Lets say that a Mexican was driving a Cadillac with rims and chrome. Would you instantly think that they were apart of a gang? Many would think that way. Do you think that stereotyping is right? Whether its right or not many of us have been guilty of it. The police stereotype because of their experiences. They have been in neighborhoods where most of the calls were burglary’s,  auto thefts, or shootings. Stereotyping could be perceived as a form of discrimination. 

The media helps buid this up. They may use words like a black man robbed a corner store or a street thug was shooting in an inner city neighborhood. We must look at people as human beings and not judge them because of where they live or what they wear. Stereotyping hurts people’s feelings and may not be the best tactic to use in any situation. Just remember that everybody is not the same. When one person or a group of people are guilty, they all are not guilty.

Courtesy of colorcurve.com

Courtesy of

photographybyjohncorney.com

Since human beings have intelligence, they have been in the need of expression.  Therefore, we have developed many kinds of art movements to satisfy our creativity, and movies are the most modern and also the most popular.  Anyway, the quality of movies has been decreasing  dramatically.  First of all, stereotyping has taken a very important role to get success in the promotion and releasing of a movie.  Another point is the low quality of some actors in performing a character; now is very common that some actors are good only for some characters.  A last observation could be that most of the creators of movies take old stories to make new versions, or they only take a popular event to develop a story; such as “Titanic” or “Pearl Harbor”.

 Stereotyping has taken a very powerful role in the cinematographic stage.  For example, a hero has to have some very specific characteristics to perform a protagonist character.  Similarly, the female star is required to be a certain way to capture the public attention.  Therefore, the public gets a specific conception of beauty with people like Brad Pitt or Jennifer Lopez. More over, the antagonist must also have more or less the same characteristics of the leading characters.  Stereotyping is not only in the characters. While we are watching a movie we realize that places have a traditional look too.  Therefore, USA is depicted as technology and Mexico or the rest of Latin America, on the other hand, are represented like very remote places.  Furthermore, movies that show countries like Colombia or Bolivia, degrade them involving them only with drug production or extremely crime.

 Since stereotyping has taken place, bad actors have come with it.  It is not a coincidence that we still see the same people in Hollywood movies.  Stereotyping is easily done because we are used to accepting only a certain people.  Also directors do not want to take the risk of trying something new.  Obviously there are good actors, but anyway the movie world has been filled up with mediocrity.  First of all, they always look for people with certain characteristics besides acting ability.  Also, they classify people according their look, so some of them are okay to be a protagonist, but the rest only to be extras.  For example, Leonardo Dicaprio performs very badly in Titanic.  He behaves like a guy of the United States in the 90’s that is very far from the character of an English man during the years of the Titanic.

 The problem in Hollywood movies begins with the screenplay for a movie.  Writers have limited their creativity in a specific and repetitive model of movie.  Even people who are not movie fans realize that in many of the movies, director develop a story like a routine for every single movie.  We can realize of this absence of creativity when we have seen “Rocky” in five different editions; some of us could say that it is a kind of mini-series.  Another example is the 101 dolnations, that after the success in cartoons it has been made into a movie.   But the worst thing is when we see movies where they are not movies, but actually big musical repertories.  This was the case with “Space Girls”, or the current Rock Star.  Actually, rock star was funny but it did not make any sense.

 Hollywood has been producing a lot of movies with bad quality because of their coward-ness in trying new things.  It is true that most of the people are satisfied seeing their favorite artists on the screen.  But there are some viewers who are looking for good art, and obviously they realize the carelessness that the directors have with the stories for movies.  Also, stereotyping has limited the options for many actors with all the conditions to perform leading characters.  However, I still hope that someday I will watch the reality of life on movies, and not a made up world of artificial beauty created to wash our brains with superficiality.

lets say for places lie Delhi  - they crib about it every now and then , Delhi is too hot, you sweat  like anything, the auto drivers don’t go with meters, people even tell you wrong directions – to cut it short, Delhi is full of a-holes…!!Oh well yes, it does have a larger number of assholes, its a metro city, its population is as much as Dehradun added up 7 times, it has a mixed population with people migrating every now and then shifting their bases to Delhi – for educational purpose and some for working purposes! Yet it offers you great education, awesome food and rocking night life!

