Wow, I think that’s the first retroactive quote I’ve ever seen on the Dope! Well done!
I’ll amend my statement – I can’t think of a single ethnicity/race bigoted stereotype that’s based on any facts.
It’s one of their defining features. That’s a bad example because it’s like calling football fans liking sports a “stereotype”; it’s borderline tautological, not a stereotype.
Touché!
I’d invite others to read the two sources you offered.
I believe context matters greatly in this sort of discussion if the actual goal is to understand an issue (rather than to ‘win’ on a very limited point, devoid of any and all meaningful context). The authors of both papers take great pains to explain the limitations – numerous and material – in their methodology.
I actually did the opposite of ‘dismissing’ them. I perused each paper (and have now read each in its entirety) and – ironic, in the context of this topic – pointed out how critical it is to take the totality of each reference into consideration, and how risky it is to approach the cites/topic in as reductive a manner as I believe you did.
So, if surveys show that MAGA people tend to be more racist, sexist, etc., than the general population, then you’re stating a fact that MAGA people tend that way. I’m not sure where the bigotry is.
I would say that a negative stereotype based on immutable characteristics is a bigoted one, and I have yet to see an example here based on facts. But, you’ll have to ask the OP, since he hasn’t defined what he’s looking for and refuses to give an example.
This whole thread is unsustainable with the current board rules as far as I understand them. Perhaps that’s the point of it, to criticize the moderation here.
Then you have stereotypes like “Jews control the banks,” which are seen as bigoted because they imply the less privileged group is the more privileged group.
It’s perfectly sustainable. What likely won’t work very well is an attempt to use for cover to push bigoted stereotypes. Which is why people are either saying “and this is why it’s wrong”, or dancing around the issue. For…reasons.
I want to know who the Polish person was that screwed it up for the rest of us…. (Speaking of stereotypes that have no basis in fact.)
Nobody. In fact Polish and other ethnic “jokes” are an example of how stereotypes are often not based on fact even loosely. In many cases what you have is basically the Mad Libs of bigotry, where the insults stay the same but new names are inserted to change the target.
I mean, there are definitely some national or ethnic groups that are known to have high rates of alcohol consumption, for one example. Is that stereotype not based in truth? It could probably even be proven by data.
I know. It was a bit of a facetious statement. One theory is that it was lack of English when they came over (duh) and working shit jobs like meatpacking. (Also duh, that’s where the work was.) It’s why I always object to this “all stereotypes are based on a grain of truth” horseshit.
It’s an example of a carefully chosen for deception “truth”, that fails to mention why they drink a lot. The answer typically being “poverty and oppression-induced stress”.
OK, as I mention above, I’m part Jewish, so I’m going to go down the path that the OP won’t go down.
It’s true that Jews are overrepresented among investment bankers and bank CEOs. First, investment banking tends to be in NYC and other big cities, and Jews are overrepresented in those places compared to rural America. Also, in the middle ages, I understand that banking was one of the few opportunities available to Jewish people (who maybe weren’t allowed to own land? Be merchants? I’m not sure). Also, Jews in the US tend to have more education than average.
So, there’s certainly a nugget of truth that Jews are overrepresented in banking than you would expect given the size of the Jewish population relative to other demographic groups in the US.
This has led some people to say that Jews are bankers because Jews are greedy – I don’t think there’s a nugget of truth there at all. And, then, if someone clearly Jewish leaves a crappy tip and the waiter say, “another greedy Jew leaving a crappy tip”, then you really get into the bigoted stereotyping, and again, I don’t find any truth nuggets there.
So, Jews overrepresented in banking in the US → Likely true. Jews are bankers because they are greedy? Well, bankers can be greedy, but that’s not why Jews are bankers. This particular Jew leaving a crappy tip because he’s Jewish? Clearly bigoted and false.
At this point I think we’re nitpicking on what a “nugget of truth” is. Here in this thread, we have half of people arguing there is a nugget - that a bigoted stereotype may stem from some truth, but it’s distorted and unfair truth - and half arguing there isn’t even one at all, that there is no truth in a bigoted stereotype.
I maintain that it’s incredibly difficult to make a stereotype (bigoted or not) stick in anyone’s minds, or be held by people, if there isn’t at least a bit of truth in it. Amending an earlier example, there’s no way I could convince society at large that Hispanic-Americans like to walk around wearing 4-foot tall stilts all the time, and that stilt-walking is a big thing in Hispanic culture, since (almost) no one has ever seen a Hispanic-American do that.
Jews also went into banking because, unlike Christianity, Judaism allowed lending money at interest (albeit only to non-Jews).
https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/4108763/jewish/Moneylending-and-Jewish-Law.htm
That was a confusing exchange!
The one I gave surely qualifies? It’s a stereotype that men are more violent than women: that’s both negative and based on immutable characteristics, and is confirmed by statistics on crime.
I really hope they do. This is the sort of view I wanted to counter:
And I think that article does a good job of doing so, while being sensitive to the issues and the real harm that stereotypes can cause.
If you’re interested in mutual understanding, rather than ‘winning’ on some narrow point, I suggest asking for explanation or clarification in future, rather than excerpting a couple of lines and demanding sources.
That seems a fair summary. And like the OP, I didn’t want to give such an example because of the assumptions that would likely be made.
Yet I think it can be a problem that people shy away from talking about stereotypes: if no one talks about it, no one hears the explanation, and those who do notice the disproportion will be drawn to conspiratorial theories instead.
But it is more accurate. Specially in this message board, if it ever got old, then it would not be the SDMB.
Exactly what it says in the next bit that you quoted:
Of course it’s a learned skill. But the body that’s best for basketball has to, among other things, be tall; which isn’t necessary for a lot of sports, and may be detrimental for some. There are other ways in which bodies work differently that make some people better suited for some sports than for others.
But that’s kind of an aside; for the purposes of this discussion, you can substitute “natural athletic ability” in that quote for “natural basketball playing ability”; that doesn’t change my point.
It can also be something considered positive, but that’s used, one way or another, in a negative fashion. “Black people are great dancers”, “women have great manual dexterity”, that sort of thing.
– Many years ago, I had a male friend say to me that some kind of poorly paid fiddly job was done primarily by women because “women have better manual dexterity.” I said to him “Yes, that’s why all the great guitar players are women” which shut him up on the subject (he was a person who had some brains and used them, and I could see him re-thinking his preconceptions.)
Nobody said we had better manual dexterity if we wanted to be surgeons or rock stars or anything else that might get respect or high pay. They only said it if they wanted to land us with something that was thought of as a crappy job.
See @iiandyiiii’s post #55; and @Der_Trihs post #58.
There is also no nugget of truth to, say, claims that gay men are more dangerous to children than straight men; or that Jews are greedier for money than any other group. I could go on.
Do some stereotypes have a nugget of truth? Yes. Jewish mothers are very likely to try to feed you. Of course, so are a lot of non-Jewish mothers. And a significant percentage of fathers, and of people with no children.
Weren’t allowed to own land, certainly; or to join guilds.
In some places, at the time, Christians weren’t allowed to charge interest. Judaism allowed it in some circumstances. (Whoops, having caught up to the thread, thanks for link, @Q.Q.Switcheroo .) A bank that can’t charge interest isn’t going to be a bank for very long. So the bankers wound up being Jews – who the Christians borrowed from, and then denigrated (and sometimes drove out or killed) them for providing the service the Christians’ society needed someone to provide.