dollface wrote:

I think the reason that stereotypes don't really offend me is because I am a stereotype. I'm everything you expect me to be. I've mentioned before that my favorite word in the English language is "cliche", haven't I? Well, I am very cliche. [I wish I could type the accent. ] Personally, I find individuality overrated. Everyone thinks they're different, and in ways, everyone is. But you haven't got to make a big show of it. You have pride in your race? Wow, never seen that before. You don't? My god, you oreo! This is so new to me *sarcasm, sarcasm*. You don't care about pride at all, you love everyone? Peace core, hello! You hate everything? Here, I'll let you borrow my eyeliner.

Anyway, point being, I don't think my discard for race should make me racist. I mean, honestly, if I went out of my way to always treat minorities better, wouldn't that be the exact definition of racism? Treating people differently because of their race? The only race worth giving regard to is the human race.

[/philisophical bullshit]

It's a complicated matter, really. On one hand, you risk losing yourself in blending into a certain group. On the other hand, stating the need to be different, in a way, is asking to be discriminated in some sense. That's why I try not to have any expectation for anything. Even though I still do, because in my opinion, it's still important to be able to understand people before going to a conclusion as to who they are.
I hope I'm making sense here...

SleepDebtFairy wrote:

Speaking of that.. what does everyone think of affirmative action? I did a small paper on it in my last English class and learned a few things, but I'm still confused.. In my opinion, I think it would be better to have scholarships for people who have good grades but are poor, and not for specific minority rates - after all, minorities are more often poor than the majority. While I understand that the purpose of affirmative action is to make sure that minorities aren't discriminated against in jobs/college, I think it would just be so much better to have college applications without the option of providing your race. That way the use of race as criteria for their acceptance isn't an issue at all.

Of course, I'm very naive, and there's probably something I'm missing. Is there a reason why this wouldn't work? \:

I deduce from your words that wherever you live (the USA, I assume, but right know I have no clue), colleges reserve a fixed amount of scholarships in order to give them to members of specific minorities in danger of discrimination. Well, first, in Spain things work in a similar way. The difference is, your also have to provide your family or personal income, along with your race, and they both are valid criteria.

Apart of that, the issue is not to avoid discrimination in the applying (in fact, if you didn't provide it, there would be less chances to be recognized as a member of such minorities, if you think about it), but to avoid an over-concentration in some colleges.

I have no idea about how you are assigned a college in the USA (or is the college "who" is assigned to you? ). But I suspect that it probably shares some liaison to your place of residence. And you will agree that the rates of minorities members – non minorities members (wait, what a stupidity… is any one in the world not belonging to some minority?, well, let’s hope everybody understands) vary from one place to another. That would cause segregation, a very noticeable segregation, between education centers. So, colleges offer (or are obliged to offer) some of their scholarships to increase and let mobility, and that’s the mechanism for “assuring” a regular distribution.

You may say it’s not fair. No, in fair circumstances, it isn’t, neither for ones nor for the others. Or, I should say, it wouldn’t be. But it is a temporal action in the wait for and in order to get these.


Disclaimer:
- I am aware of the inappropiate use of the word "race"; I am sorry, but I can’t think of a proper synonym in English.
- I am also aware of my expression lacks; if anything is not clear, please just ask (and please, if it is not trouble, point me any mistakes you see!).
- And finally, if I have missed the whole point, please inform me

Last edited by Asfalolh (05-08-2007 10:54:35 AM)

dollface wrote:

I think the reason that stereotypes don't really offend me is because I am a stereotype. I'm everything you expect me to be. I've mentioned before that my favorite word in the English language is "cliche", haven't I? Well, I am very cliche. [I wish I could type the accent. ] Personally, I find individuality overrated. Everyone thinks they're different, and in ways, everyone is. But you haven't got to make a big show of it. You have pride in your race? Wow, never seen that before. You don't? My god, you oreo! This is so new to me *sarcasm, sarcasm*. You don't care about pride at all, you love everyone? Peace core, hello! You hate everything? Here, I'll let you borrow my eyeliner.

Anyway, point being, I don't think my discard for race should make me racist. I mean, honestly, if I went out of my way to always treat minorities better, wouldn't that be the exact definition of racism? Treating people differently because of their race? The only race worth giving regard to is the human race.