Besides that, the spirit of Delhi people, their willingness to help you, their hospitality, their way of enjoying life, of letting things go! The exposure it offers you regarding almost everything that you can think of – food, brands, education, sports – that’s because the environment is such (- lets not talk about people who lack basic G.K. and fail to answer even the simplest Q’s, that kind are present every where). Delhi is full of flaws for few who can’t survive there, for others who are smart and alert, don’t just believe on anything that people tell them and trust themselves more than some stranger telling them the direction and merely agreeing to it, they push the auto drivers to go with meters instead of just going by what they charge – or preferably go via metros! It provides you with great friends you get studying/working through years, they are your family in the absence of your mom dad (- of course referring to non Delhi heights )..!! So learn to respect a place that helps you grow your career and tend to overlook the flaws or work towards them instead of cribbing about them.. You cant get the best of everything, anywhere!

Lets talk about the relationships now!

So he broke your trust and the other one two timed you! Oh this is even more weird he just left without telling you the reason for breaking up? What – he was cheating on you since 5 years.. Damn!

OMG is she dating two people at the same time – such a bitch! What- She goes out with a new guy every weekend, man how can you be in love with her..!! Damn!!

Yes – you come across such people in life, some will two time you, some one will just leave without bothering to tell you the reason, they are the masters of their life, some will cheat on a relationship as long as 5 years..!!

Then there are another group of people, some one will love you silently for years and never tell you because maybe you don’t love them back or you love someone else and thought it hurts not to be that special one; yet they will be happy seeing you happy..!! Some one is probably planning to propose you on your birthday in front of every one.. hows that.. Isn’t that romantic? Doesn’t the mere thought of someone treating you that specially tickle your soul and make you feel like WOW… ?

So guys, just because some girl(s) broke your heart – turned out to be bitchy and characterless .. doesn’t mean all fall under the same category…!!Similarly girls, just because few guys, are flirts, two timers, playboys and mere sex addicts – doesn’t mean all are the same..!!Have faith on people, more than that – on yourself … and don’t fear to fall in love again ..!!

Bless you!! 

Given even a small amount of time in a grocery check-out isle, you could easily become an expert on “what makes a woman unable to say no” or “what men really want.” Women are portrayed as having a value as an object that men must somehow earn, and yet don’t really have a good incentive to actually be with a man, except for maybe self-image and confidence. Men, on the other hand, have to do everything they can to get a woman, which is the ultimate goal for pleasure. Many attempts for reasons to be in a relationship exist in the culture these magazines present, but ultimately they are all shallow (based on visual appearance and playing hard-to-get) and selfish (instead of considering the other person’s well-being).

Enter into the Christian circle of sexuality and gender discussions. Though you are encouraged to be genuinely loving and considerate of the other person, many of these stereotypes are still maintained. I found a Church’s dating advice article where they point out to women that a man needs sex. Little to no mention of a woman’s joy in sex, the article focuses on how, “[God] also put an intense desire in man to want to often make love to his wife.” (Butler, 2006) So often people can be heard saying this same thing, focusing on how a woman must give sexual pleasure but is unexpected to receive any.
In reality, women have similar desires for sex. Some even desire more, but that is less common. We need to understand actual differences in the genders in order to make better decisions. Les Parrott points out that men and women actually have similar amounts of desire for sex.

The fact is that our sex drives, for both men and women, fall along a continuum that looks like a bell curve, and most wives are right in the middle, wanting to have sex with their husbands just as much as their husbands want to have sex with them. Of course, some women actually have a stronger libido than their husband, but these marriages are in the minority. (Parrott, 2009)

Parrott bases differences on miscommunication due to different ideas about sex. Men will get in the mood for sex more quickly, while a woman can take time to become aroused. Thus, she may want to finish some chores before she has sex. This doesn’t, however, have any strong implications about her interest level in sex.
Another stereotype is that women are the ones who prefer the physical affection before and after sex while men seek to be fulfilled through direct intercourse. Men want the feeling of pleasure, yet women want to focus on the relational aspect. A study of 1,009 people with successful relationships of mixed ethnic backgrounds and varied lengths in relationship were surveyed to find what they considered most satisfying in their relationships. The most common response from men was that they were happy in their relationships, while women reported being sexually satisfied.

