Discussing Stereotypes

The biggest issue for me,  on this day and in the whole training, was the introduction to an input on “The West and the Rest”. I appreciated the input and the attempt to show how categories like “East”, “West”, “European”, and “Oriental” can be deconstructed by looking at the time and place of their creation, and at politically motivated instrumentalization.

What made me feel very uncomfortable was to see this important topic being introduced with the attempt to reproduce stereotypes about “East” and “West” and they way this was conducted:
Refusals to play along were repeatedly rejected and disencouraged by the moderator as well as by parts of the group, which I find to be a disastrous way of dealing with stereotypes. This does not mean that I deny the existence of stereotypes, of course they exist, and are stuck in everybody’s heads, as one person pointed out. In order to make them productive though, it has to be allowed to openly reject them, and express inability to reproduce them (especially when placing random adjectives in either “West” or “East”, without those being further defined. Eastern Germany? Eastern Europe? Eastern Romania? The “global” East?). Otherwise, if the mere fact of their existence defies every attempt at deconstruction, why mention them at all?
It has to be possible to have a proper discussion about both result of the method and the method itself, both of which did only happen in a small circle after the session when lunch was already being served.
I am aware that most people had no problem with this activity though, and that it is probably my “academic bias”, which dreads nothing so much as oversimplification. It is also clear that the group was so mixed that it was difficult to reach and satisfy everyone. Yet, this is place for reflection and further thoughts – so here it goes.

This whole thing left me pondering the question of how to deal with (national) stereotypes in education: Is it okay to invoke them, especially in a multi-national group? How to deal with people who actively reject them? For me, these issues are as central and deserve the same attention as the handling of gender stereotypes. Dealing with them insensitively might cause a lot of damage within a (multi-national) group and cause individuals to feel uncomfortable voicing their opinion.
Furthermore, if we accept the potentially harmful nature of this kind of stereotypes, why not try and act against them? Why not explicitly open a discussion about what makes them so persistent, and about the different functions they have on an individual, social, and political level? I did not attend the Anti-Bias-Workshop, but am generally fond of the idea of creating awareness about personal prejudice and patterns of thinking. Why not create a space in which national or ethnic stereotypes, when they come up, are either immediately discussed or at least made visible, not to shun the individual person but to be able to recognize biases?

During the last feedback round, one participant stated that for her it was rewarding, to meet so many people from Romania, because in the country she comes from, the stereotypical Romanian is a beggar. While this statement is of course potentially hurtful, it also allows many important questions to be reflected upon by everyone in the group individually: Do I feel personally offended by this statement (or not), and why (not)? Do I feel the same as this participant? Did I realize I felt the same before she said it? Would I have dared to say it? Did I suspect that’s what people in this participants country think?
And then, on a more general level: What are the reasons she had this stereotype? In which political/cultural/social/… context was it constructed? And so the deconstruction goes…

To sum it up, this day certainly gave me food for thought. And it convinced me even further that national stereotypes, as well as old tropes about “The West and the Rest”, are still among the most pressing issues to deal with on a European as well as on a global scale.