[/philisophical bullshit]

Hear, hear!

dollface wrote:

See, I'm not bothered with the "need to be different". No two people are the same, and that's enough difference for me. I mean, at least I can admit that individuality is overrated, and that yes, I can be stereotypical. EVERYONE IS. It's human nature to not want to be alone. I mean, it's been scientifically proven that if you leave a child completely alone, save for feeding it, it will die. It's a natural impulse to want to fit in with something, no matter how much of a wallflower you are. Knowing yourself doesn't mean knowing what you aren't, it means knowing what you are. That's why it doesn't offend me if people assume things about me, because a lot of them are true, or somewhat true. Like, some people get mad if you assume they like blood because they're 'gawfic', but most do. People assume that I'm satanic, and even though I'm not, that doesn't offend me, because they're right in that I am not christian.

Wow, none of that related to race. Point being, stereotypes shouldn't offend as much as they do, especially if they're true for you. If someone said I was a hick, or that I fucked my sister, I'd just laugh, and inform them that I don't have a sister, but I'd fuck their sister.

You have to be able to laugh at yourself because, [here comes that gem of philosophy and social dogma!] no one is perfect.

Not even Tatsuya?

dollface wrote:

BOTH POSTS GO HERE.

Go me, I'm gonna be steppin' on toes all over the place! I honestly don't mean much by it, just running with something in my head here...

You and I mostly agree if I read you right, but there is something I'd like to point out. Isn't is just as individualistic to embrace the cliche? Nobody wants to be a cliche, so by saying you are one and making yourself stand out that way, isn't that just the same as the person who tries to be an individual? After all, it certainly sets you apart, regardless of whether you mean to or not. As you pointed out later on, people have a need to be individuals, and I think that whether we mean to or not, we are driven to it. But you're right, that's no reason to be a loud asshole about it. The ideal state, I think, is where you're told how individual you are rather than having to tell people, but I think that would be a hard thing to achieve.

You can't help but be an individual person. That doesn't mean that individuality is something to be cherished; you can be an individual and still have all the personality of a rotten sack of dead lemurs. I subscribed for a long time to the 'you are not a unique snowflake' theory, but I realized after a while that it's impossible for someone to be the same as someone else. Different time periods and medical conditions alone make it impossible, not to mention parenting, school, location, and all that good stuff. It is physically impossible for you to be exactly identical to anyone else in history, although you may have strong similarities. Therefore by nature, we are all unique beings. By nature, we have to be.

That doesn't mean it's special. By nature, we are not special; every other person on the planet is a unique being also, and all of those unique beings strive for individuality and attention in one way or another. We are all doing the exact same thing, despite our need for individuality and our basic uniqueness. Even more than that, we have the same basic structure; our bodies are basically the same, with very tiny differences and variations such as hair color, eye color, weight, sex, and the rest. We need the same biological input (food, water) and create the same output. We all have need for sleep. We all have need for shelter. Many things are common to all of us, and limit our individuality. Is this any more special than our individuality? Does it shape us any more?

It's hard to say. Both are fact, and both are necessary to the kind of thing we are. We couldn't have things like countries and races if we didn't have both individuality and similarity; try to start a country with a field of buttercups and see how well that goes. On the one hand, they're too individualized from you. You can't understand their needs enough to make a country. On the other hand, they are too similar to ever do it themselves. They don't need to; they're all doing what they do and not really interfering with each other. Also, they may not have the brainpower necessary to forming a country, but I've never had a lengthy conversation with one, so I wouldn't know.

But it still remains to determine which is more important than the other. For myself, I don't believe either is, simply because they're both necessary. I suppose everyone will have their own opinions.

dollface wrote:

People assume that I'm satanic, and even though I'm not, that doesn't offend me, because they're right in that I am not christian.

Stereotypes are supposed to be rigid and oversimplified. It's true that satanic = not Christian, but not Christian does not equal satanic. Of course, stereotypes also tend to be very broad and not that specific.

Edit: Did I just contradict myself by saying stereotypes are rigid and broad? I'm not sure what I was trying to say here.. I'm very drained. The point I was trying to make is that while the stereotype in that example is close, it's not dead-on either. But I guess it depends on how rigidly people use stereotypes... Such as "Goth = Satanic/Athiest/Pagan/NOT CHRISTIAN" or just "Goth = Satanic"

Edit: Okay, edit again. The stereotype used here is not specifically goth, but "satanic". Therefore the stereotype is not accurate here, but you can say it is close. However, that goes with what I say right blow this about crayons and rainbows and fluidity and transitions and blending and. sdfgdfh RAWRGSRD DFG FGFDGFDgvbcbvcTOOMUCHARTHERAPYrdfg

sleep.
[/edit]

I pretty much agree with all that Yasha posted. But on another note, stereotypes are pretty much unavoidable. Our brains like to simplify things to make it easier to process information. However, it's important to avoid stereotypes as much as you can. After all, thinking in stereotypes compared to more abstract thinking is like.. comparing a set of crayons to a rainbow. Crayons are colourful, but can only colour so much, and without shades in between. You have your basic colours, but not ones in between, unless you have a very advanced set of crayons right there. Rainbows are more fluid and all of the colours blend in, and there are so many different hues, saturations, lights, and darks. Most of the people I meet do fit into stereotypes, but there are a good deal of people I meet who don't fit into one or even two so easily. I know a woman who is from Texas, Republican, but also poor and a firm vegetarian, as one simple example.