Women’s sexual satisfaction also increased with time, though that could be because sexually unsatisfied women don’t stay in their relationships, leaving only the satisfied behind to answer questionnaires, Heiman said. Similar relationship attrition could explain why, contrary to stereotype, men who get lots of kisses and cuddles are more sexually satisfied in their relationships. “It may be that the men who endure in long-term relationships are the ones that kissing and cuddling is really important to them,” Heiman said. “Or maybe they’ve changed along the way, we don’t know.” (Pappas, 2011)

There could definitely be some variables in how and why these findings occurred, but it still gives strong evidence to these ideas of snuggling and sex drive being more of a social invention than an accurate idea.
A third stereotype that comes along is the games women are said to play. Not only are women suggested to be wanting you to figure out what they mean, there are times which women are treated as if they mean the opposite of what they say. One advertisement for Fetish perfume says, “Apply generously to your neck so he can smell the scent as you shake your head ‘no.’” I don’t need to say much to point out how this is not only untrue as a stereotype, but more of a sign of unhealthiness in a person.
These stereotypes can be untrue and interesting, but they are also detrimental if not better understood. A pivotal part of relationships is understanding the other person, and when we assume a person is a specific way because of their gender, we open our relationship to misunderstandings that will do nothing but harm it. One must seriously take into account the accuracy of statements and beliefs based solely on gender.

These distortions of the sexes are divisive, and interfere with our being intimate and loving in our close relationships. The social pressure exerted by these attitudes is as damaging to couple relationships as racial prejudice is to relations between people of different ethnic backgrounds. (“Sexual Stereotyping,” n.d.)

Not only is our general relationship diminished from a lack of understanding, but our sexual life can be damaged. Men and women can feel guilty about making sure the other is pleasured, and for other reasons. It is important for us to not have inaccurate interpretations and expectations about our spouse.
Playing games can be diminishing to a relationship (like in the advertisement about “yes means no”) and make women believe that this is an acceptable concept, and even that it is required to attract men. However, this can also be worse than just creating unhealthy habits. Accepting this as normal can be dangerous. Men can get the idea into their heads that even a woman that says ‘no’ to sex really means ‘yes.’ How much ‘NO’ does it take for her to actually mean it? A man accepting the idea of ‘no means yes’ may not actually think about what a real ‘no’ is.
These stereotypes can have an effect on so many areas of our life. Virginia Woolf, a writer from the late 20th century, spoke of how stereotypes (and the forced roles that were consequence) were extremely detrimental to the ability of a woman to express herself through writing. (1929) Every aspect of our life can be greatly hindered by creating false roles and identities for people. It is important for sexuality and many areas of our lives that we can formulate accurate beliefs about ourselves and those around us, especially our spouses.
What do we do to change things? We begin by accepting that we believe untruths! The focus must be shifted from a blame that blocks the gap, and moving to seeking truth in order to bridge the gap. We wont ‘relate’ better, which is the key word in relationships, if we keep seeking to affirm false differences between the genders.

In truth, men and women are more alike than they are different. Both men and women have essentially the same desires in life and seek the same kinds of satisfactions with each other. Both want sex, love, affection, success, dignity and self-fulfillment. They want to be acknowledged first as unique individuals, then as men and women. (“Sexual Stereotyping,” n.d.)

As Dr. Domani Pothen stated in a Critical Reading & Writing class, gender is very important, but it needs to stop being the first question we ask in identifying people.
To look past these stereotypes, we need to attempt a fresh look. It helps to be critical of the things we hear and feel before we accept them as a standard. Adrienne Rich wrote an essay about women’s roles, and described the process of looking back with a fresh perspective as ‘Re-vision.’

Re-vision – the act of looking back, of seeing with fresh eyes, of entering an old text from a new critical direction – is for us more than a chapter in cultural history: it is an act of survival.  Until we can understand the assumptions in which we are drenched we cannot know ourselves. (Rich, 1972)

My own experience applied, I’ve broken many norms. Though I look forward to sex in my marriage, I’ve always found the physical touch more appealing. I’ve also always had a lower pain tolerance, which has been scientifically shown to be common in women due to a higher quantity of pain receptors. (Sohn, 2010) I spent a lot of time thinking something was wrong with me, because I was so wimpy compared to other men like my dad no matter how hard I tried.

