Talk:Stereotype
I think[edit]
I think it says "all" far too many times. You don't have to believe that every single member of particular group conforms to a type to have a stereotyped view of them. WẽãšẽĩõĩďMethinks it is a Weasel 10:10, 1 February 2009 (EST)
What it is[edit]
Changing "all" to "most" or "tend to" doesn't make it any less stereotypical. E.g.: "All Jews are money hungry", "Most Jews are money hungrey" and "Jews tend to be money hungrey" are all equally stereotypical.-212.123.158.42 (talk) 20:23, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
- Stereotyping is not a bad thing. A stereotype is a probability estimation. It emerges from the cumulative experience of many encounters because it's useful. Think of a savanna tribe not stereotyping all lions as "man eaters" and the consequences it would have for their survival. — Unsigned, by: 199.48.147.41 / talk / contribs
- Yes, but we're talking about the "all black people are dumb, violent criminals" stereotypes.--Token Conservative (talk) 23:51, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Suggestion for another example[edit]
"All MRAs are misogynists". It's a perfect example, and it's quite prevalent to boot. WittyUsername (talk) 02:28, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
If it's all right, I'll just chuck that in. Nobody's said anything against it. WittyUsername (talk) 21:53, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- It's shit and just because no one said anything doesn't mean there's tacit approval. Not everyone looks at these pages and sees that you're a reactionary shitting them up.—Ryulong (talk) 22:12, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- How is it shit? Also, I didn't think that being a centrist made one a conservative. WittyUsername (talk) 22:23, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- You're not a centrist. All of your edits have been to JAQ off on pages concerning reactionary movements and advocating on behalf of the reactionaries' POV.—Ryulong (talk) 22:29, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Explain further, please. And try to be sensical. WittyUsername (talk) 22:31, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- No. Read the fucking article. And don't do the bullshit tone policing. MRAs exist solely to attack women and feminism. That's what the page "Men's rights movement" covers.—Ryulong (talk) 22:32, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- That's not tone policing. I was just wanting you to be sensical. Your tone isn't bad, but your sensicality is. WittyUsername (talk) 22:55, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- You're the reactionary libertarian douchebro coming to an obviously liberal website pretending to be a centrist. Not me.—Ryulong (talk) 23:08, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- That's not tone policing. I was just wanting you to be sensical. Your tone isn't bad, but your sensicality is. WittyUsername (talk) 22:55, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- No. Read the fucking article. And don't do the bullshit tone policing. MRAs exist solely to attack women and feminism. That's what the page "Men's rights movement" covers.—Ryulong (talk) 22:32, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Explain further, please. And try to be sensical. WittyUsername (talk) 22:31, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- You're not a centrist. All of your edits have been to JAQ off on pages concerning reactionary movements and advocating on behalf of the reactionaries' POV.—Ryulong (talk) 22:29, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- How is it shit? Also, I didn't think that being a centrist made one a conservative. WittyUsername (talk) 22:23, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
The reason stereotypes exist[edit]
Since when are useful heuristics "bad reasoning skills"? — Unsigned, by: 151.77.131.63 / talk
- Since when did stereotypes ever accurately portray a group of people numbering in the millions, each of them obviously individually unique? — Ɖøn Ĵuan Harass 11:04, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
- Rationality doesn't require perfect accuracy, it just requires that the cost of an inaccurate assesment multiplied by it's likelyhood is lower than the cost of a marginal increase in accuracy. The whole point of heuristics is that their inaccuracy is compensated by their cheapness and quickness, hence why we evolved biases. It's better to use a rule that's correct 80% of the times, than a rule that's correct 100% of the times but costs 500% as much.151.77.163.84 (talk) 21:35, 19 June 2019 (UTC)