From an early age, we learn that girls are girls and boys are boys. Girls should not, and furthermore CAN not be like the boys, and boys are not and SHOULD not be like the girls. This thinking early on leads to misconceptions and stereotypes not only about gender, but bleed into race, ethnicity and culture.
For our group discussion today, we talked about Miranda Fricker and her ideas about "testimonial injustice" - the idea that we make judgments about the intelligence a person has on a certain subject based on previous stereotypes we have put on them. For example, as stated in the book Philosophy Bites, we tend to stereotype women into not knowing much about football. However, there are many women who love and know all of the ins and outs of football. To create an injustice would be to not consider speaking to the woman in a group when talking about football, or when she does speak, not take her very seriously. Fricker explains that this type of injustice undermines humans as thinkers and knowers, which is essential to being a human. In a sense, we undermine people's humanity.
There is also this idea of credential excess, meaning we tend to give excess credit to certain people based on stereotypes as well. Although Fricker says this is not an injustice to humanity, I might tend to disagree. I brought up in class the idea that as an Asian American, I tend to get picked randomly by people to be in groups during projects solely based on my name, and the stereotype Asian woman in particular have with being smart. Although this stereotype should be flattering, it is still an insult to me as a person that you judge me without getting to know me first. I would not want someone to be in a group with me because they knew I would aid in them getting a better grade, but rather they know my work ethic, and know me as a person, and want to be in my group for who they know I am, not who they THINK I am.
The next topic we got into was the idea of women in politics. We all had different ideas about how attractiveness vs intelligence plays a role in the political world. Some said that looks do not play a part, and some said that looks tend to get you started, but without intelligence, only get you noticed for so long. Regardless of my group, the social idea that women were not capable of holding these positions were around since the beginning of our inception as a nation. The biggest display of the stereotype that women are less able than men could be seen as the inability to vote. Why were women dichotomized so much so that we were seen as less than? Hmmmmm. Ponder Ponder.
Are there any stereotypes you tend to put people in before even speaking to them? I know I do, I'm human, and I know after this article I am going to start paying more attention to them!
I hope my groupmates post comments before tomorrow!!
ReplyDeleteFq: does Fricker see credential excess as an injustice? If not, explain why.
Yeah, I guess we are all a bit late on this. But going back to our discussion, it really does make you realize that we judge people without even meaning to or realizing it. You look at someone and you automatically make at least a couple assumptions in your head. But that just makes getting to know people and keeping an open mind that much more important. For me, I like it when I'm getting to know someone and there are things about them that surprise me. If I can figure you out in a few minutes, no offense, but I'm going to get bored. We've all dealt with people whose conversation skills are less than stellar, but the chance should always be given. Most people can surprise you if you let them.
ReplyDeleteI wrote this huge long response yesterday and when i went to publish it, it was selected as "COMMENT AS GOOGLE ACCOUNT" and i don't have one...so when i hit the back button it had deleted it all.
ReplyDeleteAnyways,
I totally agree with Stephany...Making assumptions makes things dull and your social life completely the opposite of diverse. If you go into meeting people with this mindset of testimonial injustice then you are going to automatically write them off as a joke and never take away anything valuable they may say. Pretty silly if you think about it.
Another point we touched on in discussion was injustice in politics--specially when females are running for any kind of office. I never noticed the Palin-Clinton thing until it was brought up but it makes sense. Palin is an attractive female, who puts off very strong but very feminine vibes, while Clinton is an average (or to me, less attractive) female who puts off a masculine powerful vibe...both have things to contribute to the political realm but people are reluctant to take Palin seriously. Is it because she just seems like a "silly woman"?
Excess is an injustice as well because you're not taking them for what they're really worth. It's an injustice to yourself when you can be getting knowledge and you aren't. Or false knowledge--because that person may be credited towards knowing SO much about something and then know jack shit and you're getting all this info that's false.
Just my takes on some things.
Wanna see late? Class starts in 2 minutes!
ReplyDeleteI think we were all pretty much in agreement on this one. However agreeing with something, even realizing it yourself, doesn't mean it's "fixed". Even knowing this and being conscious of it, I still find myself actually acting on my preconceived notions when talking to someone. This is definitely something that takes actual work to overcome.