All in all, there are truth we can learn about our nature as men and women, but we must caution ourselves against making generalization. Simply listening, learning, and being open to the lives of those around us can help us better understand what could be a difference of personal health, or simply a difference of personality.

Finely clad in his expensive three-piece suit, this businessman ’stereotypes’ the youth as a ‘hood’, a ‘hoodlum’, a ‘gangsta’…a person to be leery of…so he continues to watch him suspiciously out of the corner of his eye.

Perhaps this ‘punk’ is going to try rob him, steal his briefcase or both….

The businessman scrambles towards his vehicle, unlocks it with the click of the button and then the unthinkable…no the very thing that he was thinking about happens….

Give me your keys,” he is knocked to the ground, but the offender is not at all who he suspected it to be….

As this businessman lays on the ground and attempts to regain his faculties, he spots two young men scrambling through the parking lot…randomly tossing the contents of his briefcase on the ground.

The teenager, who he had deemed as a ‘hood’, a ‘hoodlum’ a ‘gangsta’ and a ‘punk’…the very person who he had been leery of…rushed to his side and telephoned the police on his cell phone….

How ironic….

Keywords:
Race, racism, racial discrimination, stereotyping, hatred

Article Body:
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. – Mahatma Gandhi

There is a lot of hatred in this world. On the morning of September 11, 2001, the world witnessed the terrible repercussions of such hatred. Now Iím reading this blog titled ìI Hate Racistsî on ihatethis.org that is filled with venom and hatred towards racism and bigotry. By preaching sheer hatred like this you are only adding fuel to the fires that burn in a world already filled with hatred and violence.

Most of us are waiting for the world to come together in peace. We may never reach that and it may seem like a farfetched dream, but together we must find the means. We must create a safe and secure environment for our children and our childrenís children.

Racism is a difficult subject to tackle and in order to form a culture free of such racism, we must begin with education. If you donít want your children to grow up in a word of hatred, teach them tolerance toward race, religion, color, and sexual orientation. We must expose racism and bigotry for what they are.

It is important to understand what racism is. Wikipedia describes racism as ìHistorically, it has been defined as the belief that race is the primary determinant of human capacities that a certain race is inherently superior or inferior to others, and/or that individuals should be treated differently according to their racial designation. Sometimes racism means beliefs, practices, and institutions that discriminate against people based on their perceived or ascribed race.î

Racism is based on ignorance, stereotyping and learned hatred. Many people accept that we live in a diverse society today and we appreciate different cultures. However, there are still large segments of society that wonít accept human capacities are not determined by race.

There is no doubt in my mind that we need to find a healthy solution to end racism. It is important to understand the nature of racism and intolerance. Together we can end prejudice. Our fight against racism cannot be won while there are attitudes like the one displayed on ihatethis.org against racists. Such behavior is unacceptable.

Racism is not an issue that will be easily resolved, and the sooner that we begin to work together the sooner weíll come to a solution. There is a history of racism that cannot be undone but we can look to the future and make positive changes in how society views those of different ethnic backgrounds.

Give your children the opportunity to develop close friendships with people of different races. Teach your children to accept people as individuals. We must teach them that there is no room for discrimination. Remember that our children are influenced by the world around them.

Examine your own attitudes and opinions about those of a different race. Before stereotyping people, stop and think what your stereotyping is doing to our world today.

I donít hate all the people in the world, I only feel ill towards those who are blind and cannot accept people for who they are.
The ability to accept that we are equal regardless of origins is necessary in order to live in a diverse society.

 To quote the words of John Lennon, ìI hope someday you’ll join us and the world will live as one.î

1.Don’t ignore it. Don’t let an incident pass without a remark. When you let offensive statements pass you send the message that you are in agreement with such behavior or attitudes.

