We quickly learn that lesbians wear their hair short, African Americans play sports, homeless people are drug addicts, New Yorkers are neurotic, wheelchair-bound citizens are helpless, blondes are less wise, politicians are always corrupt. The list of stereotypes is ever-enduring. We live in a society where human beings are sorted and sort themselves with incredible efficiency.
Through multiple means, including the media and word-of-mouth, individuals define stereotypes as crooked generalizations that fail to recognize individual differences between members within a group. Stereotypes are portrayed everywhere; on television, on the radio, in books and magazines.
Stereotypes go beyond the surface because the generalizations affect humans extrinsically in social interactions and intrinsically on an emotional level. Stereotypes, although viewed commonly as unreliable generalizations, actually possess logical truth about the realities of human beings through life experiences, whether it is individuals living up to the stereotypes or the stereotypes engulfing individuals. By establishing the underlying causes of stereotyping and the importance of such generalizations, society can appreciate the time and energy humans spend trying to fit into a group.
It helps people to stereotype because it saves time and energy. For example, people who look similar to us are more likely to be family, who have an interest in understanding more about us. People who look less like us are more likely to be from another group, who we feel less comfortable around. It is deeply encoded into our brains. In this sense, within seconds of looking at someone, you know if you are comfortable or interested in finding out more, but if you are not comfortable or interested then you will not waste time.
Our brains succeed in speculating patterns from limited information. Many times this aspect is helpful to Homo sapiens because it allows us to learn quickly even with insufficient evidence for proof. But on the flip side, we over-generalize very easily. Let"s say mom tells you not to bother the snake because it will bite you, most likely you will leave the snake be. So now if a group of people you trust, tell you that Asians are smart and very good at math, you will most likely believe them because its saving you time. Now taking it even further, as humans, we will save more time by looking for situations that fit these generalizations as opposed to trying to prove these generalizations. This is a logical fallacy, but yet often times it does work. People will ignore happenings that cause discrepancy within our generalizations and remember when others show generalizations to be factual. It is arduous to spend the time and use the brainpower to learn why each and every human is different or in what different ways each individual behaves.
Stereotyping is a natural by-product of human tendencies. Stereotypes are automatically processed in contrast to personal beliefs, which are consciously thought. Can you imagine not being able to stereotype? Children with Williams Syndrome are unable to stereotype. According to researcher, Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg of the University of Heidelberg in Germany, these children are at greater risk for rape and other physical attacks because of it. This disability proves that social anxiety is directly related to our ability to stereotype. Because children with Williams syndrome lack social anxiety, they are unable to stereotype individuals. Children with Williams syndrome do not know the inhibitions of social situations, so they will often put themselves in great danger to help someone else. Trying to reduce stereotyping in society would involve reducing social anxiety in humans, but because these children are at greater risk for social attacks: is it beneficial to rid of society of stereotyping?
On another note, "despite their lack of racial bias, children with Williams syndrome hold gender stereotypes just as strongly as normal children." In the study on Williams syndrome "99 percent of the 40 children studied, pointed to pictures of girls when asked who played with dolls and chose boys when asked, say, who likes toy cars." The reality that Williams syndrome kids think of men and women differently, but not blacks and Asians, shows that not all stereotypes are caused by social anxiety. One way to look at this aspect is: we learn about gender within our own homes, but learning about different races usually happens outside the comfort of our homes. It would be more likely that social anxiety would occur outside our comfort zones. This idea suggests that racial stereotypes are rooted in fear. I wonder how this theory could be possible in biracial homes, because those children are introduced to different races and different genders within the comfort and safety of their home.
At the end of the day, the population seems to be convinced of the negative implications of stereotypes, however stereotypes never originated that way. Human nature finds comfort in similarities, so by fitting into a group, individuals make an effort to belong, which according to Maslow"s hierarchy is a stipulation of human life. It is important to understand that humans are affected by stereotyping every day. In rough terms, stereotypes allow the human brain to do less work when meeting and evaluating people, behaviors, and events. Such heuristics and generalizations are necessary. In order to be able to interact effectively, humans must have some idea of what people are likely to be like and which behaviors will be considered acceptable around given people.
Humans find comfort in heuristics because such trials bring new knowledge to a familiar connection. Everyday I witness people around me objectify who they are and I have concluded that humans understand objects at a greater level than other things in life. By objectifying ourselves, we assume we are taking strides to better understand ourselves. Objectication occurs when a human being"is made less than human, turned into a thing or commodity. In society people are afraid of the sudden and continuous changes humanity is subject to while objectification feels permanent and steady. Most often, on a daily basis, we treat each other instrumentally, in a way that does not necessarily deny humanity because we still respect one another as humans. In the "Journal of Moral Philosophy", Lina Papadaki writes:
"We objectify nearly everyone: partners, teachers, taxi drivers, waiters, plumbers and everyone else we use as a means to achieve... Furthermore, it would mean that we constantly objectify ourselves, since, one might think, we also use ourselves as means to achieve our ends. We cook in order to eat, we walk to reach a destination, and we work to make a living. We use each other, as well as ourselves, instrumentally all the time, and it seems unreasonable to want to call all such instrumental treatment objectication."
Humans must rely on intuition to be able to judge specific situations of human objectification and specific situations of stereotyping, because there are some moments when humanity is put down because of stereotyping. Besides mentioning the positive and negative bursts of stereotyping in humanity, it is important to reflect on the innate nature of stereotyping, which explains how the world is hypocritical by using and analyzing stereotypes every day.
As a whole, society needs humanities to understand what it really entails to be human. Humanities are useful because they foster knowledge, which, in turn, allows growth. We all like to think of ourselves as practical people in the sense that we are asking hardheaded questions instead of running after feathery abstractions. We want to know, "What does that do?," "Where does that get us?," and "How can we do that?" Throughout life, it is deemed acceptable to focus on the functions of things because, in an abstract way, it gives each one of us a reason to live. Through function and purpose, individuals set goals to achieve and without purpose to our actions, how does anyone set goals to strive? What we are, as humans, is best defined by our actions in comparison to the way objects are best defined by their uses. Therefore in the appropriate context, we are often best defined as objects.
Stereotyping only proves negative implications when people forget that there are always differences between individuals within a group. It is not a problem that people objectify one another, because, in actuality, humans are all objects; objects of sex, safety, and commerce. Objectification only crosses the line when people forget to questions the predetermined with subjective interpretations of individuals. It is a balancing act, just as most things are.
Instead of criticizing the negative implications of stereotypes, lets talk about why people within specific stereotypes continue to prove the stereotypes true. It is "forgotten" people who complain about stereotypes; it is the individuals who do not fit neatly into one group, who fuss the most often. My suggestion is to choose what you want from life. If we embrace our generalizations, then our individuality will show through naturally which helps us develop to our full potential. Stereotypes can possess natural intentions while allowing people to live, love, work, play and dream in their own individual way. When people only believe stereotypes push people around, then we are back to square one where people stereotype stereotypes.
Do you believe me if I tell you: Women are neat and like to clean, Immigrants have poor English, Indians work at a deli, Jewish people are cheap, skateboarders are stoners, Italians are good lovers?
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar