A so-called "joke" designed to offend EVERYONE

[Andrew (imported)]

A person belonging to an ethnic group whose members are commonly

considered to have certain stereotypical mannerisms met another

person belonging to a different ethnic group with a different set

of imputed stereotypical mannerisms. The first person acted in

a manner consistent with the stereotypes associated with his ethnic

group, and proceeded to make a remark which might be considered

to establish conclusively his membership in that group, whereupon his

companion proceeded to make a remark with a double meaning, the first

meaning of which could be interpreted to indicate his agreement with

his companion, but the other meaning of which serves to corroborate his

membership in his particular ethnic group. The first person took

offense at his remark, and reacted in a stereotypical way!

[bobov (imported)]

Andrew, I'm deeply hurt by your insensitive and bigoted joke. As leader of the Association of Stereotyped, Sensitive and Hostile Outsiders of Laughable Ethnicity (ASSHOLE), I will soon be ringing your doorbell and running, and maybe even writing to your parents. If there's anything I hate, it's your sort of stereotype! After I'm elected President, people like you will be locked in concentration camps so that there'll be no more persecution of stereotypes.

Sound effect: Molars gnashing on testicles.

[Dave (imported)]

A number of years ago, we had a Polish visitor at work adn I got to be good friends with him. I used to change all the ethnic jokes to "Russian" or "KGB" (it was before 1990) ...He thought they were hysterical until another worker told him the same jokes as Italian and other ethnic groups. We never told him Polish jokes.

He really got offended by the fact that we changed the ethnicity.

A small lesson in ethnic jokes.

[bobov (imported)]

I have always noted the tendancy of some people to speak of "the Jews" rather than just Jews. This seemed offensive to me because the use of the article implies objectification. I thought I might be overly sensitive, so, just as an experiment, I spoke of "the Christians" while in the company of some Christian believers. They responded with instant anger. One of them even threatened to beat me up. It seems I wasn't wrong to see hostile intent among supposedly ecumenical people talking about "the Jews."

Human beings seem to have a hard-wired propensity to affiliate with groups. They create positive stereotypes of their own groups, negative stereotypes of rival groups, and cartoonish stereotypes to identify remote groups. Only active engagement ever helps, the sort that contradicts stereotypes with direct experience. But even this doesn't work well - the appeal of stereotypes as an intellectual shorthand is too great. When people meet individuals who don't match the stereotype, they just say "Joe is exceptional, unlike most XXX, he's OK." "Some of my best friends are XXX." And of course, the appeal of positive stereotypes about one's own group is irresistible, even though these imply a negative view of others. "We're so nice," suggests "unlike those others."

With enormous effort over many years, respectable opinion can be reoriented toward tolerance of particular groups, e.g., blacks, gays, Jews. But this tolerance is precarious, and any untoward event sees the rapid re-emergence of old hatreds. Much, much more can be said. For those with a serious interest, read Gordon Allport's "Psychology of Prejudice" and J.-P. Sartre's "Anti-Semite and Jew."

[bobov (imported)]

Salami, I've got to agree with anyone that's got a name and a tatoo like yours. The Cliff's Notes version is: it's easy and fun to love ourselves and hate others; most people do it; how we talk about ourselves and others makes a big difference; a lot of people get hurt bad. Now pass the bong, before I suck on your schlong.

(I'm going to hate myself in the morning for this.)

[jemagirl (imported)]

I have always noted the tendancy of some people to speak of "the Jews" rather than just Jews. This seemed offensive to me because the use of the article implies objectification. I thought I might be overly sensitive, so, just as an experiment, I spoke of "the Christians" while in the company of some Christian believers. They responded with instant anger. One of them even threatened to beat me up. It seems I wasn't wrong to see hostile intent among supposedly ecumenical people talking about "the Jews."

Human beings seem to have a hard-wired propensity to affiliate with groups. They create positive stereotypes of their own groups, negative stereotypes of rival groups, and cartoonish stereotypes to identify remote groups. Only active engagement ever helps, the sort that contradicts stereotypes with direct experience. But even this doesn't work well - the appeal of stereotypes as an intellectual shorthand is too great. When people meet individuals who don't match the stereotype, they just say "Joe is exceptional, unlike most XXX, he's OK." "Some of my best friends are XXX." And of course, the appeal of positive stereotypes about one's own group is irresistible, even though these imply a negative view of others. "We're so nice," suggests "unlike those others."

With enormous effort over many years, respectable opinion can be reoriented toward tolerance of particular groups, e.g., blacks, gays, Jews. But this tolerance is precarious, and any untoward event sees the rapid re-emergence of old hatreds. Much, much more can be said. For those with a serious interest, read Gordon Allport's "Psychology of Prejudice" and J.-P. Sartre's "Anti-Semite and Jew."

I am always amused by people who say things like "I'm not a racest but....." or I'm nor homophobic but......" The next words out of their mouth most often indicate that they are a racest butt or a homophobic butt.

[bobov (imported)]

But butts! You've got it, Jemagirl.