Introduction
The Oxford online dictionary (2008) defines ‘Stereotype’ as “a preconceived and over-simplified idea of the characteristics which typify a person or thing”. The Merriam-Webster online dictionary (2008) holds that a stereotype is “something conforming to a fixed or general pattern; especially: a standardized mental picture that is held in common by members of a group and that represents an oversimplified opinion, prejudiced attitude, or uncritical judgment”. Both definitions are important to hoist at the outset because they capture the essence of stereotyping as it is prevalent in the world today. Stereotypes have always existed since the formation of first human societies. This essay aims to examine the psychological implications of stereotyping on the societies in the world and what can be done to avoid such a practice.
Discussion
The reasons why humans resort to stereotyping are many. Social scientists have long theorized that humans try to breakdown complex situations into smaller simplified parts to help them cope with the situation better. This process of dis-aggregation is a natural psychological phenomenon which is based on the belief of behavioral scientists that the human mind has a limited capability for cognition and hence seeks simplicity for analyzing facts as they present themselves. This dis-aggregation process is often termed as ‘categorization’. Humans tend to categorize objects, people and events in simplified categories for the ease of responding to them when the situation so demands. “We group things into categories because we expect things in a particular category to behave in a similar manner so that we have a simple way of understanding the behavior”(Schneider, 2004, P.64). For example a square will have four sides, which are perpendicular to each other; is a category, which humans use to categorize all shapes approximating a square when in actuality it may not really be a square. Categorization thus is ‘construct’ of the human memory processing mechanisms and therefore, such categorization over time reinforces into what is known as stereotypes. This complete process when applied to people results in profound psychological implications which have changed histories, brought persecution of some societies, turbulence and war. Not all stereotypes are negative and some positive stereotypes have had their beneficial effects on mankind.
The social context of stereotyping is important for understanding the phenomenon. A child learns his or her first lessons in stereotyping from the parents and close relatives. Some of these stereotypes are used as tools to modify the child’s behavior more as case to discipline the child than any real intent at prejudicing their minds. For example, the parents or elders may tell scary stories of demons and monsters to keep the child quiet. The natural fear of darkness is often accentuated in such stories and the ‘demons’ take the form of darkness which results in painting the picture of black demons. This mental imagery slowly gets transplanted and the child may end up associating demons with anyone possessing a dark complexion. Others with outright racist tendencies deliberately instill scary stories concerning a particular race to harbor division and exclusivity. Thus not too long ago, a black man was associated with sloth, evil and the devil. Some behavioral scientists opine that automatic stereotyping can occur “directly by perceiving a person executing a certain action” ( Kawakami et. al, 2002, p.5). For example, a visual of an old man is automatically associated with the quality of ‘slowness’.
Stereotyping is also used as a tool for socio-political gains. In such cases, fear is the key. Horror stories regarding the ‘others’ has helped leaders consolidate their own positions in societies and used for expanding their hold both over the geographical and psychological expanse of the people and their lands. For example, Islamic leaders held that other than the ‘people of the book’, all other races were infidels, who if not converted to Islam could be exterminated. This stereotype resulted in some of the worst carnages of human history. Likewise, the stereotyping that all Muslims are Jehadis by some of the Christian world has led to serious divisions and socio-political problems the world over. The ‘Them and Us’ philosophy has been used to great effect in building empires and nations. Stereotyping has led to formation of various entities as well as a rise of ethno-nationalism across the world. It has also led to tremendous discrimination.
Stereotypes take the form of class divisions in western societies and caste divisions in some Eastern societies. In the 5000-year old Hindu society, people were divided into four castes namely the Brahmins; scholars and the priests, the Kshatriyas; warrior class, the Vaishyas; merchants and farmers and the Shudras; who did menial jobs including cleaning human excreta, scavenging etc. Initially, these castes were based on the ability of the individual but this slowly stratified into a rigid caste system to protected vested interests of a particular community, which later developed into rigid stereotypes. Thus, all Brahmins without exception are supposed to be learned and wise. All Kshatriyas are supposedly warriors who can be called upon to defend the country. All Vaishyas are farmers and traders and all Shudras, because of the nature of their job are unclean. So embedded are these stereotypes that till to date India has not been able to break the shackles of that thought process. The psychological effects of such stereotyping are devastating. A cursory visit to any Indian village will show that the Shudras even today dare not lift their head and speak to an upper caste person. In some villages, Shudras are forbidden to draw water from the village well and have to go elsewhere to meet their daily requirements. The effect of such discrimination which extends to all walks of human endeavor have led to serious psychological impairment and personality dysfunctions of millions of scheduled castes as Shudras are officially known in India. This effect is now slowly changing only due to the Herculean efforts of the government, community leaders and non governmental organizations over the decades.
