If police are looking for black people to arrest, then they will arrest more black people.
Since more black people got arrested, then you assume that black people commit crimes more.
If you assume that black people commit crimes more, then you arrest black people more.
If you never bother to investigate asians for crimes, then they would have a low arrest record, and seem as though they do not commit as many crimes. I am not sure what you point with interviewing crime victims. Do they know who broke into their house, who stole their car, who shoplifted? Most crime victims turn to the police to find out who committed a crime against them.
My point about PSL is that it tastes like battery acid diluted with urine. But, seriously to the point, is that because they are marketed towards girls rather than black men, or is it a fundamental difference in the way that we perceive taste between the races.
This does not mean that a stereotype has to last forever, and be self reinforcing forever, but it does have quite a bit of inertia. And every time you see a black guy dunk, it will reinforce that, and every time you see a Hispanic dunk, you will consider it irrelevant to the “statistical” stereotype you have in your head. If only there was a term for that. Maybe “bias in confirmation”.
All things being equal, I think it’s reasonable to conclude that if society, generally, tells one group of kids (consciously or not) that they are more likely to be criminals than other kids, and tells the other kids that they are more likely to be successful than the first group, then the first group of kids will probably be more likely to get involved with criminal acts. If society is doing this, whether or not it’s on purpose, then I certainly see how a stereotype might reinforce itself to some degree.
That’s the real crux of the issue; someone would read something like Puddleglum’s "Black men commit one third of the forcible on rapes in this country but are only 12% of the population. " (which BTW, are only 6%, not 12%) factoid and then generalize that to a rule of thumb that black men are more likely to be rapists. Assuming that the statistic is true, that’s a valid generalization.
The problem comes in when that’s further generalized to “Black men are rapists” and then bases their treatment and perceptions of black men and their actions based on that second re-generalization.
It’s like a societal game of telephone in a lot of ways, I suspect, and with a strong vertical history component.
I mean, I’ve been on the receiving end of some stereotypes. I’m a tall, big guy with a very deep voice. People assume I’m not bright all the time, which isn’t the case. But the stereotype of the big, dumb guy is pretty well ingrained. And I have to figure that there must be some grain of historical truth as well.
But I draw the line when someone treats me differently because they’re assuming I’m not smart, or that I automatically want a double-portion of food, or whatever.
Then you are wrong. Stereotypes that are repeatedly shown to be wrong in example after example of false expectations do something to the brain, they break the assumption chain that millions of years of error checking as built into us.
Black people are arrested more because there are more of them committing crimes. The reason there is greater attention to them is because there is a higher incidence of crime. Look at the murder stats. Are murders a function of police attention? Black people make up only around 13% of the population and commit nearly HALF of the murders. That is not a function of just too many police focusing on them to the detriment of other groups, it’s almost entirely to do with an actual, real higher rate of criminality.
If you want to make a weaker point about black people being more likely to get in trouble for carrying weed in stop and frisk cities like the previous iteration of NY, then sure, that has merits, but that does not negate so many other areas where the stereotypes are real, and could be broken if only the incidence diminished.
That, multiplied a hundred fold, repeatedly will wear away at the misapplied expectations.
To the doubters out there, I’ve given this example before, but imagine you are in hunter gatherer times, and a green colored snake leaps out and bites a friend and they keel over paralyzed from the venom and almost die… and you see this happen over the course of years where every time a green snake bites someone they keel over… what do you think that will naturally do to your expectation and stereotype areas of the brain? Reinforce them. How do you break that? See examples of green snakes that do not cause death and paralysis from the venom.
This is kind of a BASIC and obvious survival mechanism, it makes so much basic sense how this works it’s confusing to me there is pushback on how stereotypes are formed and eventually broken.
