Why Do People Get So Offended By Generalizations and Stereotypes...?

[denise_xo]

What about those generalizations made by individuals based solely on personal experience, particularly in the dating and social context? There's likely to be no meaningful statistical significance and be driven by causation rather than correlation. Do they have any weight or traction?

 

No. By definition, I can't generalise based on my personal experience to a population. I can say "all the five men I have dated this year have been crap". That's a perfectly valid observation, but it's very different from saying "men in general are crap".

 

We are hard wired to conduct generalisations, for purposes of survival. It means, for example, that if we associate a lion with danger, we can act on that information instead of 'learning the hard way' every time that lions are dangerous to human beings (wouldn't be much of a species otherwise). However, the flip side of this capacity is that we also routinely apply generalisation to experiences where generalisation is not appropriate.

Edited July 8, 2012 by denise_xo

[snug.bunny]

So dating generalizations and stereotypes are thrown around every day on LS...and it amazes me how offended some folks get when a generalization is made that may apply to their gender, age group, race, etc....when they see such generalizations, they instantly go into man/women-hater mode...

 

Why do people get offended by a dating generalization or stereotype?

 

One of two things will happen:

 

(1) The generalization actually holds true for you. So why get upset if someone makes an accurate assessment of you? Do you perceive it to be a flaw that you do not want to be called out on? What justification do you have to be upset?

 

(2) The generalization does not hold true for you, or you do not perceive it to hold true. So why do you get upset if someone falsely generalizes or stereotypes you? Based on the recent "myth of confidence" thread, wouldn't your reaction imply a lack of confidence? You supposedly are "confident" that the stereotype doesn't apply to you, so why does it cause a reaction? Is it because the stereotype actually does apply to you and you don't want to admit it for sake of your "confidence"? Or is it that you don't actually have "confidence" and are being manipulated by external validation (or invalidation, whatever the case may be)?

 

People may become offended, probably because they dislike being conformed within a box. Another reason is that often, some people use it to discriminate against, belittle and offend others (just read some of the threads on LS alone...).

 

Generalizations/stereotypes can stem from an isolated incident (or several) and apply it to "something", but that doesn't mean it is true across the board.

 

Perhaps someone was belittled in the past over a stereotype, that didn't apply to him/her as an individual, but rather based on an incident that the offending party either experienced with someone else in the past or simply has a hatred towards things he/she fail to understand/comprehend. Naturally, the offended party not related to the incident that caused the offense, will feel offended/judged and want to defend him/herself.

 

Whatever the case may be, I see nothing inherently wrong with those that do choose to defend him/herself within reason. It helps to balance things out.

 

As others have noted, I think generalizations and stereotypes are a natural part of human behavior. I've caught myself making some, when I see someone/something, but it's my own ignorance making the prejudgment. It would be great if everyone could just laugh it off and poke fun of one another, but that won't always be the case.

[angie2443]

 

For example, in a dating context, let's say you enter into a relationship with a physically abusive man, and it's a terrible experience. Now, if another man was perfect in every way except he was physically abusive, would you see him as an individual and get to know him, or would you draw from your past experience with physical abuse and "lump him together" with other abusive men...?

 

This example makes no sense to me since this situation has nothing to do with generalisations. An abusive man is an abusive man. Maybe you don't know much about these situations and much about an abusive personality.

[El Brujo]

Why do people get offended by a dating generalization or stereotype?

 

More to the point, why do some people act out stereotypes??? They're not funny, and they're just adding gasoline to the fire.

[sally4sara]

Why do people get offended by a dating generalization or stereotype?

 

Here is an excerpt from one of my favorite books "The Diamond Age"

 

"Bud's relationship with the female sex was governed by a gallimaufry of primal impulses, dim suppositions, deranged theories, overheard scraps of conversation, half-remembered pieces of bad advice, and fragments of no-doubt exaggerated anecdotes that amounted to rank superstition."

 

Now if we look at someone like Bud or his female counterparts with the wisdom of years making them more obvious, we can avoid them and they pose little threat. But people like Bud do not live in a world of only more experienced and wiser people. Otherwise, how would someone like Bud even exist in the first place? It is because as they careen about in society, they come in contact with younger, naive people and infect them with their stupidity. Being that there are people of many different levels of life experience that I care about, one of which is my 14 year old son, I find people like Bud (and the female Buds) to be a huge problem to everyone they come in contact with.

When we see a new advancement in medicine or two groups of people typically in conflict with each other come to a compassionate understanding, we are often filled with hope for the future. People like Bud instill the exact opposite feelings in the people who see them doing the damage we know they are hell bent on causing. And it is intentional. Every angry, hate spewing troll poster that comes on here is not here to help anyone. They are here to drag people down and fill them with the same hateful fear they live with. One of their greatest weapons is generalizations and stereotypes.

Edited July 8, 2012 by sally4sara

[KR10N]

But according to the confidence thread, "confident" people are said to not be affected at all by external validation/invalidation...so what would incite them to defend themselves if they aren't affected?

 

Just a lot of contradictory statements made...

Life's a paradox.

