# Stereotypes



## Alxmrphi

I read in a thread in CD that stereotypes and prejudices are no longer allowed, is that in the starting thread, or aren't we allowed to comment or give our own stereotypes?

I just want to clear up the fact about this:



> I think it's time to add a very important line to the forum's guidelines: *Stereotypes, generalities, prejudices, ... are not a subject for cultural discussions; *but a collection of personal opinions encouraging people to attack each other. Hence it's forbidden.



I know it says "subject" which makes me think about the question being asked, but it feels like it also means ever, in all posts, which would be the absolute stupiudest rule to ever exist.

Mods, clarify?


----------



## cherine

Yes Alex, I meant as a topic for a thread.

The guidelines have been updated, please give them a look and tell us if they're not clear enough.
The mod team is working on clarifying the rules and guidelines of the Cultural discussion forums, so any help would be appreciated.

Thank you


----------



## emma42

What an intelligent and overdue modification (excuse the pun!).  Shukria, Cherine.


----------



## Alxmrphi

emma42 said:


> What an intelligent and overdue modification (excuse the pun!).  Shukria, Cherine.



Not really, it's just ANOTHER thing we can't talk about in CD.


----------



## Josh_

I normally don't participate in the so-called stereotyping threads, but I agree that the forbidding of such discussion is a little extreme, to say the least.  The fact of the matter is that all people have stereotypes of some sort and make generalizations.  As much as we may deem ourselves liberal and tolerant of others it is impossible to completely escape it.  As bad as it is, it is a part of culture, and it is worthy of discussion for the sake of better understanding.  I think the discussion of these things can be beneficial because after we have laid out what the stereotype is we can then ask why one would have that stereotype and/or how it developed.  After that we can then work on bridging the gap and eradicating the stereotype. I remember reading in one of the threads a member who said he came here with some big preconceived notions, but was pleasantly surprised to have overcome those preconceived notions and now has a better understanding of "the other side." 

In essence understanding stereotypes and then working to overcome those stereotypes is an essential part of cross-cultural understanding.

Josh


----------



## Alxmrphi

Exactly! The fact that humans don't know EVERYTHING, means that it is imperative we made assumptions and the amount of generalisations, it's impossible to explain every factor of a culture, so of course a generalisation to make a point, HAS to be made.

Also, the fact that talking about future possible world leaders that directly affects so many members in this forum, (French), which has an extremely popular forum, this being not allowed as it falls under the category of "listing favourites"

If I wasn't so annoyed I'd probably laugh at the stupidity of the decision.
I probably am coming across quite bitter here, but , well, yeah I am, the fact that a presendential election can't be talked about because it is about favourites, which a whole country will set out to vote for and have a direct impact on the world.

I just can't believe it, I need to vent because I'm angry at some of these recent mod decisions, and it is a comment I feel I have to make, and this is "COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS"

So I can't wait to find out how my "COMMENT" has broken a rule and thus this thread will become locked.


----------



## maxiogee

I think all stereotypes are bad, but then again - maybe that's just a stereotype 

I think, Alex, that we can stalk about elections and their processes without starting the thread off with a list of favourite politicians. Speak to the issues, not the persons; speak to the history, not the best leader Xyzland ever had; speak to the voter involvement, not the best ways to get the vote out.


----------



## Alxmrphi

It was more about the generalisations being ruled out.

I didn't list a load of favourite politicians, each one is quite different from the other (well, the front runners), I am not interested in the issues of French life or history, I am interested in an insider view of the character of each of the candidates, and apparently that can't be done here, to my astonishment.


----------



## ireney

Alex Murphy you are not taking into consideration the fact that it is still a Cultural Discussions forum. As such, if a certain generalisation is part of the culture then it is accepted. If not, then it is outside the scope of the forum anyway. We just made it clearer. What is the cultural significance of "Are all Greek 20 feet tall, blond and devilishly handsome/beautiful" ?  Any generalisation of "Are X people Y adjective"  have of course a negative answer. There is nothing cultural about it period.

A discussion such as Josh described has yet to make its appearance in the CD forum as far as I can remember. Even if it does however, we now have a clear statement in the rules and guidelines that will allow us to delete those posts that do not discuss the question asked but move  in a vicious circle of "all X are Y" - "no they are not" - "but I've heard all X are Y".


As to your other complaint, personal opinions about person A or person B are not cultural discussions. And as maxiogee said, issues yes; persons no.


Besides (and that's a member's contribution to the discussion) people are supposedly voting on political platforms and parties' agendas  for the country, not  on whether Mr Smith is an all around good guy who is just  prone to think that all foreigners must be expelled and communists sent to exile etc and Mr Smithson  has a tendency to giggle madly and scream "It's ALIVE" but a capital fellow nonetheless.


