The Instigator
Inquistive
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Kryptic
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Stereotypes Cannot and Should Not be Eradicated

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/12/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 754 times Debate No: 76510
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (9)
Votes (0)

 

Inquistive

Pro

Stance:

Underlying stereotypes cannot and should not be eradicated from our society.

Defining:

Underlying: implicit; discoverable only by close scrutiny or analysis (http://dictionary.reference.com...)

Stereotype: a simplified and standardized conception or image invested with special meaning and held in common by members of a group (http://dictionary.reference.com...)

Eradicated: to remove or destroy utterly; extirpate (http://dictionary.reference.com...)

Rounds:

Round One: Acceptance and Stance
Round Two: Rebuttals and Arguments
Round Three: Rebuttals and Arguments
Round Four: Rebuttals and no further Arguments

Good luck to Con.
Kryptic

Con

I accept this debate, before we go any further though, I am going to assume you are Pro (for) Stereo types not being able to and should not be removed. And I am debating that they can be and should be removed.
Obviously my argument will not be looking at current lifestyles within uneducated and high crime ridden areas but examples of historical changes as well as changes through time etc.
If you are happy for my argument then let us begin :)
Debate Round No. 1
Inquistive

Pro

In response to your acceptance, my focus will be on the present and future situation in any area no matter it's educational, criminal or socio-economic stance. If you can accept my terms, we may continue, if not, the debate may be terminated.

A stereotype, as defined, is a simplified and standardized conception or image invested with special meaning and held in common by members of a group. Every human being, no matter how hard they try, have natural stereotypes and biases formed possibly by family members, media or experiences. This automatic urge to stereotype is human nature and therefore cannot be eradicated completely. The type of stereotyping that should be preserved is the mild, implicit stereotyping. The kind of stereotyping that is not met with prejudice and then put into action as discrimination. Stereotyping can be harmless and even beneficent to us as a race.

Many people want to seem void of stereotypes and judgements so they will go against a gut feeling of danger to trust a person they do not know. Those people will seem like saints to themselves and possibly others until they are betrayed and/or hurt. Stereotypes breed certain fear and caution in people that can help protect them from danger. Without these assumptions, we would fail to place our trust in the right places. The only way stereotyping is harmful is if the stereotyped group is taunted or discriminated against, which is by all means wrong but not the point of this debate. Just to clarify.

Stereotyping can be accurate and help people to assume things about a person correctly. If a woman wears a hijab, you would more often than not rightfully assume she's Muslim. This can help in now knowing what foods they cannot have if dining with them or help promote conversation. Assuming things correctly can make a person seem more knowledgeable and sensitive to others.

Implicit or mild stereotypes cannot be and should not be eradicated from our society.

Sources:

http://www.simplypsychology.org...

https://www.youtube.com...
Kryptic

Con

I do respect your position and completely accept your stance.
I am Con (against) on this debate.
I do not believe that stereotypes should stay
I also do not believe that is it impossible or at the very least, improbable to remove stereotypes.

I will happily use your definitions unless I feel as though you are creating a logical fallacy with word play, or I have a better defined example.



Stereotypes are a result of confirmation bias due to a lack of education on what is portraying a stereotype. For example, if I say conspiracy theorists are tin-foil-hat antigovernment 'wackos' I have just created or agreed with a stereotype; and I have done this because of some extreme people who actually fit into this category. Like-wise, if I suggest that in a high crime populated area where minority figures are the majority of criminals, if I was to walk down a street at night and come across a person that fits into a category of minority, I will assume or lean towards assuming they are a criminal or have the potential to be one.
Another example is to say that homeless people are all homeless because they 'did it to them selves', with this dogmatic mindset, you will view most if not all homeless people like this.

This is where I would like to change the course and look at current stereo-types that are just bad.
When we look at equal rights for women, we tend to think, voting, driving, employment, education etc, however a lot of the time we forget just how a lot of people treat women. If you look at authority figures in the US very few are female, if we look at people who are viewed as 'strong, courageous, tough and driven', it is not often women are the centre point at this.
Just with that ALONE, we will see and do see a lack of respect for women unless they prove themselves.
If a man with a suit is walking down the street, people will generally think that this man has got everything in his life in check and is in a position of respect or authority, or both.
If a women does the same thing, she is looked at in a sexual way, she is judged by her hair, posture, if she is tired or smiling. Suddenly we see a trend of judgemental behaviour instead of respect; now I am not saying she would not be treated with respect, but there is a CLEAR correlation between attraction in females and success in females.

A quick way to refute your argument that cultures can't be changed, look at any country in the Middle East coming over to a Western country like Australia or America. We can see the new generation that is not restricted by religion has no affiliation with the cultures or trends from their heritage. Looking over history and seeing parts of Asia going through the ages of technology, at one point they had samurai swords, now most have technology and have grown past this.

So we can define a stereotype as ignorant, misinformed or simply an observation. However to address everyone with it is bigoted and ignorant. We will slow down our growth as a civilisation if we continue this path.

Many people want to seem void of stereotypes and judgements so they will go against a gut feeling of danger to trust a person they do not know.”

What people should be doing is not trusting someone because they don’t look trustworthy. Not because they’re black with a hoody on and are too afraid to look like a racist.

“Stereotypes breed certain fear and caution in people that can help protect them from danger.”

Possibly, however we aren’t living in a forest where one mountain lion won’t charge you so you think all won’t. We are living in a modern time with education, simply because one person is a lower class liar, it does not mean all will.

“Stereotyping can be accurate and help people to assume things about a person correctly. If a woman wears a hijab, you would more often than not rightfully assume she's Muslim. This can help in now knowing what foods they cannot have if dining with them or help promote conversation. Assuming things correctly can make a person seem more knowledgeable and sensitive to others.

Implicit or mild stereotypes cannot be and should not be eradicated from our society.”

Firstly, you just changed your argument, secondly, identifying clothing and assuming is falls under stereotype, but it does not implicate something negative over a person like ‘women can’t drive’ or ‘Asians are really smart.’ This is simply offensive.

Debate Round No. 2
Inquistive

Pro

Again, as defined, stereotypes are a simplified or standardized conception invested with special meaning held in common by members of a group. The definition given does not include specification on whether or not that conception has a negative denotation. Nonetheless, I will follow Con's path to the negative stereotypes.

As said before, many people will want to go against their gut feeling (not that they should, but it happens as I am simply stating fact) and help or trust someone a negative stereotype might tell them not to trust. People don't want to seem racist or biased but occasionally those negative stereotypes are correct. As you say, if an area has high crime rates where minority figures are the majority of criminals, then the stereotype that those figures are criminals may not be true for all, as many negative stereotypes aren't true for all in the group they represent, but could help in a time of uncertainty or danger.

More often than not, success is based on attractiveness but it pertains to both men and women. If a man is clean-cut and wearing a suit or looks attractive and nice, than they are often deemed more successful and intelligent. As women are also judged by appearance. To say that generally females are judged by their appearance but not males is just clearly incorrect. More often than not, if a woman or a man seem to be in shape and more attractive, they have the money or motivation to make themselves look better. These two things are signs of success in the past or future.

Never did I state that "cultures can't be changed," therefore I am not accepting the statements following a proper rebuttal as they are refuting a statement never shared.

We are living in a modern time, and now we have bigger problems than a mountain lion, yes. We have bio weapons and drones and nuclear missiles, making the need for caution and stereotyping even more important.

I never changed my argument and at the time I wrote the statements about a Muslim woman wearing a hijab, no parameters were set saying that I had to defend negative stereotypes, causing your judgment in my statement's relevance to be extraneous.

Again, underlying stereotypes cannot and should not be eradicated from our society.

