# Voicing limited and qualified agreement with a bigoted stereotype **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 31, 2025, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561 "2025-07-31T21:36:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/301 "2025-08-18T20:04:30Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Okay, let’s try an experiment: > > Jewish people are (statistically) over-represented in Hollywood relative to the overall population. That’s the wrong experiment. This is what the OP was talking about: A - No surprise there, we all know The Jews run Hollywood. B - Stop repeating that bigoted stereotype! C - Hold on a second there, B. Jewish people are (statistically) over-represented in Hollywood relative to the overall population. Thanks to C, we’re now going to focus on historical statistical minutia instead of A’s bigoted stereotype. This is exactly what’s going on in [the National Guard vis a vis law enforcement thread](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/national-guard-as-a-long-term-armed-adjunct-to-law-enforcement/1022159/32). We get a discussion about how many NG troops are MPs who are “trained police” instead of the fact our president is sending the military into a city via a (literal) trumped up emergency. ---
**Author:** ![thorny\_locust](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thorny_locust/32/431_2.png) [@thorny\_locust](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thorny_locust)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/302 "2025-08-18T20:27:55Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > That’s the wrong experiment. This is what the OP was talking about: > > A - No surprise there, we all know The Jews run Hollywood. > > B - Stop repeating that bigoted stereotype! > > C - Hold on a second there, B. Jewish people are (statistically) over-represented in Hollywood relative to the overall population. > > Thanks to C, we’re now going to focus on historical statistical minutia instead of A’s bigoted stereotype. Rather more than that: C - Hold on a second there, B. Jewish people are (statistically) over-represented in Hollywood relative to the overall population. That fact does back the stereotype; it’s the nugget of truth in the stereotype. However, that fact can be explained by . . . Not only is the conversation going to be diverted into arguments about the explanations; but C is going to have started off by claiming that there’s truth in the stereotype. Which is probably the main thing A will remember of the conversation, whether or not B proceeds to hit the ceiling (which, if it happens, they may remember only as ‘you can’t mention an obvious fact without being attacked for it!’) ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/303 "2025-08-18T20:32:06Z")
Sure, but what’s the alternative? Replying with “No, Jews are not statistically over-represented in Hollywood” will then lead to claims of “denying reality.” It’s a triple trap: 1. acknowledge that Jews are overrepresented = possibly playing into the bigots’ hands 2. deny that Jews are overrepresented = bigots will then claim you are being deceptive 3. ignore it = then bigots win by virtue of them talking and you being silent ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/304 "2025-08-18T20:39:42Z")
1. Ask “Why is the religion of people in Hollywood a thing that you are concerned about?” Because there’s, really, only one reason for that question. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/305 "2025-08-18T20:41:57Z")
I mean, there are legit reasons for that question. If 99% of people in Hollywood were fundamentalist Muslims or Christians, it would have severe ramifications for society and the stuff that Hollywood makes. (I’m not saying Jews, or any other religion, have anywhere close to that much influence. But religion does matter.) ---
**Author:** ![thorny\_locust](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thorny_locust/32/431_2.png) [@thorny\_locust](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thorny_locust)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/306 "2025-08-18T20:42:49Z")
4.) ‘While that’s true it doesn’t back the stereotype. Jews as a group aren’t controlling what you see in the movies, that’s nonsense.’ Follow with explanations if it looks like anybody’s listening. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/307 "2025-08-18T20:44:59Z")
Make up your mind, the parenthetical negates what precedes it. ---
**Author:** ![Q.Q.Switcheroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/q.q.switcheroo/32/5713_2.png) [@Q.Q.Switcheroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.Q.Switcheroo)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/308 "2025-08-18T21:09:09Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > I mean, there are legit reasons for that question. If 99% of people in Hollywood were fundamentalist Muslims or Christians, it would have severe ramifications for society and the stuff that Hollywood makes. But the “Jews run Hollywood” stereotype isn’t so much about religion as it is about ethnicity and culture. (The standard bigoted grumble is along the lines of “too many damn Weinsteins and Spielbergs!”, not “too many damn kosher-keeping synagogue-attenders!”) ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/309 "2025-08-18T21:21:15Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > If 99% of people in Hollywood were fundamentalist Muslims Then mentioning how fundamentalist Muslims run Hollywood wouldn’t be a bigoted stereotype, would it? You can just stand up and say that fundamentalist Muslims do, in fact, run Hollywood, and back that shit up with facts. The problem here is that Mr. C does NOT believe Jews run Hollywood\*, he knows it’s a bigoted stereotype. Yet, he decides, without anyone asking, to “correct” someone by voicing his limited and qualified agreement with the stereotype. \*Well, maybe he does, and in addition to being a bigot, he’s a coward who won’t voice his actual agreement with the stereotype. ---
**Author:** ![Slithy\_Tove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slithy_tove/32/18248_2.png) [@Slithy\_Tove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slithy_Tove)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/310 "2025-08-18T21:22:04Z")
IIRC, the predominance of Ashkenazi Jews in early Hollywood was due to nepotism, or at least of senior executives hiring promising young men recommended by those closest to them. Almost exclusively Jewish but not exclusively a Jewish practice, because it also explains why WASPS ran Wall Street or Yalies the CIA. ---