2.Choose the time and place to respond. Your best bet is to follow-up in private. If the comment was made in public, wait for a moment when you’re alone with the individual to bring up your concern, maybe in the car driving home, or suggest that you take a moment away from the group.

3.Don’t shy away from tension or conflict. In fact, expect it. Remember that tension and conflict can sometimes produce positive change.
Always evaluate the security of the situation when confronting prejudice. Ask yourself whether you need back-up to keep you safe or if there is someone better equipped to respond to the situation like the police. You won’t do anyone any good if you get yourself hurt.

4.Think about what you want to get out of the “intervention.” If a comment or action hurts, the tendency is to strike back. But tit-for-tat is not productive. If your goal is to challenge someone’s behavior, be sure not to escalate matters into confrontations or negate his right to speak his beliefs.

5.Project a feeling of understanding, love and support. Without preaching, state how you feel and firmly address the hurtful behavior and attitude while supporting the dignity of the person making the prejudiced remark. Try to assume good will.

6.Use “I” statements, not “you” statements, to explain how what was said made you feel. Use humor when appropriate. Ask questions to help you figure out the real concern underlying the comment. Listen closely. Consider that there might be some hurt motivating the bigoted comment, and respond to it.

7.Be nonjudgmental but know the bottom line. Don’t act superior; a patronizing attitude is not productive. Simply make it clear that issues human dignity, justice, and safety are nonnegotiable.

Prepare yourself for a life of stamping out prejudice

1.Beware of your own attitudes and stereotypes. Everyone has biases. Make sure you’ve examined yours.

2.Gather accurate information to challenge stereotypes and biases. Take responsibility for educating yourself about your own and others cultures. As the saying goes, knowledge is power.

3.Distinguishing between categorical thinking and stereotyping. Categories help us sort out information and make sense of the world. Acknowledging obvious differences is not a problem, but placing negative values on those differences is, it’s called stereotyping.

4.Be a role model. Reflect and practice nondiscriminatory values in all aspects of your behavior, both personally and professionally.

5.Teach others through positive examples. Provide examples of individuals whose lives challenge stereotypes.

Additional reading can be found on this link:

http://www.changeworksconsulting.org/Guidelines-Racism.pdf

Prejudicial Behavior Induced by Transiently Disorderly Environments

A recent study gives qualified support to what has been established since the 1980s: that “neglected environments” conduce towards “crime and antisocial behavior.” The antisocial behavior revealed by the study consisted in the increased manifestation from people, when in disorderly surroundings, of prejudicial stereotyping of other social groups. The increased stereotyping was “small but significant and systematic.”

The study was conducted by social scientists, Diederik Stapel and Siegwart Lindenberg, of Tilburg University in the Netherlands. They determined the increased incidence of social stereotyping in disorderly environments through the administration of questionnaires to people in both disorderly and orderly environments (in this case, a street and a railway station).

Accordingly, in light of their study results (which were reported in Science), they counsel local authorities, if they are interested in discouraging social discrimination, to see to it that public environments are in good order and repair. Estimating the merit of the study, David Schneider, “a psychologist at Rice University in Houston, Texas, and” an authority in stereotyping, assesses the study as “ ‘an excellent piece of work that not only speaks to a possibly important environmental cause, but also supports a major potential theoretical explanation for some forms of prejudice’ ”.

The idea that the state of the environment influences human behavior initially received impetus through the “ ‘broken windows’ hypothesis” of sociologists, James Wilson and George Kelling. As developed by Wilson and Kelling, the hypothesis argued that people, if they see suggestions that prior criminal or antisocial acts have transpired (as in public environments that display decay and neglect), would also be more likely to manifest such acts.

That the “broken-windows” hypothesis had something to it was proven when the New York subway system famously instituted, in the late 1980s, its zero tolerance policy on graffiti (incidentally, Kelling acted as a consultant for this experiment): The policy is conferred credit for “improving the safety of the network”. The hypothesis received further support in 2008 when Lindenberg and co-workers tested it in Dutch urban contexts: The study findings “suggested” discernible influence “on people’s readiness to act unlawfully or antisocially” according to the state of their environment.

Subsequently, Stapel and Lindenberg then wanted to determine how sensitive this connection is between environmental decay and behavior by exploring the possibility of whether or not even relatively mild decay, such as littering, would affect people’s “unconscious discriminatory attitudes towards other people”. They devised a series of experiments.

