To grab onto Party of A-5's statement,
stereotypes are often based on 'some' fact that almost always turns out to be either purposely erroneous or otherwise NOT true for the majority of the group in question.
'Because I know a dude that was from X that did Y' is not science or even a good rule of thumb. It just doesn't work nearly as well as judging an individual based on a first impression and even those are often wrong.
Plus the fact that when it does let us down, when we are surprised by someone who doesn't fit their 'harmless' stereotype, we SEEM racist to them very often.
For that reason alone I would try to shun even harmless seeming stereotypes because people will think(logically!)that you subscribe to many other stereotypes you're not sharing.
As Heebs said
Quote:
|
liberal use of racist remarks regardless of non malicious intentions will begin to torque me off
|
For instance the experience with South Koreans that americans have had is based on how individual South Koreans acted around individual AMERICANS of completely unidentified character or intelligence, not anything else. So if I make generalizations of ANY kind based on those experiences with South Koreans I'm almost certain to be wrong.
My very wise Grandfather said, "Getting to know someone is like walking up to a house in the middle of the night and looking through a window into just one room. You might learn that room so well that you could walk around it in the dark with the lights off, but it's a mistake to assume it tells you ANYTHING about the rest of the house."
I hope I didn't lose any of my fellow Yoopers, as that was a little oblique
.
I'll try it this way, Ted Bundy's neighbors lived next to him for a LONG time and didn't know what a psycho he was, so it seems a little egotistical to think one can nail down an entire group on ANY topic based on second hand info or personal experience.
Rob