotypically---the one I was expecting.


Of course,
Stereotypically, people object to _false _stereotypes or those laid out just to push an agenda (unless of course you are the one pushing the agenda and doing so without integrity).


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Of course,
> Stereotypically, people object to _false _stereotypes or those laid out just to push an agenda (unless of course you are the one pushing the agenda and doing so without integrity).


Nooo.

Stereotypically people who don't fit the stereotype object to being stereotyped. Moreso if that stereotype is negative or goes against what they perceive as "common sense" or their experiences.

Stereotypically, if the person agrees with the stereotype or fits into it they will file it into their personal "true" box and move on without challenging it.

So, quite stereotypically if you are a conservative and don't personally identify with being a racist and/or being identified as a racist you will object to the stereotype that conservatives are racist. 

Or if you are a woman who is not emotional, you will object to "women are more emotional than men," etc. etc.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Of course,
> Stereotypically, people object to _false _stereotypes or those laid out just to push an agenda (unless of course you are the one pushing the agenda and doing so without integrity).


You live in Colorado right?

You must love weed.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

samyeagar said:


> Take a woman who is outspoken and staunchly pro-life. What other things can be reasonably suspected about her? Religious, traditional gender and family roles, conservative, votes republican, etc


Sorry for multi-quoting.

Like this is interesting to me. This woman as described could be my several of my female relatives. 

But that is not the picture that is in my head. 

Funny, right?


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

FrenchFry said:


> Nooo.
> 
> Stereotypically people who don't fit the stereotype object to being stereotyped. Moreso if that stereotype is negative or goes against what they perceive as "common sense" or their experiences.
> 
> ...


I....I'm dizzy.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

FrenchFry said:


> Nooo.
> 
> Stereotypically people who don't fit the stereotype object to being stereotyped. Moreso if that stereotype is negative or goes against what they perceive as "common sense" or their experiences.
> 
> ...


I am not sure that's right actually. I accept that there are certain stereo types about men even if I don't fit them myself. I neither get offended nor argue that those stereo types are untrue. I may argue they might not be particularly useful to use to illustrate a certain point but not that they are untrue.

I actually argued about something the other day, pushing a stereo type for men, even though I didn't fit it at all (can't remember what it was now, probably something penis-related again).


----------



## Slartibartfast (Nov 7, 2017)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> What about all the Black, Hispanic, and Asian conservatives? Are they racist?
> 
> What about all the liberals who pander to minorities with promises of everything from expanded affirmative action to reparations? Are they not racist?
> 
> Which is more racist; meritocracy or quotas?


Danged if I know. Which is why I don't like the term "stereotype." It's okay in a general way, but you tend to end up arguing endlessly about whether this or that is a stereotype and whether it is or isn't racist to say so, instead of seeking even a small point of agreement. 

For instance, Black Africa consumes ten billion dollars a year in skin-bleaching products. That's a sad fact, and talking about stereotypes is of no help. I think anyone who grew up in the South in the 1940's and 1950's knows that racism is deeply nuanced and very complex. You simply can't claim validity for a racism stereotype among any group, because it's not one thing. Am I racist because it's probably the first thing I notice? Or is it just Boss Hogg because he hates that N***** president? Is it the Black African skin-whitening customer? I don't know. But I know it's about being nice to people.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

FrenchFry said:


> Nooo.
> 
> Stereotypically people who don't fit the stereotype object to being stereotyped. Moreso if that stereotype is negative or goes against what they perceive as "common sense" or their experiences.
> 
> ...


That is all true enough. Doesn't change the fact that people use stereotypes to make false accusations and push agendas, regardless of whether or not any particular individual being stereotyped identifies as such. 

This also ignores the fact that the stereotype rests on a definition that may or may not be shared. There are lots of positions which some would consider racist but others wouldn't. In this case, many conservatives oppose some or most forms of affirmative action. Liberals use that to call them racist. Not everybody agrees this is racism. Technically speaking, pure meritocracy is the exact opposite of racism and anything that deviates from that is what introduces a racial component. 

So there's two layers of danger here--first ascribing to a group something that is not endemic of that group, but also even if something is endemic, that it may be labeled as something else. While it may actually be fair to levy a stereotype that conservatives are against affirmative action, extending that to an accusation of racism is something else entirely.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

FrenchFry said:


> You live in Colorado right?
> 
> You must love weed.