No one said they are fair. I get it less than others since I’m a mixed black guy and not full on african looking black, but there is still some expectation there at times of me not knowing as much based off a look. I get less of that because of how I carry myself, and how I communicate, but before that kicks in I know there are probably people that make assumptions about me that may not be true. I went to a conference of black engineers in college (not an engineer) and saw a SEA of black men who were in school to be engineers. If THAT was the population of the typical college you’d see fewer lowered expections of black people being as “able” in the same numbers. THAT vision would break the chain of lowered expectations in people.
Instead what do people typically see in large state and private colleges? Large chunks of asians, because they are more likely to be there based on the general population.
Now personally I think that while much of this is driven by nurture, there is a strong genetic component that accounts for some of these differences in numbers. But I WANT to see a higher representation of black people in those sorts of engineering fields and colleges, but we need more people with the aptitude to engage in that. And if nature, in all its brutish and cruel distributions does not see fit to distribute the stats that elevate the lives of men in a more egalitarian fashion, I think we should figure out a way to do that ourselves.
But until we do, and until the discrepancies we see around us go away, the stereotypes will persist. More liberally minded people, who assume NATURE builds us all EQUAL (massages temples at stupidity), will be more inclined to believe the differences must be a result of societal failing, or a legacy of slavery and jim crow, and more conservative people will tend to think that it’s because people just don’t work hard enough, or are lazy and sitting on their ass. Even if some of that is undoubtedly true, plenty of people can work just as hard as others if not harder and still come up shorter.
Both of those impulses have an astonishingly incomplete view of the variables that go into outcomes for people. This dereliction of awareness is going to leave people behind and unhelped.
People don’t notice the green snakes that do not cause death, only the ones that do.
They know green snakes cause death, and if you see a green snake you consider yourself lucky or capable if it does not kill you.
That’s how confirmational bias works. That’s how prejudices work.
It is much much easier to form a stereotype than it is to disabuse yourself of it.
And of course, if society is helping you to reinforce these stereotypes, (black people aren’t a smart as white people, so they don’t need as good of schools), then that gives them even more inertia.
Actually, this is correct, they don’t, they latch onto the ones that do and it casts a pall on all other green snakes. Which is where our executive function and gray matter needs to come in and overrule the expectation system of our brains.
But the issue still remains, if you see far more examples of green colored snakes biting people and causing paralysis with their venom than brown snakes, it will create a stereotype and more negative view of green snakes from a birds eye view. Even if it was true that there was confirmation bias in the assessment, looking at data and stats are one tool in removing those assumptions. Problem. What if both the stereotypical expectations and the data align? How do you combat the problem then?
Perhaps the solution is to alter human beings in their behavior and other means over time such that the data no longer aligns with the negative view.
People and society are more complex than this, I think. If society keeps telling black kids that they are inferior in some way (whether it’s about criminal aggression, lower IQ, or whatever), then it’s possible that some of them may really believe it, and act that way.
That’s a separate issue. You’re saying that society holding that stereotype will perpetuate it. That’s not the same as saying the stereotype is false. The exact opposite, in fact.
You shouldn’t be “figuring” this because it is a logical fallacy to appeal to the bandwagon.
People have always believed in myths and lies. People have always believed in aliens, ghosts, demons, dieties, and crazy conspiracies. All that means is that there is something about these ideas that is especially seductive.
The big dumb brute is an appealing belief. Who is better able to withstand dirty, hard labor? The big tall guy. So let’s make him do all the heavy chores. And we’ll justify it by telling him he’s too dumb to work in an office. Eventually we’ll all start believing it.
Almost all stereotypes are self-serving like this. “Blacks are childlike subhumans who lack discipline and intelligence” easily translates into “They would make great slaves and servants.” “Women are emotional creatures who are given to neuroses” easily translates into “Better keep them in the home so they’ll stay barefoot and pregnant so the men can rule everything.”
