Stereotypes

Well, this post has been in the making for a while now, so I am hoping to provide a higher level of quality than my usual frothy-mouthed drooling rant sprees.

Stereotypes. They get up people's noses. Why?
What I have noticed about stereotypes is that they typically are born out of a fact, they are of an objective nature. It may later turn out that the fact is false, but it is a fact that spurs the creation of one. Object based stereotypes are never worth anything, so I will focus my discussion on stereotypes that assign a particular attribute to a group of people. Why are people insulted by them? Whether they are correct or incorrect, people typically take offense because the stereotype points out a type of scale, a continuum that people judge themselves on. If they fall into the stereotype, people feel offended because it seems like the stereotyper has control over them (to control you first must understand) or in some cases does have control over, in the case of institutionalized discrimination, which I cannot condone. If they are on the negative side, they have pushed themselves so far to the opposite that it is insulting to be mistaken for a positive. Either way, it forces the person to evaluate themselves by the terms set out by the stereotyper, even though that may not be an aspect the person cares about in themselves. The important thing to remember about stereotypes is that two types of knowledge are imparted
1. Knowledge about the stereotyped.
2. Knowledge about the stereotyper.
Within the genre of stereotypes a person indulges in, we may uncover a truth about them, whether is it true of the stereotyped or not. If a person decides that another race is "less smart" it is obviously the case that they consider themselves to be "more smart". This may not mean much, but can become more revealing with more telling stereotypes. For the purposes of refuting a stereotype, this is the more effective method, as the original 'fact' that the stereotype was based on may be lost to antiquity. It is in this way that we discover the nature of stereotypes. they are put forth as objective analysis, but they can only be known as a subjective assement. Thus, one may not attack the stereotype itself, but must attack the stereotyper to be properly effective.
However, this being said, I wonder why stereotypes have the negative stigma they do? As a female, I encounter few stereotypes, thank you Suffragettes!, but I have found that when they do, one of two things will occur:
1. I will correct the stereotyper, and continue on my merry way.
2. I will appreciate the stereotype.
What? Appreciate? Yes, I know, bizzare, but bear with me. A popular stereotype is that women are more fragile than men because we cannot build muscle mass. If it is a smaller task, I will ignore the stereotyper and do it myself. However, if it something I cannot do, I appreciate the help from the person who is aware such a condition may exist in realtion to me. It is just like knowing a person's personality. We know the 'personality' of a culture, race, ethnicity, etc. From knowing this, it is easier to cater to the groups needs, wants, likes, or dislikes. It is only in the expecting, and the refusal to change my belief about a group, that stereotypes becomes a problem. In essence, it is when people forget the subjective nature of a stereotype, and attempt to treat it as an objective truth.
There you have it.
I'm tired now and going to bed. Hopeful, the next post will be on modern day love, both the finding and the nature thereof.