Now that's funny. 

I travel a lot. No matter where I go, when people learn where I'm from, that's the first thing they want to talk about. 

It even happened when I was in Germany!

I despise weed. But I do have a sense of humor about this though and I understand everyone else's curiosity. So I don't take offense when people approach me in this way. It has made for a lot of good jokes both locally and nationally.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

Fozzy said:


> I....I'm dizzy.


 Sorry Fozzy. 

My actual factual deal is it's really easy to see why people would object to stereotypes if a) it doesn't apply to them and b) it effects how they operate on a day to day basis--especially if it is something they have no control over.

Even more so on an interpersonal level. It's actually worse because you know that you--the individual--have little effect in changing that stereotype even if you bear zero resemblance to what has been ingrained. Arguing on the internet doesn't seem to work, unfortunately.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Now that's funny.
> 
> I travel a lot. No matter where I go, when people learn where I'm from, that's the first thing they want to talk about.
> 
> ...


I live in CO too.


----------



## Middle of Everything (Feb 19, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> I live in CO too.


Stoner.


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

FrenchFry said:


> Conservatives are racists.
> 
> I am willing to talk about this.


The speed and so are liberals!


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

If she only asked that about black men, I'd consider that to be biased (maybe unconsciously). If she asked about all men, then it would not be evidence of bias.




UnicornCupcake said:


> Ah, well said. Context is important, too.
> 
> For example, you're trying to set your friend up with your other friend who happens to be black. If she says: "Does he have a job? Because I only want to date men who are employed..." Do you consider that a stat, stereotype, bias or racism?
> 
> ...


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

FrenchFry said:


> Arguing on the internet doesn't seem to work, unfortunately.


Silly FrenchFry. Arguing on the internet isn't about convincing people, it's about shouting at them!


----------



## TX-SC (Aug 25, 2015)

According to stereotypes I am bad in bed and have a small penis that I overcompensate for by driving a lifted truck or a sports car. I also cannot dance and I apparently sexually harass all women I come into contact with. I am also a loser who would abandon my wife and children for a younger woman. I am also lazy and sit on the couch playing video games all day, ignoring my poor, needy wife.

She (my wife) on the other hand, is apparently fantasizing about cheating on me with a black stud with a huge penis. She is apparently using me for my money and secretly hates me. She apparently loves to buy shoes and she nags me constantly. She has no brain of her own (she's blond), and can barely contribute to society beyond spreading her legs and squirting out babies.

Hmm, could that be offensive to anyone? 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

TX-SC said:


> According to stereotypes I am bad in bed and have a small penis that I overcompensate for by driving a lifted truck or a sports car. I also cannot dance and I apparently sexually harass all women I come into contact with. I am also a loser who would abandon my wife and children for a younger woman. I am also lazy and sit on the couch playing video games all day, ignoring my poor, needy wife.
> 
> She (my wife) on the other hand, is apparently fantasizing about cheating on me with a black stud with a huge penis. She is apparently using me for my money and secretly hates me. She apparently loves to buy shoes and she nags me constantly. She has no brain of her own (she's blond), and can barely contribute to society beyond spreading her legs and squirting out babies.
> 
> ...




Not offensive, but boy you both need some serious MC 
TAM must love stereo types: that’s what drives traffic!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

leon2100 said:


> the words "most", "some" "few" "many" are not stereotyping words
> the words "every" and "none" "all" are stereotyping words"


Humans are lousy in understanding probability. If I see an Asian dude at work it's invariably "he's hardware". If Indian dude, "he's software". That's based on 32 years in the same building. Do I generalize my findings to people in college? No. 

Stereotypes are fine if you limit scope and use them with the proper weight (little). 

There are patterns, but it's unwise to hammer an individual into a pattern.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

marriageontherocks2 said:


> The real problem with stereotypes is, even if it's true 70-80% of the time it's not fair to the 20-30 people out of 100 who don't fit the stereotype.
> 
> White people don't really have to deal with stereotypes so much anymore.


Yeah, you're all racists! 