[WonderKid]

I see it all the time on social sites like Facebook and such. A girl will put, "all men are jerks" "guys are *******s, I'll be single forever", but I never respond to those statuses because they all want attention--what else? Women love attention so it's nothing surprising to me.

 

I do however knock a lot of stereotypes out the water. I am black. And many white women have assumed many things until I open my mouth and talk to them. Once I do that I open their minds. I don't sag, talk gangsta slang or even dress that way. With white people in general I make friends quickly.

 

For instance, I'll say, "yeah I play Skyrim." But most black guys wouldn't even play a game like that. Most black guys play sports games, FPS, or fighting games. But when I bust out and say, "I am a level 13 Redguard who just got done beating Volsung and taking his mask, and I defeated 4 dragons, and learned a new shout." I suddenly get their interest. I can't count how many "whoa" faces I get or how many eyebrows I've raised.

 

Movies range from the 1944 film "Laura" to 1954 "Seven Samurai" 1960s "Dr. No 007" "The Warriors", "Clockwork Orange".

Music from early 1800s-present time.

 

I try to embrace as many cultures as I can.

[USMCHokie]

For instance, I'll say, "yeah I play Skyrim." But most black guys wouldn't even play a game like that. Most black guys play sports games, FPS, or fighting games. But when I bust out and say, "I am a level 13 Redguard who just got done beating Volsung and taking his mask, and I defeated 4 dragons, and learned a new shout." I suddenly get their interest. I can't count how many "whoa" faces I get or how many eyebrows I've raised.

 

Talking about Skyrim actually gets you bitches? Yeah right.

 

So you're saying that I shouldn't be divulging this information to women...?

[WonderKid]

Talking about Skyrim actually gets you bitches? Yeah right.

 

 

And you're dumb for not acting like a gangsta black, that is the only type of black I see white women going for. White women (and black women even more) really dislike the nerdy type of black.

 

No using expansive vocabulary and not cussing got me "women". I don't click with "bitches". You got a lot to learn. You're like school on Saturday you have no class.

 

I meant to goth genders in general. I have a lot of white friends that are women who are nerds and play the game. And no I don't want to be a gangsta. That status doesn't clarify any boy as a man. I was raised to be a man, not a gangsta. Out of 10 men in a lineup, only 2 would be "real gangstas' really. I'm not a nerd, just love to learn. Talking about many things can get you a woman. The more you know, the more you keep them on their toes.

[zengirl]

I think people who generalize or stereotype are too lazy to get to know people unlike themselves so it's easier to just lump them together rather than to see people as individuals.

 

Agree 100%. The biggest problems with generalizations are that they reflect lazy thinking and thus contribute to ignorance.

 

I would hardly say they reflect well-developed adaptation because a generalization is a very basic level of schema. We spend most of our learning time branching out from the false generalizations we make. For instance, a child may see a dog and think, "Cat," if he's only ever seen a cat. That's about the level of cognitive processing as a generalization, and it's incorrect. Learning is the opposite of generalizing --- it's learning to individualize and sort the world out as smaller, more accurate variables.

 

However making an observation of a group, based on your own experiences, is not necessarily generalizing. If one says, "All the women I've been meeting are. . . " I think that's a valid point, and we can examine that to see why that guy has been meeting women who have the same general characteristic and find a lot more interesting out about it than if he concludes that every woman in the world is as he perceives AND like the women he's meeting.

[brahmabull117]

generalizations are no problem but make sure you say that it's a generalization and not a rule

[ThaWholigan]

I'm willing to bet anything that men who refer to women as bitches, especially black ones, get more play in a week than you do in a year. So save the lecture, Uncle Tom, I was only informing you of an obvious fact in case you missed it.

Depends on demographic, as well as the guy. I know dudes like that who get girls (ahem, bitches ), and I know a few who do so poorly that some suspect them of being virgins. "Gangsta blacks" are an acquired taste. Sure they get play, but they are not that stupid - they play to their demographic. The hood girls, and the white girls who want to be with hood guys.

[Disenchantedly Yours]

So dating generalizations and stereotypes are thrown around every day on LS...and it amazes me how offended some folks get when a generalization is made that may apply to their gender, age group, race, etc....when they see such generalizations, they instantly go into man/women-hater mode...

 

Why do people get offended by a dating generalization or stereotype?

 

One of two things will happen:

 

(1) The generalization actually holds true for you. So why get upset if someone makes an accurate assessment of you? Do you perceive it to be a flaw that you do not want to be called out on? What justification do you have to be upset?

 

(2) The generalization does not hold true for you, or you do not perceive it to hold true. So why do you get upset if someone falsely generalizes or stereotypes you? Based on the recent "myth of confidence" thread, wouldn't your reaction imply a lack of confidence? You supposedly are "confident" that the stereotype doesn't apply to you, so why does it cause a reaction? Is it because the stereotype actually does apply to you and you don't want to admit it for sake of your "confidence"? Or is it that you don't actually have "confidence" and are being manipulated by external validation (or invalidation, whatever the case may be)?