**Author:** ![BippityBoppityBoo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bippityboppityboo/32/5745_2.png) [@BippityBoppityBoo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BippityBoppityBoo)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/311 "2025-08-18T22:03:29Z")
> [@Slithy\_Tove](#): > > because it also explains why WASPS ran Wall Street or Yalies the CIA. Misspelling there: why WASPs _ **run** _ Wall Street or Yalies the CIA. ---
**Author:** ![DemonTree](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/demontree/32/8646_2.png) [@DemonTree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DemonTree)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/312 "2025-08-18T23:24:55Z")
> [@thorny\_locust](#): > > But you don’t appear to want to frame it as acknowledging the fact and then pointing out why it doesn’t support the stereotype. You appear to want to frame it as saying that the fact does support the stereotype. We need to go back a bit. Contrary to @BigT, I believe the majority of stereotypes spring from some kind of observation, rather than being invented ex nihilo. And this observation might be accurate, or it might be unrepresentative or biased in some way (for example, based on media reporting that doesn’t reflect the true frequency of events). Humans are always looking for patterns, and we like to come up with explanations for those patterns: thus is a stereotype born. If the stereotypers have a pre-existing prejudice or hostility towards the group in question, it can easily be a bigoted stereotype. Eg in the current example, the observation would be “there sure seem to be an awful lot of Jewish people doing important jobs in Hollywood”, and the stereotype (or conspiracy theory?) is that “the Jews run Hollywood”. Then we can ask two questions: is the observation the stereotype is (presumably) based on accurate? And does it support the stereotype? The answer to the first question varies, and the answer to the second, in the case of bigoted stereotypes, is usually “no”. I took the OP to be effectively asking how to say that the answer to the first question is “yes” without being accused of supporting or endorsing the stereotype. Perhaps I misunderstood? Regardless, that’s my issue with the whole thing. It’s not that I want to frame some fact as supporting a stereotype, it’s that I want to be able to say the fact is true, if it is indeed true. Perhaps you believe it should be enough to write “I’m not saying it supports stereotype Y, but ackshually, X _is_ true”. However, this would almost certainly be interpreted as a dog whistle or as suspect by uncharitable posters. And perhaps this genuinely is what bigots say? I think the actual answer to the OP is that you need to write an essay explaining why observation X does not support stereotype Y, and only then is it permissible to point out that X is true. And even so, people are likely to reflexively deny that X is true because _they_ think it supports the stereotype. This is why wise people follow the gentle advice of multiple posters here and keep their mouths shut. ---
**Author:** ![DemonTree](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/demontree/32/8646_2.png) [@DemonTree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DemonTree)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/313 "2025-08-18T23:41:02Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Only Democrats/progressives/liberals have agency; Republicans/conservatives/MAGA are just the way they are and can’t be criticized. This is funny because Republicans/conservatives/MAGA are forever complaining that liberals believe ‘oppressed’ groups have no agency, and white people/men/cishets etc are always blamed for their problems. And they also seem convinced they are an oppressed group themselves, so it actually fits. 😂 * * * > [@BippityBoppityBoo](#): > > why WASPs _ **run** _ Wall Street Is this true, or another bigoted stereotype? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/314 "2025-08-18T23:42:02Z")
But we can research the facts about the origins of at least some stereotypes - and the stereotypes about Black people in America very clearly originated not from any behavioral observations, but from a need to justify enslavement and (later) Jim Crow laws by those in power in the South (as well as Sundown Towns around the country). ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/315 "2025-08-18T23:43:29Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > This is funny because Republicans/conservatives/MAGA are forever complaining that liberals believe ‘oppressed’ groups have no agency, and white people/men/cishets etc are always blamed for their problems. These folks are not accurate arbiters of the beliefs of liberals/progressives/Democrats. ---
**Author:** ![DemonTree](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/demontree/32/8646_2.png) [@DemonTree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DemonTree)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2025, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/316 "2025-08-18T23:45:59Z")
IMO it’s about as accurate as your ‘the media thinks Republicans have no agency’ claim. And it’s pretty subjective, so I have no idea how we’d prove it one way or the other. ---