> Irish are drunks, French are stinky cowards, Italians are organized criminal greaseballs, etc... These are basically tongue in cheek at this point, no one really cares or takes them seriously. Stereotypes for blacks; lazy, welfare, criminals, less intelligent, gang members, aggressive, abandon their kids, sexually predatory, etc.. add in probably 100 different racial epithets that they're known by and you can see how unfair it is to apply these stereotypes to all black people because they are not only very serious, but routinely accepted as true by a lot of people in America. Many black people don't fit into any of those categories and they shouldn't have to prove that they're not these things. It's a ridiculous burden.


Ey? Dunno why we are fighting it, you won't get rid of it. Personally if people don't want to bother treating me as an individual I simply won't do the same. I wouldn't expect otherwise if it was vice versa.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

This topic can easily get one banned  Speaking of which, she’s really hilarious (and relevant here).

https://youtu.be/qaPWB3Pw4ac

One of many reasons Why it’s sometimes tricky to keep it all together here...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

White people sterotypes

Were conservative gun toting members of the nra who want to surpress all minorities,


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

This response is completely off point. 

It references one side of a large bell curve/distribution, when the post it responded to was referencing the other. 

This would be identical to a discussion about how children behave in certain situations when I am describing children in the bottom ten percent of academic performance and the person I’m arguing with is responding by describing how those in the top ten percent act. 





EleGirl said:


> Stereotype much?
> 
> "We looked at eight questions from the General Social Survey. First, how many white Americans say they wouldn’t consider voting for a black presidential candidate? In the 2010 edition of the survey, the most recent version to ask this question, 6 percent of white Republicans and 3 percent of white Demorcats said they would not. However, it’s possible that these responses have something to do with Obama himself. In 2008, when Obama was a candidate rather than a president, the numbers were about equal among Republicans and Democrats. And at earlier times, white Democrats were more likely than white Republicans to say they wouldn’t vote for a black president. In 1988, for instance, when Jesse Jackson was running for the Democratic nomination, 23 percent of white Democrats said they wouldn’t vote for a black president, compared to 19 percent of white Republicans."
> 
> http://talkaboutmarriage.com/mod-chat/400522-difference-how-men-women-treated-tam.html#post18654282


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

The link to the six stereotypes was excellent. I read them. 

As I expected in two of the four M2 and I were inverted. And maybe tied in one. 

And as always - intent matters. The tone here isn’t - this or that gender is weak. The tone was - we studied this attribute and here’s what we found. 

There is a strong desire in the modern world to avoid discussing sex differences. I think that is based on a long history of the ruling gender (male) wanting to stay in power. 

Denying sex differences is unhelpful. Men are taller than women. 




Red Sonja said:


> Oh dear, I can navigate (land, sea and air), I don't "talk, talk, talk" and I return spiders and snakes back into the "wild" instead of killing them.
> 
> I must not be a woman according to "science".


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

MEM2020 said:


> Men are taller than women.


*Some* men are...Are you stereotyping? :grin2:


----------



## CuddleBug (Nov 26, 2012)

chillymorn69 said:


> Do thet work?
> 
> Are they offensive?
> 
> ...




Stereotypes come from fact. Too many peoples doing the same things = stereotype.


Doesn't bother me at all but then again, I'm not super worried about being politically correct 100% of the time. Just words anyway.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

MEM2020 said:


> Men are taller than women.


Except when they're not.

The silhouettes shown below represent the height disparity in scale between myself and some of my sexual partners if wearing kitten heels. From left to right the red silhouettes represent my wife, ex-wife, first sexual partner after my ex-wife and my tallest sexual partner.

Though not an exhaustive representation, most of the women I have been with have been taller than me.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Personal said:


> Except when they're not.
> 
> The silhouettes shown below represent the height disparity in scale between myself and some of my sexual partners if wearing kitten heels. From left to right the red silhouettes represent my wife, ex-wife, first sexual partner after my ex-wife and my tallest sexual partner.
> 
> Though not an exhaustive representation, most of the women I have been with have been taller than me.


Ey? Nah you're just a short-ass 

Hehe


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

Stand up comedy is taking a hit.

Political correctness has made it hard to make fun of anybody .