The fact that stereotypes are used to benefit the stereotyper is what keeps them entrenched. A white guy is able to get a little ego boost at the thought that blacks are more dangerous, which is why that belief is so prevalent in our society. Meanwhile, another stereotype–white guys are heartless bastards–doesn’t get as much traction (despite the evidence that seems to support it). Not because there isn’t a “grain of truth” there (cuz perhaps there is, right?), but because it doesn’t make the majority of Americans feel warm and tingly–seeing as how it personally affects them.
I’m guessing the “big dumb brute” stereotype is entrenched because the majority of people aren’t big brutes. It’s always fun to poke fun at the “other” guy, especially if he has traits (strength and height) that are otherwise admired.
The stereotypes we’re discussing are either wholly or mostly false (at best, stereotypes are about extremes, not averages and the ordinary or typical; at worst, stereotypes are entirely fantastical). In addition to that, I’m saying that it hurts society and people to perpetuate them.
Like I said, there are two reinforcements going on here.
One is confirmational bias. You have a hard time seeing what you do not expect to see. That’s on every individual to try to use our executive function to overcome such prejudices.
The second, and probably more important, is society reinforcing those stereotypical roles. If I don’t hire a black guy, because of my prejudice that is informed by society telling me that black people do not make good employees, then I am adding to the unemployment of black people, and reinforcing that stereotype. If I stop and frisk a black guy, because I think that he is a criminal because he is black, I think that contributes to a person’s lack of respect for law enforcement, and may even increase the likelihood of lawbreaking. If I don’t bother to work with the black kid in the classroom, because black kids don’t do well in school, then I am reinforcing the fact that black kids don’t do well in school. If I don’t rent or sell a house in a nice neighborhood to a black family, I am reinforcing the stereotype that black people do not live in nice neighborhoods. I could go on, but I do actually have other stuff to do,. I am sure you get the point.
Anyway, the first is on the individual. Everyone needs to approach and examine their prejudices in a different way, we all have them, and we all picked them up in different places and different manners.
The second is on society to fix. This requires the govt’s cooperation to deal with all the issues of crime, housing, poverty, and education. I do not see how much progress can be made on an individual level to address these sorts of systemic disadvantages offered to certain disadvantaged demographics.
No, that’s not what you said. You said “If society keeps telling black kids that they are inferior in some way (whether it’s about criminal aggression, lower IQ, or whatever), then it’s possible that some of them may really believe it, and act that way.” That means that some stereotyped kids will act in accordance with the stereotype, which would make the stereotype true.
I don’t think people can just randomly make up stereotypes because they don’t like certain other people.
I personally don’t think there really is much a “big dumb brute” stereotype. But if there is one, my guess is that it has to do with smaller guys needing to develop intellectually to compensate for lack of size.
But your argument implies that - all else being equal - the percentage of people in the stereotyped group who conform to the stereotype will be higher than the percentage of other groups who do. Which means the stereotype has some validity to it.
Maybe. But if the cause of this is the existence of a widely recognized stereotype, then it seems to me that “valid” is the wrong word. I think “effective” might fit better.
Do you think stereotypes develop organically, through deliberate data collection and robust statistical analysis?
Or do you think they develop just like any other display of nhumanity–to boost someone’s ego to the detriment of someone else’s?
Which is exactly my point. The stereotype exists because of the feelings it creates in the people who cling to it. The existence of “grains of truth” doesn’t have anything to do with it.
“Organic”, yes. “deliberate data collection and robust statistical analysis”, no.
A lot of people observe things. Each observation is a data point and each of these people have only a few data points. But on a societal level, the observations that are more commonly observed and by more people are the ones that are more likely to prevail.
Once stereotypes begin to get established there’s a combination of confirmation bias and xenophobia that magnifies them.
You may have misunderstood what I was saying. I was suggesting that that stereotype could have some validity.
A big strong guy of average intelligence might get a job in concrete construction out of high school to make some quick money. A smaller guy with the same mental aptitude and inclinations as this guy but with less ability to drag concrete around might be more likely to opt for an intellectually oriented field.
Possible. But as above, I’m skeptical as to whether this stereotype really exists altogether.