What are some constructive stereotypes? (lemmy.cafe)

submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by spujb@lemmy.cafe to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world

36 comments fedilink hide all child comments

(Example at the end)

Usually we discuss stereotypes in terms of how they are harmful—which is good because it’s super important to recognize and confront the stereotypes that perpetuate systems of oppression and hurt. That doesn’t mean all of them are harmful, though. Some are neutral and and some are a net positive. If you can think of neutral ones that’s fine but I’m especially interested in the constructive and beneficial ones. Hopefully I’m explaining this well enough but if it becomes clear I didn’t I’ll delete this post.

Example: I usually encourage people, especially kids and pedestrians, to assume that drivers can’t see you. While it’s not necessarily true even a majority of the time, it’s nevertheless a constructive stereotype to hold in terms of road safety.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] spujb@lemmy.cafe 0 points 5 months ago

“Don’t eat red berries, many red berries signify poison”.

The subject of the stereotype (red berries) even in your own example is still kept within its normal context (consumption). I will be keeping my own original understanding of “stereotype” for this reason. :)

[-] NeptuneOrbit@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

It's also the FIXED portion. Everyone has seen people est and enjoy some times of red cherries. Yet, presumably, if you got new data showing drivers do actually pay attention and being a pedestrian was relatively safe you would adjust your beliefs.

A belief based on unbiased data ("being a pedestrian where I live is dangerous and this may be due to a lack of awareness by drivers") is not the same as an unfounded, fixed belief based on no data, unrepresentative data, or data that does not reflect the root cause.

[-] spujb@lemmy.cafe 1 points 5 months ago

I actually often see drivers smile and wave at me, disproving that they are unaware, and nevertheless I do not adjust my beliefs in the context of maximizing my road safety as a pedestrian.

[-] ekky@sopuli.xyz 3 points 5 months ago

I'm with you here, Neptune's definition seems to overspecify the extract from Oxford they presented.

If we boil stereotyping down to its core components, then it appears to simply be an instance of correlation using subjective and non-complete data: "This individual exerts traits a, b, and c, which means they are highly likely to also exert traits x, y, and z."

Or: "This individual is operating a car (unique trait/type of person), therefore their visibility and attention capacity are likely reduced or under strain (overgeneralization as driving might come natural to them, and fixed as I might assume that no one is a natural)."

^This is, of course, an oversimplification, as I'm going purely by Neptune's words and my own understanding, and have not looked up additional sources.

[-] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

Useful stereotypes can help a person avoid danger.

Unknown mushrooms don't have to be poisonous but being careless with them can lead to a grisly death. Drivers don't have to be unaware of me but it takes just one who is to put me in mortal danger if I'm not careful. A man following a lone woman at night where nobody else is around doesn't have to have ill intent but she's still better off being prepared for the case that he does.

Does this discriminate against mushrooms, drivers, and men? Yes, but that's the point. It's essentially an informal safety guideline and it deliberately overreaches just like real safety guidelines. The 999 times someone doesn't need that handrail don't outweigh the one time they do; not in OSHA's eyes. Because someone might die if the handrail fails that one time.

This whole thing becomes problematic when it gets over-applied. Avoiding canned mushrooms in the supermarket won't protect me from poisoning. Assuming that all drivers are blind and irresponsible will not improve my behavior on the road. Being afraid of all men in all situations will not make that woman's life better.

Like always, Paracelsus is right: The dose makes the poison. (And like with poison, some stereotypes are so toxic that any dose of then is bad for you.)

[-] spujb@lemmy.cafe 0 points 5 months ago

Love this explanation, thank you!

And some of the determinants of what makes valid- versus over-application are knowledge, cognition and time.

I don’t have training in foraging, so without that knowledge I use stereotypes to avoid danger
Children have lower cognition, so we tell them to stereotype that all strangers are dangerous until they are older
A woman walking alone at night may not have time to examine her biases, and so uses stereotypes to keep herself safe

I am interested to know if there are other determinants as well. :)

[-] spujb@lemmy.cafe -1 points 5 months ago

excellent breakdown 🙂

this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024

21 points (76.9% liked)

Ask Lemmy

27281 readers

2111 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Rules: (interactive)

1) Be nice and; have fun

Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them

2) All posts must end with a '?'

This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?

3) No spam

Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.

4) NSFW is okay, within reason

Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].

5) This is not a support community.

It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.

6) No US Politics.

Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online

Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.