Sources:

http://www.businessinsider.com...

http://www.livescience.com...


Kryptic

Con


I thank Pro for his response, this debate is stimulating and I do understand his side, although I also see problems and a lack of general awareness that could lead to a situation of irrational behaviour; I have read over Pros sources so far and see that the YouTube clip he referenced to also understands this issue. Refer to https://www.youtube.com... for the clip.


I see that Pro is only looking at the stereotypical response of something and not a prejudice attitude towards it, although I would have to disagree and state that prejudice, being the act of judging something before it happens will instil in any and all situations regardless. Now, if that situation is good, then it won’t matter, but this is not the side I am looking at. I am suggesting that the only reason we don’t show our true intentions on a situation when it is bad is because of fear of castration from society, the fear of being alone or out casted or viewed as different. In this youtube clip, the person was talking about how in the 1930’s, a woman leader in America was only an accepted option by 1/3 of people, now it’s over 90%. I would say that the stigma of society determines how much we have a stereotype, now to determine what dictates stereotype is the amount of respect on a figure everyone mutually agrees with. Look at religion, people can follow Christianity in a fundamental way, seeming very literal, this is usually Baptists. If we look at Pentecostals, we see a very graceful, merciful and loving method of Christianity; both look at the same book but have different outlooks and different appreciations of what is acceptable.


I do not doubt that stereotypes can be useful; however, picking up on body language is more useful than applying a method of approach towards a group of people.



“As said before, many people will want to go against their gut feeling (not that they should, but it happens as I am simply stating fact) and help or trust someone a negative stereotype might tell them not to trust. People don't want to seem racist or biased but occasionally those negative stereotypes are correct. As you say, if an area has high crime rates where minority figures are the majority of criminals, then the stereotype that those figures are criminals may not be true for all, as many negative stereotypes aren't true for all in the group they represent, but could help in a time of uncertainty or danger.”


~ I actually see no evidence for this, I would like to see an article derived for this statement. I can however, use your youtube clip against you. CrashCourse (the channel that uploaded the video) suggested that both sides of the stereotype respond similarly to the stereotype at hand; I can hypothesise, summarise and conclude in one swoop that the negative stereotypes on minority figures that you were arguing people were attempting to avoid is a circular logical prophesy. For example, a police officer treats a minority figure less than average, says they’re a criminal or thug or will amount to nothing etc, the person will most likely respond and feel a similar way when they’re getting older. In other words, your argument is only an argument because of lack of social awareness and education in the first place. So, to combat this, you must be aware of the stereotype, but actually change up the default stance, otherwise it will continue.



“Never did I state that "cultures can't be changed," therefore I am not accepting the statements following a proper rebuttal as they are refuting a statement never shared.”


~Your title literally says… Stereotypes cannot and should not be eradicated. This can also translate to; Stereotypes can’t be eradicated and stereotypes should not be eradicated. Either you need to make more sense, or stand by what you have said.



“Again, as defined, stereotypes are a simplified or standardized conception invested with special meaning held in common by members of a group. The definition given does not include specification on whether or not that conception has a negative denotation. Nonetheless, I will follow Con's path to the negative stereotypes.”


~ I am simply stating that by you opening the door for the good parts of stereotypes, you have been misled as there are clearly negatives to the same area; you claim you did not mention negatives, but it does not matter at ALL, stereotypes incorporate all avenues.



“We are living in a modern time, and now we have bigger problems than a mountain lion, yes. We have bio weapons and drones and nuclear missiles, making the need for caution and stereotyping even more important.”


~ In fact, this is why I am debating you, I live in Australia and people of indigenous decent or appear to be from the Middle East are treated as less, they are looked upon as worse than normal. One of my great friends is from Hong Kong and the stereotypes he gets is so oppressive, people talk down to him presuming he is uneducated; although he is one of the most intelligent people I know, he beats my grades in Biology which is impressive.