But, anyway. Regaurdless whether anyone agrees with that or not.. the main point I was trying to make is that minorities in the USA seem to have mostly race-based stereotypes applied to them, while white people have a variety of different stereotypes that can apply to them, most if not all about characteristics, clothing, personality traits, etc., but not race. A goth is stereotyped a goth not because they're white, but because they wear a lot of black or seem morbid. A prep is stereotyped a prep because she has dyed blonde hair, pink clothing, and miniskirts, not because she's white. Sure, most of the people stereotyped that are white, but people don't often think "Oh, that person's white, so he/she must be a prep/goth/nerd/etc." They think of the clothing and characteristics first.

I wondered why this was so for white people, but not minorities. It may be that there are more white people in the USA than minorities, and thus more variety, but I don't think the difference is incredibly significant. I've mostly accounted it for the higher amount of discrimination applied to minorities, and thus many of them become more involved with their own race and family. We may be past the civil rights movement and have much improved, but a great deal of racism still exists, sadly. And obviously. When I was young I thought racisim was pretty much gone, but I was naive, and when I was older it took me a while to realize that racism was still there, just more subtle.

Stereotypes will always exist. However, the main point I want to make is that I simply hate stereotypes based on something you're born with, such as race. Stereotypes for things you choose to do, like dress in all black or all pink, I don't mind as much.

Yasha wrote:

hat doesn't mean it's special. By nature, we are not special; every other person on the planet is a unique being also, and all of those unique beings strive for individuality and attention in one way or another. We are all doing the exact same thing, despite our need for individuality and our basic uniqueness. Even more than that, we have the same basic structure; our bodies are basically the same, with very tiny differences and variations such as hair color, eye color, weight, sex, and the rest. We need the same biological input (food, water) and create the same output. We all have need for sleep. We all have need for shelter. Many things are common to all of us, and limit our individuality. Is this any more special than our individuality? Does it shape us any more?

Agreed. We are all different and unique, however, we share more similarities than differences. Individualism is good, and I highly value mine and refuse to change my ideas and beliefs because of what someone else wants, but we all need to be similar in a lot of aspects so we will belong and we won't feel lonely.

Asfalolh wrote:

<snip>

Thank you for your post. Affirmative action confuses me, so I appreciate it.

I'm not completely sure of how colleges work here. I see what you mean about colleges wanting to avoid an over-concentration of a specific race. I didn't really think about that.. but wouldn't not using race as a criteria for everyone avoid that too? Maybe not. Minorities are most likely to live in poverty and thus have a lower amount of education, so there grades would usually be lower and they would have less of a chance..

Sorry, I'm kind of tired right now and I just spent hours highlighting and reading in my Child Psychology book.

Last edited by SleepDebtFairy (05-08-2007 10:25:44 PM)

Yasha wrote:

Posty!

Oh, I get what you mean. That's similar to what I'm saying. People try to make a big deal about being different, but in basic structure we are the same. But that isn't to say people are the same. It's like... we are all individually similar. The fact that I embrace being a stereotype is breaking the stereotype. There is nothing you can really do to escape this. It's an endless loop. This applies to racial/ethnic stereotypes as well. People seem to get so offended when I say that they're exactly what people expect them to be, but most people are. Take every racial stereotype you know, apply it to the people around you, and see if the majority doesn't conform to it. Maybe still being in highschool, and being surrounded in immature stereotypes, I'm not seeing from all points on this. But, at least for me, white people act the way you think white people will act. Black people act the way you think black people will act. For the majority. Not for the whole. Understand that, I'm not saying everyone. I'm saying most, and I won't even try to say I'm wrong for that, because I'm not. I'm not being a racist, I'm being a realist.

A thing happened in my workplace that I can't really discuss in detail, but it was a startling moment where I realized yes, this happens in Canada, too. Suffice to say you can be a very well dressed black man with children that look classier than I ever have, and people will still mistake things you're holding for weapons.