----------



## maxiogee

ireney said:


> a) Mr Smith is an all around good guy who is just  prone to think that all foreigners must be expelled and communists sent to exile etc
> b) Mr Smithson  has a tendency to giggle madly and scream "It's ALIVE" but a capital fellow nonetheless.



Sounds like a dream ticket to me!
Where do I go to live so I can vote for these luminaries?


----------



## Alxmrphi

> As to your other complaint, personal opinions about person A or person B are not cultural discussions. And as maxiogee said, issues yes; persons no.


A lot of the stuff in CD hasn't got anything to do with culture, it's just so vague that it's left open because people might get to a cultural aspect of it, and again how many times do I have to put this across, IT WASN'T ABOUT "COMPARING PEOPLE" - we're talking about how people think a new leader will affect their CULTURE, in the South do people want X to win because they have a certain view of what X can do, do people in the North favour Segolene because she's a lefty and most people in cities (to me) seem to, or do people who live on farms and have a more outdoor CULTURE favour someone from the same background.

It's not "who is your favourite", but I absolutely give up on arguing this point, as many of other members talk about widely through PM, nobody ever wins a discussion against the mods in C&S.


----------



## zebedee

Alex_Murphy said:


> A lot of the stuff in CD hasn't got anything to do with culture, it's just so vague that it's left open because people might get to a cultural aspect of it,



Yes, you're right there, Alex. And that's precisely why we've just spent long hours putting our heads together and improving the CD Guidelines.




> It's not "who is your favourite"


Your post certainly reads that way. I shall quote it here and perhaps if you re-read it now you'll see why.



			
				Alex Murphy said:
			
		

> Who are you voting for and why?
> I'd love to get some opinions from the people who will vote, seeing as it opens tomorrow for the first round.
> 
> I want Segolene Royal to get it (I'm not French, I'd just like another leader in the country who I admire), for her socialist liberal ideas and emphasis on helping education reach more people and give incentives to help people be creative.
> 
> What about you?



The next post would have been: _Well, my vote goes to Xxxxx because..._
 Post nº2: _Well, I'm voting for Yyyyy... S/he's the best because...
Post nº3: Me too. I really like Yyyyy
_
ie a list of favourites.





> but I absolutely give up on arguing this point, as many of other members talk about widely through PM, nobody ever wins a discussion against the mods in C&S.


Oh dear, I didn't realize your goal in opening a thread in C&S was 'winning a discussion against the mods'. I thought you had the benefit of the forums in mind. Ah well, more fool me.


----------



## Alxmrphi

No, it wasn't my intention, it was only after ireney's remarks, which turned it into a bit of a debate that it became like that, my intention was purely and soley me posting a comment about something that bothers me, I did post it in the right forum didn't I?



> The next post would have been: _Well, my vote goes to Xxxxx because..._
> Post nº2: _Well, I'm voting for Yyyyy... S/he's the best because...
> Post nº3: Me too. I really like Yyyyy_



And about the list of favourites, my thread was locked because of posts that _hadn't even_ been posted yet, are you saying?
I didn't ask that question though! I don't think it's fair to lock a post because you suspect the responses will be a list.

As for the list _rule_, I can see how boring it might become to see a "list" of favourites, but showing support and explaining why you like a presidential candidate isn't the same as "What's your favourite band?"

I see the logic in the rule, and what it's there for, it's when the rule is used to block out conversations about things that are interesting.

I would be much happier if the rule was changed to "no lists of favourites without an explanation, that is something to do with something completely abstract from WR" of course not in that wording lol.


----------



## .   1

I have utterly no doubt that I was the final straw that broke the camel's back on this matter and I am proud of what I have done.

I have cleared space in my PMs so anybody who wants to take a shot at me because of what I have done please feel free to vent at me. You may convince me that I am wrong and you may come to understand why I did it.
In any event it will be stimulating.

I am become sick to my back teeth with constant sniping threads about stereotypes involving Americans.
It had nothing to do with who voted for what.
It had everything to do with;
Are Americans arrogant?
Are Americans paranoid?
Are Americans bad tourists?
Are Americans hubristic, blah blah blah.
It was boring and pointless and divisive and ugly and nothing like cultural.

It was an opportunity for a narrow band to attack the perceived Satan and I became bored with it.

I encourage anybody who thinks that it is fair enough to slag off at an identifiable ethnic group to start their own campaign to reinstate the ability to question the integrity of an entire cultural group in the name of culture. Good luck with that. I can't see too many wearers of pointy white hoods around here.

.,,


----------



## zebedee

There was no single thread that led to the CD Guidelines being re-vamped. It's something that we've been pondering over for a while and have spent many hours considering and re-considering. I'm not sure we've found the final solution yet either.

Anyway, thanks to all of those who, inadvertently or otherwise, have helped and are helping us to re-define the fuzzy area which is Cultural Discussions. We're getting there.

Kind regards,

The Culture Discussions Forum Mods.


----------

