Discussing my previous post, a friend mentioned that our tendency to be defensive and sensitivity to criticism is not always our fault. She recalled some painful experiences where Indians were stereotyped as being lazy, lacking commitment or plain stingy.
What I was talking about is criticism - which usually has a justifiable basis and is applied to one person or a small group. What my friend mentioned was racism - which generally emanates from making generalizations about an entire populace based on a small subset of people who are being observed only in one capacity.
Life today is (or maybe it always has been) highly compartmentalized such that we generally interact with a set of people only within a pre-determined environment. Colleagues are for office and occasional weekend nights out. House-mates enter the picture when there are bills to be settled or a house to be cleaned. Activities which help people repel the insanity that professional life brings - things like gymming, joining a dance or sports club, reading a book, etc. are either done alone or with people who are normally not prominent in other parts of our life. There might be some overlap for sure, but generally we form opinions about individuals with enforced blinkers on.
Ideally speaking, judgments should be made only after observing people under a variety of conditions - relaxed, pressured, worried, happy etc. Of course, given the humdrum of everyday life, this is not possible and hence our proclivity for arriving at half baked conclusions, which in turn becomes the root cause of racism.
So all Arabs are terrorists, all Indians are funny (this is what a colleague told me once) or arrogant (read this in a blog), all Chinese are as hard working as a hot dog vendor in a fat guy convention, all Americans have single digit IQs and all Englishmen have upper lips stiffer than a piece of cardboard. Of course such blatant stereotyping can be funny at times but more often than not it is a malaise that causes unbelievable amounts of damage.
Blatant racism obviously cannot be condoned and should be stood up to but perceived racism like the one I mentioned in the previous post reeks of insecurity and brings with it an element of self-pity. Criticism is generally in two forms - directed at an individual only or directed at an individual who is representative of an entire people. Sreesanth is a public figure which is why any criticism he receives is taken as a personal affront by all Indians. Now, if criticism of an individual is extrapolated and applied to a bigger group it is racism. However, if criticism of a public figure is seen as criticism of an entire public then it is racism perceived.
It is the latter which I wish we would move away from. Thoughts?
What I was talking about is criticism - which usually has a justifiable basis and is applied to one person or a small group. What my friend mentioned was racism - which generally emanates from making generalizations about an entire populace based on a small subset of people who are being observed only in one capacity.
Life today is (or maybe it always has been) highly compartmentalized such that we generally interact with a set of people only within a pre-determined environment. Colleagues are for office and occasional weekend nights out. House-mates enter the picture when there are bills to be settled or a house to be cleaned. Activities which help people repel the insanity that professional life brings - things like gymming, joining a dance or sports club, reading a book, etc. are either done alone or with people who are normally not prominent in other parts of our life. There might be some overlap for sure, but generally we form opinions about individuals with enforced blinkers on.
Ideally speaking, judgments should be made only after observing people under a variety of conditions - relaxed, pressured, worried, happy etc. Of course, given the humdrum of everyday life, this is not possible and hence our proclivity for arriving at half baked conclusions, which in turn becomes the root cause of racism.
So all Arabs are terrorists, all Indians are funny (this is what a colleague told me once) or arrogant (read this in a blog), all Chinese are as hard working as a hot dog vendor in a fat guy convention, all Americans have single digit IQs and all Englishmen have upper lips stiffer than a piece of cardboard. Of course such blatant stereotyping can be funny at times but more often than not it is a malaise that causes unbelievable amounts of damage.
Blatant racism obviously cannot be condoned and should be stood up to but perceived racism like the one I mentioned in the previous post reeks of insecurity and brings with it an element of self-pity. Criticism is generally in two forms - directed at an individual only or directed at an individual who is representative of an entire people. Sreesanth is a public figure which is why any criticism he receives is taken as a personal affront by all Indians. Now, if criticism of an individual is extrapolated and applied to a bigger group it is racism. However, if criticism of a public figure is seen as criticism of an entire public then it is racism perceived.
It is the latter which I wish we would move away from. Thoughts?
5 comments:
Ideally speaking, judgments should be made only after observing people under a variety of conditions - relaxed, pressured, worried, happy etc.
Hmm- is that necessary? 'Judgements' could still be made of a person in 'a' particular condition right? I personally would not have a problem being 'judged'/criticised for one facet of mine without taking the others into consideration. Because it would still be a criticism of me.
It would be a criticism of you at that point in time - for example if you snap at someone when you are under stress or pressure, you are being rude. But using that experience to classify you as a rude individual would be wrong.
I find myself putting people into categories based on my experiences when I meet them the first couple of times. More often than not I am wrong. Maybe it's to do with how good a judge of character a person is.
Another side of the coin is when people make judgments on others based on the state of mind the former are in. An example would be 'racism through terror' which occurred in the U.S. in the aftermath of 9/11. People with headgear and beards (read Sikhs and Muslims) were ostracized simply because Americans (and the rest of the world) were terrified and hence stereotyped anyone who bore even a remote resemblance to Osama as terrorists.
By the way, in his book 'The Power of Thinking Without Thinking' Malcolm Gladwell outlines how we unconsciously make snap judgments of people. It makes for interesting reading. Try getting your hands on it if you haven't read it already.
P.S. Who are you? A name would help me picture who I am talking to.
stereotyping spreads like stupid rumors as its the way of remembering a particular group of ppl (Chinese,Indians,whites,blacks,blondes,women etc etc)..The less judgemental a person becomes abt everything and everyone around the lesser he carries stereotyiping in his mind..
...around the lesser he carries stereotyiping as a frame of reference in his mind..
Mind & Body, Heart & Soul.
Post a Comment