 

I don't understand this myself Hokie. The only way to talk about certain subjects in any constructive way is through making generalizations. Now you can disagree with the generalization and that's fine but I don't understand people that whine about the generalization itself. If no generalizations where ever made, the entire talk would center around every "what if" case that seems to distract from the orginal thesis more then it helps to understand it. In life, there are always fast amounts of different situations, people and combinations and no two people are ever the exact same. However, generalization in my minds eye are just summerzations to clean up a talk without getting to messy with all the possibitlies and "what ifs". I think we are all intelligent enough to know that not everything is only one way even if generalizations can be made.

[WonderKid]

I'm willing to bet anything that men who refer to women as bitches, especially black ones, get more play in a week than you do in a year. So save the lecture, Uncle Tom, I was only informing you of an obvious fact in case you missed it.

 

Yeah they actually do get more play. From girls.

 

But I prefer to get my play with women. It's way better IMO. Girls tend to don't know when they're being disrespected. So it works out better for me I'll stick with that instead--hasn't failed yet. *shrugs*

[johan]

Why do people get offended by a dating generalization or stereotype?

 

They actually don't. But Asian people always think they do.

[USMCHokie]

They actually don't. But Asian people always think they do.

 

Say it ain't so...! :eek:

[johan]

You're offended, aren't you. Admit it.

 

Have you learned your lesson now?

[SteveC80]

It gets dangerous when you beleive every group or gender is the same but obviously stereotypes come from some small truth

 

Just like some genders are more prone to do different things some people are more prone to violence or bad driving doesnt mean ALL just more in that group then other groups or genders

[threebyfate]

Can't believe you're asking this question Hokie, considering the gross generalizations that manifest rampantly all over LS.

 

"The ex-girlfriend dumped me, thus all women are shyte."

 

"I was rejected once in 1954, thus women are irrationally stupid."

[Mme. Chaucer]

People get offended by stereotypes, because they often are true. By getting offended, you are almost admitting there is some truth to them.

 

That's not why I am offended by them. In my case, it's because I believe that judging an individual based upon a collection of traits shared, or presumed to be shared by the vast majority of other members of their race or gender prohibits you from knowing the actual person in front of you. Or from even being open to knowing them, because you have your set of ideas and that's all you need.

 

Yes, plenty of Jewish people are careful with their money. Lots of black people are good dancers. Many women love to be taken out to nice, expensive dinners where the man pays. Do you really think it's a worthy way to deal with people you meet to attribute generalized, stereotypical traits to them? What purpose does it serve?

[USMCHokie]

Can't believe you're asking this question Hokie, considering the gross generalizations that manifest rampantly all over LS.

 

"The ex-girlfriend dumped me, thus all women are shyte."

 

"I was rejected once in 1954, thus women are irrationally stupid."

 

That is PRECISELY why I asked this question. With all the supposed intelligence and "confidence" running around on LS, it seems a bit puzzling that folks get so riled up by such blatantly "gross" generalizations. And with all the talk of confident folks being able to ignore external validations and invalidations, my meter started tingling...

[threebyfate]

That is PRECISELY why I asked this question. With all the supposed intelligence and "confidence" running around on LS, it seems a bit puzzling that folks get so riled up by such blatantly "gross" generalizations. And with all the talk of confident folks being able to ignore external validations and invalidations, my meter started tingling...

There's a clear distinction between needing a lot of external validation and invalidating inaccuracies. The former is about strokes, the latter, combatting prejudice and bias.

 

These are very simple concepts that differ. Really surprised that you conflated the two. Even more surprised that you need even have asked.

 

If you require concrete examples, it's the difference between needing compliments everyday and untying the black man being dragged behind the truck full of white pointy hat wearing crazy people.

[USMCHokie]

There's a clear distinction between needing a lot of external validation and invalidating inaccuracies. The former is about strokes, the latter, combatting prejudice and bias.

 

These are very simple concepts that differ. Really surprised that you conflated the two. Even more surprised that you need even have asked.

 

If you require concrete examples, it's the difference between needing compliments everyday and untying the black man being dragged behind the truck full of white pointy hat wearing crazy people.

 

Perhaps at the extreme ends of the spectrum, it'd be difficult and even reckless to conflate the two...however, as you venture towards the middle, you'll still have people making generalizations about dating, which I thought my OP was clear to specify...unfortunately, it was broadened to include lynchings...

 

I don't disagree with you regarding the potential harm in generalizations and stereotypes...this was more a product of my recent streak of litigious posts...

[threebyfate]

Perhaps at the extreme ends of the spectrum, it'd be difficult and even reckless to conflate the two...however, as you venture towards the middle, you'll still have people making generalizations about dating, which I thought my OP was clear to specify...unfortunately, it was broadened to include lynchings...

It's disingenuous to even suggest that there was any dating related limitations in the opening post.

 

Based on what's expressed on LS about women and their "place" in the home and society, women haven't fought for our rights just to have them reduced to cooking, cleaning and popping out brats on this crazy site.

[USMCHokie]

It's disingenuous to even suggest that there was any dating related limitations in the opening post.

 

Read the second word in the opening post. Then go to the bolded question in the middle of the post...there's a word right before "generalization." Would it be presumptuous for me to assume that people read all the words?