One experiment took place in a busy Utrecht railway station. People “were asked to sit in a row of chairs and answer a questionnaire for the reward of a chocolate bar or an apple”. At this time, because of cleaners’ strike, the station was strewn with litter. They then repeated the experiment after the cleaners’ strike when the station was thereby tidier.

The questionnaires probed the participants’ attitudes towards three social groups: Muslims, homosexuals, and the Dutch. More precisely, they were asked how well these social groups “conformed to qualities” corresponding to positive and negative stereotypes, as well as to stereotype-independent qualities. For instance, “ the ‘positive’ stereotypes for homosexuals were (creative, sweet), the ‘negative’ were (strange, feminine) and the neutral terms were (impatient, intelligent)”.

Beyond these questionnaire responses, the experiment also probed unconscious behavior incidental to the answering of the questionnaires. In this connection, for example, it should be known that “[a]ll the subjects were white.” It was then contrived that when they sat down to answer the questionnaires, “one chair at the end of the row was already occupied by a black or white Dutch person.” It was observed that when the station was “messy”, subjects tended, “on average”, to sit “further from the black person than the white one, whereas” when the station was tidy, “there was no statistical difference.”

An additional experiment was conducted by the researchers, this time, “on a street in an affluent Dutch city.” Initially, the experiment was conducted when the street was orderly. Subsequently, the experiment was again conducted after the street had been made “disorderly”: a “few paving slabs” had been removed and both “a badly parked car and an ‘abandoned’ bicycle” were introduced into the street scene. As with the rail station scenarios, “ disorder boosted stereotyping”.

This inducement to stereotyping with environmental disorder, Stapel and Lindenberg hypothesize, may be a coping mechanism to deal with disordered environments: partitioning people tidily into predefined categories compensates for the disorder in the environment.

To test this hypothesis, “they showed participants in a lab pictures of disorderly and orderly situations, such as a bookcase with either disheveled or regularly stacked books.” They then asked the subjects “to complete both the stereotyping survey and another one that probed their perceived need for structure”. This latter survey probed for the subject need for structure by asking subjects “to rate the truthfulness of statements such as, ‘I do not like situations that are uncertain’ ”. The experiment confirmed the hypothesis: Stereotyping and the need for structure were more highly correlated in subjects exposed to pictures of disorder.

Commenting on the study, Harvard University (at Cambridge, Massachusetts) sociologist, Robert Sampson, cautions about interpreting the results of the study: Albeit the study was “ ‘clever and well-done’ ”, it is still the case that there are, depending upon “ ‘social context’ ”, “ ‘considerable subjective variations within the same residential environment on how disorder is rated’ ”. Because of this context dependency, the perception of disorder “ ‘is subject to different social meanings in on-going or non-manipulated environments”.

Accordingly, Sampson adds, once we move beyond “ ‘the lab or temporarily induced settings’ ” and  immerse ourselves in “ ‘the everyday contexts in which people live and interact’ ”, it cannot be simply assumed “ ‘that interventions’ ” correcting disorder in the environment will have unfailing effects.

Schneider is in agreement with Sampson about the still ambiguous implications of the study for public policy. Schneider cautions that one of the questions that have to be addressed is how enduring the prejudicial effects of disorder are: It may be the case that people may quickly adapt to disorderly environments so that they needn’t become, over time, necessarily prejudiced in their assessment of other social groups.

Stapel concedes to such cautious qualifications: He admits that disorder in their study meant transient disorder and not permanent disorder.

(For reference to the foregoing article, see: Ball, Philip. 2011. “Chaos promotes stereotyping.” Nature, 7 April. doi:10.1038/news.2011.217)

Stereotypes. What are they? According to the Oxford dictionary, it is “a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing.” These stereotypes can be positive and negative, for example when different nationalities are stereotyped as friendly or unfriendly. Basically, we look at either one person or a group of people; take in their physical appearance, then judge them on it, even though we do not know what each individual is like. We don’t get to see what characteristics they have as we normally assume bad qualities. So why do we do it?