250 thoughts on “Discussing Stereotypes

  1. Sarah, thank you for your feedback.
    I acknowledge the problematic nature of the exercise. My wish was to move together with the participants in the area of common places and try to deal with them from a distance, and see how they generate from a logic of cultural constructs and hegemonic discourses around what East and West are. On the previous day, at the anti bias workshop, we had discussed and worked on stereotypes: finding their sources and discussing intersectionality, seeing how they are reproduced and in what ways we can stop and prevent them. Still, as the workshop ended late into the night and people didn’t have time to share their presentation in the plenum, i wanted to offer at least a little more space for sharing and discussions.
    My intention was to see how we reproduce the dichotomic thought around artificial cultural constructs such as E-W, concepts that were created and have not originated naturally, as I have tried to show in the presentation. I understand that I made a false presupposition, that participants would think of stereotypes and write them down, and not already filter or avoid them. I wasn’t explicit enough, either. My intention was twofold: first, to raise individual questions in participants about how they incorporate in their identity national stereotypes, how they relate to them, if they accept or reject them. Secondly, to use the stereotypes presented (and here not everyone thought of stereotypes, because i didn’t explain it sufficiently well) in order to have a discussion about what is considered to be east and west, and always move in this shallow waters of stereotypes or preconceived ideas and then see, with the presentation that followed, just how old they are and how they originated, discuss power relations and the artificiality of the terms. My goal was to deconstruct them as cultural constructs in the sequent presentation.
    I am sorry if during this initial activity my moderation was perceived as restrictive, it was not my intention, and, as such, i accepted people wanting to place certain adjectives in the middle on the two columns. I perceived that as a refusal and i respected it.
    Thank you again for your input and for your open questions.

  2. Pingback: Buy Adobe Acrobat
  3. Pingback: Download}
  4. Pingback: custome essay
  5. Pingback: thesis to book
  6. Pingback: cialis price
  7. Pingback: cialis 5mg
  8. Pingback: how to use viagra
  9. Pingback: Brand Cialis
  10. Pingback: canada drugs
  11. Pingback: viagra
  12. Pingback: cialis online
  13. Pingback: thesis service
  14. Pingback: women viagra price
  15. Pingback: cephalexin order
  16. Pingback: karl malden viagra
  17. Pingback: 100mg viagra pill
  18. Pingback: sildenafil soft
  19. Pingback: cialis otc months
  20. Pingback: Silagra
  21. Pingback: viagra meaning
  22. Pingback: cialis wikipedia
  23. Pingback: cialis side
  24. Pingback: cialis pharmacy uk
  25. Pingback: cialis dose
  26. Pingback: drugs like viagra
  27. Pingback: gabapentin 300 mg
  28. Pingback: what is amlodipine
  29. Pingback: meloxicam
  30. Pingback: duloxetine 20 mg
  31. Pingback: mirtazapine 30mg
  32. Pingback: buy bupropion
  33. Pingback: citalopram dose
  34. Pingback: wellbutrin 300 mg
  35. Pingback: diclofenac topical
  36. Pingback: 36 hour cialis
  37. Pingback: cialis 40mg india
  38. Pingback: online viagra
  39. Pingback: acyclovir
  40. Pingback: donepezil 10 mg
  41. Pingback: what is cephalexin
  42. Pingback: clindamycin gel
  43. Pingback: cialis not working
  44. Pingback: cialis works
  45. Pingback: Keto diet t plan
  46. Pingback: cialis 20
  47. Pingback: vardenafil 10mg
  48. Pingback: cialis 2019
  49. Pingback: otc viagra walmart
  50. Pingback: walmart viagra
  51. Pingback: sildenafil dose
  52. Pingback: amlodipine generic
  53. Pingback: cvs cialis
  54. Pingback: levitra overdose
  55. Pingback: cialis peak effect
  56. Pingback: xenical
  57. Pingback: proscar generic
  58. Pingback: tizanidine 2mg tab
  59. Pingback: cialis ingredients
  60. Pingback: cialis name brand
  61. Pingback: viagra 100mg
  62. Pingback: cialis back pain
  63. Pingback: regcialist.com
  64. Pingback: lyrica pregabalin
  65. Pingback: viagra cost
  66. Pingback: sildenafil 50mg
  67. Pingback: viagra otc
  68. Pingback: viagra
  69. Pingback: cialis canada
  70. Pingback: purchase cialis
  71. Pingback: sildenafil generic
  72. Pingback: 1
  73. Pingback: female viagra
  74. Pingback: cialis europe
  75. Pingback: buy viagra nyc
  76. Pingback: cost of cialis 5mg
  77. Pingback: natural viagra
  78. Pingback: cialis
  79. Pingback: natural tadalafil
  80. Pingback: herb viagra

Leave a Reply