I see stereotypes every single day, I am a Caucasian male, 19 years old, around 6ft tall, I have no deformities, I am not over weight or underweight and as a result. People don’t expect anything of me; if I was to get into a fight, people wouldn’t first think I am uneducated or intoxicated, they would most likely presume I had been enraged by something. If I was to apply for a job or hand in an assignment, they would just think it’s normal. Anything I do in society is respected because I am not out of the ordinary. When my friend hands in an assignment he is revered for being an intellectual, although he is just doing an assignment… Some stereotypes are helpful, but overall, stereotypes are abusive and oppressive. No one wants to live in a place of oppression and abuse, especially in America at the moment. This ‘land of the free’ is a politically correct racist.



“I never changed my argument and at the time I wrote the statements about a Muslim woman wearing a hijab, no parameters were set saying that I had to defend negative stereotypes, causing your judgment in my statement's relevance to be extraneous”


~ If I took your title out of context, I do apologise J



“Again, underlying stereotypes cannot and should not be eradicated from our society.”


I will presume you are referring ‘cannot’ as an adjective and simply emphasising the importance of your statement.








On a side note, would it be possible to reference your work a little more precisely? For example, if I make a statement and want to relate it to a source, you could do what Wikipedia does. If I said, “I can search the webpage ‘Google’ on the search engine ‘Bing’.” [1] (ß I can put a reference number, being the number one in brackets, with the website in question)


(http://www.bing.com... [1])


It helps out the setting a lot more and I am able to find what sources link to where very easily. Thankyou J


Debate Round No. 3
Inquistive

Pro

I would first like to clarify that I am not a "he" so in the future, a word of advice would be to do research and look at a person's profile or use the pronoun "they" as I find anyone assuming I'm a he very offensive.

"I see that Pro is only looking at the stereotypical response of something and not a prejudice attitude towards it.."

Of course I am focusing on stereotypes as they are the subject of the debate as clearly outlined by the title. Stereotypes are in essence thoughts and beliefs, not actions. Con has been focusing directly on those actions. I apologze as I have been focusing on them as well and this should have been my argument from the beginning, but now I have realized my faults. Those actions are not stereoypes, they are discrimination. You can ban, eradicate and control actions and you can punish people for them, but stereotypes ARE NOT actions.

You cannot and should eradicate a belief or thought unless you make someone brain-dead or kill them, which of course the government shouldn't be killing people just for believing something. We shouldn't be eradicated thoughts or punishing people for them as we should all have the freedom to think what we want. When you act upon those thoughts, that is DISCRIMINATION, NOT STEREOTYPES. Discrimination is wrong and should be eradicated. But the thoughts we have are, in essence, harmless.

Stereotypes possibly should be eradicated to an extent, as far as the negative ones go, but you just cannot eradicate a thought or belief. We can't help what we think of or what we believe in, we haven't learned to control that internally. Mind readers do not exist therefore any claims of someone thinking something would be baseless unless the person came out and said their beliefs out loud.

Cultures ARE NOT the same as stereotypes. America has come from having slavery and segregation to not having that. That culture changed. But for some, the mindset of blacks being worthless or less than whites, has still carried on.

I realize that stereotypes have postitive, negative and neutral denominations. By not specifing whether the stereotypes had to be negative or positive, I implied all branches of stereotypes.

"...the stereotypes he gets is so oppressive,..."

I would like to point out the faults of this statement. Firstly, it would be gets are so oppressive. Second, Con then goes on to say people talk down to their friend, this is discrimination as this is an action.

My source placement is not of concern as I actually include sources and Con's arguments are fatally undersourced. I know very little of the denominations of Christianity Con mentioned in the last round so I would like to see a source to tell me more about this.
Kryptic

Con


Opening.



Firstly, in regards to referring to you as ‘he’, I apologise, it was a lack of respect and effort on my part and I did not mean to offend you. Although, in hindsight, this reminds me of a stereotype in and of its self; however, I did not mean anything by it, it was a typical generic singular pronoun kafuffle. On a later inspection of your account however, there is no way for me to view your gender; in saying that, I should be increasingly robust by the way I acknowledge and respond to people in general.