The stereotyping described above was at a point in time, mirrored across the Atlantic in the United States of America. The stories and incidents of segregation would be similar and one just has to look through the struggle against slavery by Abraham Lincoln, the US Civil War, the Black Civil rights movement in the sixties and the travails of ‘affirmative action’ to understand the power of stereotypes.
At the human level, the effect of stereotypes has been to empower the position of power of some communities and the subjugation of others. Thus, Romany Gypsies being ‘thieves’ and ‘child snatchers’ is a popular stereotype that has ensured that this particular community continues to live on the fringes of society throughout Europe irrespective of the ‘enlightened’ community of the European Union. The stereotype, which posits that the Kurds are devious, untrustworthy, troublemakers and barbarians have ensured that the entire community remains a group without a nation. The stereotype that ‘all Jews are blood suckers’ unleashed a wave of persecution by the Nazis which led to the deaths of over six million Jews. Group level stereotypes helped harden positions and create the puzzle that is the Balkans today. The animosity between Serbs, Croats, Slavic Christians, Slavic Muslims and a host of sub-regional entities in the Balkans is a conundrum in which stereotypes have had great spoiling roles.
Stereotypes have also been used negatively for a positive end by Armed Forces the world over. The US Armed forces routinely used the stereotypes of ‘slant eyed’, ‘monkeys’ and ‘japs’ to bolster the morale of the troops in their fight against the Japanese during the Second World War and the Vietcong during the Vietnam War. The Pakistani army successfully developed a stereotype that all Hindu (Indian) soldiers were effete and that ‘one Pakistani soldier was equal to 10 Indian soldiers’ to boost morale and launch four conventional wars against India. The stereotype that ‘all Arabs are dumb’ was carefully cultivated by the British to build public support and justify their various expeditions to the Middle East. Behavioral scientists explain these phenomena as “positive self-stereotypes and negative out-group stereotypes constitute positive inputs to social identity”(Klein & Azzi, 2001, p.280).
Stereotypes also serve as coping mechanism, as an escape valve from troublesome factor called ‘Human Conscience’. Thus black men were ‘subhuman’ who could be enslaved and did not deserve equal human rights. Similarly, the inhabitants of the colonies were a ‘white man’s burden’ who needed to be civilized by their masters.
Gender stereotypes have been used as tools to keep the women out of the workplace. The gender stereotype posits that women are weak, emotional creatures whose main role was to raise families and look after the homes. This stereotype is unique amongst the various stereotypes because of its almost universal acceptability irrespective of the location on the globe. The stereotype has its effect on the target population also as Bell & Spencer (20020 report “Recent research has demonstrated that stereotype threat – interferes with women’s performance on standardized maths exam”( p.1). These stereotypes invade the boardrooms of corporate world too. According to a study by the Catalyst group (2005) “Gender stereotypes portray women as lacking the very qualities that people commonly associate with effective leadership. As a result they often create false perceptions that women leaders just don’t measure to men in important ways”.(p.1)
“According to social identity theory (SIT), representations of social groups (or stereotypes) fulfill a variety of functions related to group protection and group enhancement”( Klein & Azzi, p.280). The need for a social identity and group enhancement sometimes sees its manifestation in deliberate cultivation of stereotypes to build a national identity. Australia is a typical example of this variation. Since the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, nations have striven to establish their national identities based on common social, cultural, ethnic and religious values. This process is easier for nations which have had a rich tapestry of history; culture and a religious past, since the source for putting together all the ingredients for developing a national identity are readily available. Australia, on the other hand, had virtually no historical background to draw on as a source. Thus because of the lack of a historical context, the Australian people chose to build upon their vast geographical expanse as the canvas for building their national identity. This process required great imagination, self-belief and a conscious effort to create a ‘history’ which was a mix of myths, legends and true facts. The extremely harsh conditions of the Australian outback, popularly known as the ‘Bush’ required kindred spirits to conquer, served, as just the right ingredient to build the Australian identity. So successful have the Australians been that today the stereotype that the quintessential Australian ‘Bushman’, the Crocodile Dundee, is a hardy, dependable ‘mate’ who can be trusted upon to fight for the right cause, is accepted as an inviolable truth.