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

MEM2020 said:


> The link to the six stereotypes was excellent. I read them.
> 
> As I expected in two of the four M2 and I were inverted. And maybe tied in one.
> 
> ...


You had me until that last part.

It has less to do with men perpetuating the myth as much as those who want power, both male and female, because the argument can be used to help solidify victimhood.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Personal said:


> Except when they're not.
> 
> The silhouettes shown below represent the height disparity in scale between myself and some of my sexual partners if wearing kitten heels. From left to right the red silhouettes represent my wife, ex-wife, first sexual partner after my ex-wife and my tallest sexual partner.
> 
> Though not an exhaustive representation, most of the women I have been with have been taller than me.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Far,
Perhaps. It is certainly a complicated topic. And made more so by people using foolish word choices. For example - if this thread had been started by any number of other folks it would have been about generalizations because:
- The word stereotype is almost always used to reference non scientific generalizations about human groups which are also often unflattering / racist / sexist / ethnicist.
- So when your foundational term is ugly - your thread is impaired from the get go

If however you start with generalizations, that is a totally different conversation. For example, people use quality reviews every day when making purchase decisions. That data ranges from defect rates on car make/models to car make, to amazon or rotten tomato reviews. 

And we all KNOW that applying that generalization to a specific type of choice - is merely an attempt to shift the outcome in a positive direction. Applying that to human subgroups by doing what the graphic below shows - is simplistic - toxic and destructive and gets to the essence of the reductionist thinking that reflects what a stereotype is. 





farsidejunky said:


> You had me until that last part.
> 
> It has less to do with men perpetuating the myth as much as those who want power, both male and female, because the argument can be used to help solidify victimhood.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

That one picture of the two graphs sums up this entire discussion perfectly.

Different populations will have different traits.

If an individual is taken at random from each population, one will be _more likely_ to display a certain trait than the other. That is mathematically proven and irrefutable.

However, each individual is just that, and can lie anywhere on his/her continuum. There is always an element of risk in making an assumption based strictly on the population from which the individual came. 

So it can be foolish to either deny that differences exist in the aggregate or to bank on assumptions based on a single data point. 

But we rarely have complete information and inferences are a part of daily life in all things. Life is always a balancing act.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

MEM2020 said:


> Men are taller than women.





Personal said:


> Except when they're not.


That said and unsurprisingly on average men are taller than women, just as the average man is taller than the average woman, while average men are taller than average women.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

And in fact - if a Latvian woman (Latvian women are on average the tallest women when grouped by nationality) of average height 5’6.9” - or for simplicity 5’7” tall - is in China or India she is taller than the average male there. 

I selected height for a few good reasons. 
- It is not susceptible to a meaningful amount of reporting error
- The stats are super rich since it is commmonly measured everywhere
- It is not an Intra-generational social construct since it’s gender variability exists in spite of familial eating patterns where food is plentiful and distributed independent of gender
- It is an accepted sex difference that doesn’t typically cause folks to become agitated 

But then we find that human height itself is somewhat of a social construct over long periods of time since certain diets make humans taller - this becomes instantly obvious when immigrants move from say Japan to Hawaii and their kids / descendants are significantly taller. 

Height is a terrific trait to use to show gender overlap and then variations across countries/racial groups. 






Personal said:


> That said and unsurprisingly on average men are taller than women, just as the average man is taller than the average woman, while average men are taller than average women.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

MEM2020 said:


> - It is an accepted sex difference that doesn’t typically cause folks to become agitated



Smart. I am glad I didn’t post brain size comparison between average human sexes. Comparing height is much more subtle.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

The most sensitive subjects in a meritocracy are often those which are important but difficult to measure. 

And I wasn’t trying to be subtle. I am however aware that this topic of generalizations is adjacent to the topic of stereotypes. 




inmyprime said:


> Smart. I am glad I didn’t post brain size comparison between average human sexes. Comparing height is much more subtle.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

MEM2020 said:


> The most sensitive subjects in a meritocracy are often those which are important but difficult to measure.
> 
> And I wasn’t trying to be subtle. I am however aware that this topic of generalizations is adjacent to the topic of stereotypes.


I know  I forgot to add a smiley face after 'subtle'. No matter what comparison is posted, my experience has been that there is *always* somebody bound to get offended.


----------