**Author:** ![Zoobi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/13edae/32.png) [@Zoobi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoobi)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2025, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/317 "2025-08-19T00:08:37Z")
Look, if you guys want to agree with bigoted stereotypes then just do it. It’s not going to surprise anyone, trust me. You are only handicapping yourselves. If you think you need to speak truth to power about the real unPC difference between Black people and White people then just do it. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2025, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/318 "2025-08-19T01:38:45Z")
**DemonTree** , none of those cites you provided show any poster actually advocating the suppression of facts or refusing to acknowledge facts. The point of **Cheesesteak** ’s remarks (and I will defer to **Cheesesteak** ’s more authoritative interpretation of them if he disagrees) about “shutting the fuck up” was about refraining from excusing or sanitizing a nasty bigot’s bullshit stereotype. Not about refusing to express or acknowledge any actual facts relevant to such stereotypes. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2025, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/319 "2025-08-19T02:18:51Z")
> [@thorny\_locust](#): > > But you don’t appear to want to frame it as acknowledging the fact and then pointing out why it doesn’t support the stereotype. You appear to want to frame it as saying that the fact does support the stereotype. Which it doesn’t, for reasons already gone into exhaustively in this thread. As, it seems to me, the fact that the problem is that you want to claim there is support for the stereotype has also already been gone into exhaustively in this thread. And you appear entirely unwilling or unable to accept that there’s a difference between ‘this fact supports the stereotype but’ and ‘this fact doesn’t support the stereotype because’. Yeah, this is a perennial problem with the discourse of self-identified “race realists” and similar discussions. Not trying to say that **DemonTree** herself is a race-realist type, but their sort of naive “it stands to reason” logic is very viscerally appealing when one’s arguing about very complicated matters. The core of the problem, it seems to me, is that it’s easy to get confused about the difference between **inconclusive evidence** in favor of some hypothesis and **unreliable evidence** about that hypothesis. For example, let’s say your hypothesis is that leafhoppers prefer variegated leaves to nonvariegated ones on their foodplants. Your experimental results seem to confirm that preference, but maybe your confidence interval is quite large, so the probability that the results are just a statistical fluctuation is quite high, and/or there are likely to be confounding factors you didn’t account for in how the variegated leaves were selected, or whatever. So, you do have some evidence in favor of your hypothesis, but it’s very far from a slam dunk. The evidence is **inconclusive**. Now suppose that you suddenly found out that you have an unsuspected mild form of color vision deficiency that led you to make mistakes in the leaf selection for your experiment: some of your supposedly unvariegated leaves were actually variegated and vice versa. You don’t actually know what kind of leaves the leafhoppers were eating when you recorded them as preferring “V” or “NonV”. You messed up the experimental conditions, so you never actually tested what you thought you were testing, and your results are worthless. The evidence is **unreliable**. This is what happens with many so-called “nuggets of truth” in phenomena affected by systemic societal bigotry. I used to get into arguments with “race realists” on these boards, for example, who insisted that persistent measured IQ differences between Black and non-Black test subjects counted as evidence that Black people are naturally less intelligent than non-Black ones. They were willing to admit that such evidence was **inconclusive** —that IQ testing is imperfect and that there can be all sorts of reasons for people to test differently, etc.—but they really really really wanted the acknowledgement that it counted as **some** evidence supporting their hypothesis. What they couldn’t wrap their heads around is that _it’s impossible to test subjects’ “natural” intelligence levels in an environment where some subjects have experienced lifelong stereotypes and bigotry about their alleged “lower intelligence”, and others haven’t._ In such circumstances you are never getting an accurate reading of what their “natural” intelligence is, any more than you got an accurate reading of leafhopper leaf preferences in the experiment where you unwittingly mixed up the variegated and nonvariegated leaves. You have not managed to test what you thought you were testing. Your data isn’t just **inconclusive** , it’s **unreliable**. That inconvenient reality is hard for a lot of the “stands to reason” arguers to process. It feels to them like just needless nitpicking and resistance to admitting unwelcome facts. _“Look, I already admitted that this evidence is incomplete and inconclusive, so why aren’t you willing even to admit that it actually **does** count as **some** evidence supporting this position?!?”_ They haven’t grasped the difference between the inconclusive and the unreliable. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2025, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561/320 "2025-08-19T05:42:48Z")
That sort of “go ahead, it doesn’t bother or affect us” approach sounds all fine and good except that these stereotypes command enormous power. They’re arguably a big reason Trump won in 2016 and 2024. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/voicing-limited-and-qualified-agreement-with-a-bigoted-stereotype/1021561.md?page=17)