The industry too uses stereotypes to its advantage. Advertising and marketing managers study stereotypical behaviour and groups and then devise their advertisement and marketing strategies to sell their products to the target group. The print media often uses stereotypical mindsets to sell their newspapers to niche communities or targeted audience. Lending and credit agencies rely on statistical inputs and stereotypes of prospective clients who pose minimum risk. The movie industry perhaps best understands the power of certain stereotypes and the possibility of using those stereotypes to produce a blockbuster hit.
Populations most susceptible to stereotyping come under various categories. At the unit level, children of any class, caste, creed or religion irrespective of the level of ‘civilization’ of that society are susceptible to be influenced by stereotypes. At the national level, the first categories are the victors, those who propagate the stereotype. The victims are the target who could be the vanquished. In this old fashioned construct, those who are subjugated become the object of negative stereotypes which are then reinforced by the victors for their own interests. Stereotypes are also easy to foist in controlled societies. Totalitarian regimes, who can manipulate access to information, change histories; education and depictions in mass media can easily impress stereotypes in their target populations. Weak personalities in search of identities, the easily impressionable and those who flock at congregation of the various cults and sub-sects are yet another population set who are susceptible to being impressed by stereotypes.
According to Romascavage (2005), “In order to erase a stereotype, a group of people might either have to try and get an entirely new image or the members might need to disassociate themselves from that group”(para 8). Removing stereotypes would require action at various levels. At the global level, international agencies need to work hard to sensitize the world community on the dangers of stereotyping. Education is the key panacea for removing stereotypes. Stereotyping complete countries as possessing a particular negative trait and sweeping generalizations need to be discouraged. Labeling all incidences of terrorism as ‘Islamic Fundamentalism’ belies the fact that statistically, the number of Muslims involved in acts of terrorism are miniscule in comparison to the vast majority of Muslims who wish to live a peaceful life. Influential writers, thinkers and leaders need to lend their voice to encourage removal of stereotypes. Influential TV personalities and religious teachers have significant following the world over. It is these eminent personalities who must lend a helping hand in reducing stereotypes.
Some times, world events in themselves help change stereotypes. The declaration of Senator Barack Obama as the next President of the United States of America has helped shatter a longstanding stereotype about the (in)abilities of a Black man. This momentous event has not only shattered the ‘black man’ stereotype but has also brought about a perceptible change in global outlook; of yet another stereotype that America is a racist country.
Conclusion
At the working level, objective assessment in organizations, institutions and offices will go a long way in removing long held beliefs. Showing greater visibility to success stories of the previously disadvantaged sections of the society would also help bring in a change in the negative stereotypes of the target populations. Implementations of suitable balancing mechanisms as well as laws to discourage negative stereotyping are some of the options available to governments and the society at large. In this endeavor, the media too can play a large and constructive role. In the modern wired world, information can be made available to almost everybody instantaneously. The media must employ its hallowed principles of fair play, impartiality and justly report the ills of negative stereotyping. Thus ‘affirmative action’ needs not be only a governmental effort, but a cooperative and collaborative effort of the entire society.
References
Bell, Amy E & Spencer, Steven J. (2002). The Effect of Stereotype Threat on Women’s Performance on the Fundamentals of Engineering Exam. Proceedings of the 2002 American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. 2008. Web.
Catalyst.(2005). Women “Take Care”, Men “Take Charge”; Stereotyping of US Business Leaders Exposed. 2008. Web.
Kawakami, Kerry, Young Heather & Dovidio, John F. (2002). Automatic Stereotyping: Category, Trait, and Behavioral Activations. PSPB, Vol. 28 No. 1, 3-15. 2008. Web.
Klein, Olivier & Azzi, Assaad E. (2001). The Strategic Confirmation of Meta-Stereotypes: How Group Members Attempt to Tailor An Out-group’s Representation of Themselves. British Journal of Social Psychology (2001), 40, 279–293. 2008. Web.
Romascavage, Stacy. (2005). The Psychology of Stereotyping. The Muhlenberg Weekly. 2008. Web.
Schneider, David J. (2004). The Psychology of Stereotyping. New York: Guilford Press.
Stereotype. (2008). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. Web.
Stereotype. (2008). In Oxford Online Dictionary. Web.