![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A generalization would be, for example, to observe that on average, females show poorer performance in doing math than males. It makes me cringe to admit this, but I've heard that statistics such as average SAT scores, numbers of women vs. men enrolling in engineering programs, etc., support the hypotheses that females, as a group, have worse math skills.
Prejudice is to say "oh, she's a girl, she can't do math." I will take my perfect 800 on the math section of the GRE and beat anyone who says this into a pulp.
The problem with generalizations is that they lead to prejudice. Generalizations are useful because they allow for snap judgments. Like, if someone runs in exclaiming "Quick! Somebody prove that cos(A+B) = cosAcosB - sinAsinB before the house burns down!" then you will probably find the person who looks most like a "math geek" to direct this problem to, and that stereotype is male (and scrawny, wearing glasses and a pocket protector). OK, so that example is absurd and far-fetched. But more useful generalizations might suggest who you should pull out of line to search at airport security: the young man from Saudi Arabia or the old lady from Minnesota. (But, then again, this makes it kind of suck to be a perfectly innocent young man from Saudi Arabia.)
Why do generalizations lead to prejudice? When one has to make a snap judgment, is prejudice any more effective than generalization? I think not; prejudice is too inflexible to allow one to recognize and adapt when one has encountered a math-geek chick, or a little old lady terrorist from Minnesota, or a deficit-spending Republican.
Discuss.
Prejudice is to say "oh, she's a girl, she can't do math." I will take my perfect 800 on the math section of the GRE and beat anyone who says this into a pulp.
The problem with generalizations is that they lead to prejudice. Generalizations are useful because they allow for snap judgments. Like, if someone runs in exclaiming "Quick! Somebody prove that cos(A+B) = cosAcosB - sinAsinB before the house burns down!" then you will probably find the person who looks most like a "math geek" to direct this problem to, and that stereotype is male (and scrawny, wearing glasses and a pocket protector). OK, so that example is absurd and far-fetched. But more useful generalizations might suggest who you should pull out of line to search at airport security: the young man from Saudi Arabia or the old lady from Minnesota. (But, then again, this makes it kind of suck to be a perfectly innocent young man from Saudi Arabia.)
Why do generalizations lead to prejudice? When one has to make a snap judgment, is prejudice any more effective than generalization? I think not; prejudice is too inflexible to allow one to recognize and adapt when one has encountered a math-geek chick, or a little old lady terrorist from Minnesota, or a deficit-spending Republican.
Discuss.