Children are a lot more perceptive than people may believe. When children are given a lot of information to remember, they generalize the group in order to remember it easily. They listen to the generalizations that their parents make, and then apply them when they get older. The human race yearns for success, popularity and acceptance. We all prefer to hang out with people similar to us on a certain level, as we feel more comfortable with them and can relate to them. The fear of the unknown is a massive aspect in stereotyping. There is a name for fearing the unknown, or the unfamiliar. It’s called Xenophobia. People tend to accept their behaviour as ‘normal’, or as most people do. This is usually farthest from the truth. If we took the time to understand why some people act and behave in certain ways, and understand why their responses are as valid to them as our responses are valid to us, everyone would be a lot more tolerant and stereotyping would occur much less.

Imagine you are walking in town with your friends. You happen to see a girl on her own, with bright pink hair, an eclectic mix of clothes, and a lot of piercings on her face. What do you think of her? Confident. Different. Outspoken maybe. She comes over to as you for directions. You want to avoid her but don’t wish to be rude. She speaks, and you realise she is soft-spoken, shy and insecure. Not what you expected at all. Misconceptions happen on a daily basis, and it is unfair to assume someone is a certain way due to their appearance.

There is one great example of stereotyping in history. Everyone knows it. Everyone has heard of it. Do you know what it is? …… The holocaust. Hitler stereotyped all Jewish people as evil, blaming them for the loss of World War 1 and Germany’s money problems.. It is a perfect example of how violence can evolve out of stereotyping based on ignorance and misunderstanding of other groups who are different to us.

There are many, many different stereotypes. It has become a common thing that everyone seems to do. But we shouldn’t judge, because:

Not all Italians eat pasta;

Not all pretty girls are confident;

Not all boys are insensitive

Not all smart people are nerds;

Not all words spoken are meant;

Not all skinny people are anorexic;

Not all blondes are dumb;

Not all rich people are snobs;

Not all people who wear black are Goths;

Not all teenage parents are irresponsible;

And finally…

Not all people who are smiling, laughing, and joking, are happy. People hide a lot through a smile. So don’t judge. Don’t take things at face value, for they aren’t always as they seem. The person who seems the most organized, or the most in-control, could need the most help. We shouldn’t stereotype for as we all know “don’t judge a book by its cover.”

Annie Hintsala suggests in her poetic piece on stereotyping Americans that we, in the rest of the world at large, believe Americans to be lazy, greedy, stupid, xenophobic, and generally anti-social. It’s somewhat ironic that in an attempt to stop the world stereotyping her nation, she has, herself, committed the very same offence by suggesting that everybody has the same opinion of Americans. Generalisation is a slippery and ironic slope from which it is difficult to escape. Best to leave it alone. After all, you can’t control what other people think of you, your nation, your gender, etc. All you can really control is how you behave towards others. At this point I’m going to stir in some controversy and add that what Annie failed to list in her essay were the terms ’self-obsessed’ and ‘whiny’.

It may surprise our heroine to know that most of us in the rest of the world rarely think about Americans – unless it’s in terms of movies or the News. When I get up in the morning, I don’t think ‘Golly, Americans sure are stupid, how did they get so daft?’. I’ve known a lot of Americans in my life – Canadians too – and I can honestly say that I never once thought that any of them were stupid . . . well apart from the guy who thought ’soccer’ was a girl’s game (maybe he was right, which is why I pointed out that here in Britain we play football).

So what is with the need to justify ourselves in this way? We’re all just people clinging to a ball of dirt orbiting the Sun, after all.

How about this: next time you meet anybody at all, from anywhere – they could be from down the street, the next town, or some distant shore – don’t label them with any category, be it nationality, sex, financial status, musical taste, or dress sense. Judge them on what they say and how they treat others, not by their passport and religious beliefs . Easier said than done, I guess. If it was a cake walk, the Twentieth Century would have been less bloody, and commuters in the Twenty-First Century wouldn’t fear getting on public transport with anybody carrying a rucksack or wearing a particularly large belt.

As humans we do, unfortunately, have the capacity for real nasty behaviour. But what sets us apart from the rest of the animals on this planet is the ability to change our behaviour through empathy and compassion.