I would like to point out the faults of this statement. Firstly, it would be gets are so oppressive. Second, Con then goes on to say people talk down to their friend, this is discrimination as this is an action.’


~I apologise for my appalling grammar.



‘My source placement is not of concern as I actually include sources and Con's arguments are fatally under sourced. I know very little of the denominations of Christianity Con mentioned in the last round so I would like to see a source to tell me more about this.’


~I do also apologise for my lack of sources, however at this point I have needed none as the conversation we have had this far has been basic knowledge and does not need to be sited, the rest has been on using your sources or correcting your information. Although, for the better of the debate, I will use more sourcing when it comes to arguments. My only concern with your placement of sources was I did not know where each source went, I was only guessing.




I would like to thank Pro for this debate so far, it was interesting and understandable for both sides in my opinion, although I do believe I have a better understanding of this topic. I will respond to some statements made and make my final statement and conclusion.



Rebuttals.




Those actions are not stereotypes, they are discrimination. You can ban, eradicate and control actions and you can punish people for them, but stereotypes ARE NOT actions.’


~Stereotypes are actions, whether subtle or indirect, it has influenced your behaviour thus causing an action.



‘We shouldn't be eradicated thoughts or punishing people for them as we should all have the freedom to think what we want. When you act upon those thoughts, that is DISCRIMINATION, NOT STEREOTYPES. Discrimination is wrong and should be eradicated. But the thoughts we have are, in essence, harmless.’


~I am arguing that a stereotype is an action and is only withheld due to social stigma.



‘Stereotypes possibly should be eradicated to an extent, as far as the negative ones go, but you just cannot eradicate a thought or belief.’


~Well this is the essence of my argument, I probably wouldn’t have even debated if you had of been this specific, I don’t really understand if you are correcting yourself now, or you are changing your argument, either way, this should have been snuffed out in the rules and round one. Your rules for rounds are stated in round one, it clearly says at round 4 to have rebuttals and no further arguments.



‘Cultures ARE NOT the same as stereotypes. America has come from having slavery and segregation to not having that. That culture changed. But for some, the mindset of blacks being worthless or less than whites, has still carried on.’


~Cultures create stereotypes. Stereotypes are created from education, this means that a culture is an expression of a stereotype.



Conclusion.



So far, this debate was mainly opinionated, unfortunately the real debate only went on for 3 rounds, it was a little sloppy on both sides to get started and a little confusing on what we both actually stood for. Pro appeared to be completely for stereotypes, I argued against due to a strong conviction that stereotypes are not useful.


The first statement made by Pro was quite vague, It was more of an opinion than an argument and as a result, I returned with a similar outlook, the main argument was


Many people want to seem void of stereotypes and judgements so they will go against a gut feeling of danger to trust a person they do not know. Those people will seem like saints to themselves and possibly others until they are betrayed and/or hurt. Stereotypes breed certain fear and caution in people that can help protect them from danger. Without these assumptions, we would fail to place our trust in the right places. The only way stereotyping is harmful is if the stereotyped group is taunted or discriminated against, which is by all means wrong but not the point of this debate. Just to clarify.’


However, what pro forgets to realise is that you can’t have a strong opinion and conviction about someone and not act on it, Pro then used an example of the youtube video which I accurately displayed to be incorrectly used on her* side in round 3. I mentioned that in the video, the police acted on a stereotype and in the heat of the moment, used force according to the stereotype, ending in an un-needed death. Later in that video, the author also described stereotypes to be sustained due to responses of the stereotype. For example, the stereotype of oppressive authority figures in high crime rates of America will only enforce the stereotypes of the criminal figures continuing to apply to crime. Essentially, it’s a belief system. Refer to the youtube video for the source.



