Cultural Stereotypes: Are They All Bad?

         Are stereotypes a completely negative influence on cross-cultural interactions? 

            Before reading this week’s assignment from our class textbook Maximizing Study Abroad, I was under the impression that while stereotypes don’t always hold true, they possess some validity because they are always derived from a truth that describes some individuals within a cultural group.

 

         
             However, it has become clear to me that although stereotypes may possess some validity, relying on stereotypes to serve as primary information creates a barrier preventing genuine interactions between ourselves and others; doing so tends to sort people into categories and highlight differences instead of similarities.  

             Not all stereotypes have to contain negative connotations, but can be attached to either positive or negative statements.  Regardless of polarity, the pervasive and unchanging declarative, culture-restrictive statement neglects the ever-present force of change.  With the ability to constantly shape and redefine a cultural group’s ways of life, even if a stereotype possesses some measure of validity at one point, change can render a statement completely inaccurate and give it a derogatory flavor if it didn't have one already.

            The first activity in the reading required us to classify a list of example behaviors based on whether they seemed personal, cultural, or universal.  Here are a couple of examples:

1.     Eating with Chopsticks

2.     Respecting your Elders

3.     Sleeping with a light on

            For the first example, I felt that it constituted both a cultural and personal behavior.  In Japan, I imagine that using chopsticks is the accepted norm for most eating situations.  However, an individual in the U.S. (where eating with chopsticks is not the norm I would guess) may choose to eat with chopsticks by personal preference.  This behavior is clearly not universal because it is not a dominant practice globally.

            The second example was thought–provoking for me because I can see the behavior fulfilling the broadest of the three categories.  I cannot think of an example where intentionally treating elders with a lack of respect is the cultural norm.  They often represent wisdom, longevity, and tradition, placed at the top of the familial structure.  Hence, this behavior falls under the universal and the cultural category in my opinion.

            The third example jumps out at me as a personal choice (which the book agrees with), but I can also see it fulfilling a functional need within a cultural group.  Perhaps sleeping with the light on holds religious significance or acts as a safety measure.  Although I have not done the specific research to confirm these speculations, the situations I’ve brain–stormed seem uphold a specific cultural purpose.

            Instead of using assumptions associated with a given culture to define our thoughts opinions about an individual, the activity entertains the possibility of many factors being at work and encourages us to be more analytical when it comes to why an individual within a cultural group acts in a certain way.

           
            The second activity focused on turning stereotypes into generalizations and further into hypotheses.  Take the stereotype, “Spaniards are laid-back.”

            Instead of declaring that all Spaniards are laid-back, one can generalize that "some Spaniards are laid-back with their sense of time."  This statement is more accurate than the initial example because it is purely based on evidence gained through experience and can be modified to reflect any changes in understanding.

            This statement can break down further into questions that investigate some meaningful truths:

What is my standard for saying Spaniards are laid-back?   In what way do I possess a different quality? 

Why might a laid-back persona be the cultural norm?   Are there any cultural advantages of conducting oneself in this manner?

            The activity converts a statement that ignores inter-cultural nuances to an open investigation of why such a characteristic or behavior is accepted within its cultural context.  While this process does not present any immediate answers, it puts an individual on a path to deeper understanding as opposed to the utilization easy, formulated stereotyping.  

            Despite cultural stereotypes being truthful to a limited extent, I now feel confidant that thinking dynamically and analytically about the validity of such statements not only fosters a greater level of cultural understanding and makes for more genuine interactions with others, but also reveals relevant personal characteristics the reflect our own cultural groups.