Later on in this debate, there was also miscommunication of the title; as the title says ‘Stereotypes Cannot and Should Not be Eradicated’, This could be taken in two ways, the first way is ‘Stereotypes can’t be eradicated and should not be eradicated’, the second way is implying the word ‘can’t’ to be an adjective and impress the expression of the word ‘should’ to be louder. I assumed it was meaning #1 I gave and showed a clear example of how stereotypes can be removed. I also mentioned why they should be, showing a bad stereotype. By this time, we have witnessed a clear forfeit in the original argument topic made by Pro; and this should be enough to suggest Con winning.


By round 3, Con misinterprets my argument by simply not seeing the complete extent of her original statement. She* also goes on to say ‘Never did I state that "cultures can't be changed," therefore I am not accepting the statements following a proper rebuttal as they are refuting a statement never shared.’ However, clearly this is stated in the title… Shortly after saying this, she then said in her final statement ‘Again, underlying stereotypes cannot and should not be eradicated from our society.’


Unfortunately, so far, nothing I have said needed to be sourced as everything falls under common knowledge or simply a correction of the information already given by Pro, in fact, the only source I actually needed was the youtube video clip that Pro used; At this point I have shown beyond reasonable doubt that I have won this debate by pro essentially agreeing with my points.



I do want to thank you for this opportunity to converse with you and would like to possibly debate this issue again with clearer states in which confusion can be kept to a minimum, as in the end, was the reason you lost this debate.


~Kryptic.


Debate Round No. 4
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 1 year ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
==================================================================
>Reported vote: evanjfarrar// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Pro. Reasons for voting decision: Pro had more convincing arguments, and was superior with use of proper grammar.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) No explanation for any of the points.
===========================================================================
Posted by Inquistive 1 year ago
Inquistive
The revisions that were to be made: (P = Paragraph, S = Sentence)
P3 S4 "I apologize..."
P4 S1 "You cannot eradicate..."
P4 S2 "We shouldn't be eradicating..."
P4 S3 "...DISCRIMINATION, NOT STEREOTYPING..."
P7 S1 "...have positive,..."
P9 S2 "...it would be, 'he gets are so oppressive.'..."
P10 S2 "...Christianity that Con..."
Again, I apologize for any inconvenience, I'm having WiFi troubles.
Posted by Inquistive 1 year ago
Inquistive
I apologize for my type errors in Round Four as I proofread and edited it but for some reason the changes did not show up.
Posted by Inquistive 1 year ago
Inquistive
Alright then.
Posted by Kryptic 1 year ago
Kryptic
just making clear :) if your happy with this so far then sure
Posted by Inquistive 1 year ago
Inquistive
Round One was acceptance. I made my argument in Round Two as set out by my layout. If you for some reason have a problem with that, I have no problem quitting this debate. To note, my argument is my argument and if you think it's invalid than that's not your problem. It's just means I haven't made a convincing argument. I'm not going to accept your claims of my argument being invalid due to the fact I have had no misconduct thus far according to the terms I layed out. Going back and forth is the point of this website and debates everywhere so do not critique my terms after you've accepted them.
Posted by Inquistive 1 year ago
Inquistive
I'm going to assume your response as disagreement and this debate is over.
Posted by Kryptic 1 year ago
Kryptic
the reason I am not calling what you wrote an argument is due to the idea that these are vague statements that don't really describe stereotypes but an all around fear / respect / reverence for unknown people.
Posted by Kryptic 1 year ago
Kryptic
round 1 is for acceptance, I am curious as to why you didn't put forth an argument? or are you wanting me to accept and place my argument as well? we are wasting rounds by going back and forth. my proposition was to accept, allocate what we are doing and if you agreed you were to simply act like I never wrote anything and we were in agreement. your proposition since you are making the assertion needs to be placed for me to then place down mine.
the burden of proof is required ASAP for the assertion.
No votes have been placed for this debate.