∙ The stereotype that the American education system is a chain of prison-like schools which promote or accept murder as a way of life, based on the stereotype that all school districts in America run under the exact same policies and post-Columbine propaganda/paranoia.
∙ The stereotype that all Americans have a superiority complex and think of themselves as being higher or more important then those from other countries, rooted in the belief that America is in fact the �most powerful and greatest country of them all�
∙ The stereotype that all Americans are divided into extreme Liberals and Conservatives, and take on the extreme believes of either one or the other.
∙ Stereotypes of Americans� interests. Such as purchasing power and economic balance. Such as stating that �Americans own too many of X.�
∙ The stereotype of American attitude towards sexual behavior and maturity.
And these are only a few of the one that come to mind. I recognize that it is possible that the offenders do not even know of their stereotyping, but it is apparent that some are creating these stereotypes on propose. I wonder if it�s really that hard to try not to stereotype any race/gender/religion in these forums. I know it exists in real life, but I also know that those who stereotype people in real life are look down upon, at least in my area/social circle. I would really like to see the extreme cases of stereotyping disappear on these forums to make everyone�s visit more enjoyable.
Please give me feedback� examples of when you may have experienced any sort of stereotypes on these forums. We all may or may not of experience it in real life, but why bring it here?
Thanks
Wes
[ June 28, 2001: Message edited by: Wes1701E ]
Saying that, I haven't noticed much "US-bashing". I've noticed comments that point out the bad points of the US, usually from the Canadians. The British (being Me, Lee, and Orion), just tend to make bad jokes at their expense.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeff Kardde:
Well, gee, could it be that a large portion of this BBoard be from Europe or Australia or even (GASP!) Canada which are not part of the United States of America? Naaaaaaaaah ...
Why is that an excuse to make stereotypes against americans, or anyone for that matter?
quote:
Originally posted by PsyLiam:
...I've noticed comments that point out the bad points of the US, usually from the Canadians. The British (being Me, Lee, and Orion), just tend to make bad jokes at their expense...
Oh, ive noticed the jokes.. hell I find some of them funny as hell, the "bad points of the US" are represented incorrectly, just a little "some of..." before the statement or even "in my experience..." or "most [insert group here] i know..." turns an offensive stereotype into a harmless opinion, (which is what they are)
They're making stereotypes of CONSERVATIVE Americans.
quote:
Originally posted by Wes1701E:Why is that an excuse to make stereotypes against americans, or anyone for that matter?
Shik: "If you're gonna have the biggest tits in school, y'gotta expect the comments to come in droves, especially when you show them off as much as we do."
Hmm. No, I can't see where that stereotype comes from.
Dat's funny.... No comment, I just found it really funny, and I forgot to make a comment on it.
Stereotypes being what they are, I think that most American are still imbued with that old Manifest Destiny ideology and a certain City On A Hill belief system that seperates the world into easy "us vs. them" piles.
And some would argue about whether there really is such a thing a "American Culture." It might be just an amalgam of Britany Spears / N Sync songs, Cuban folk dances, African drum beats and Scotish poetry...or whatever was brought by those who came over.
Whatever it is, it is no longer dominated by white male hegemony. The recognition and acceptance of diversity angers quite a few people who no longer have the spotlight.
[ June 28, 2001: Message edited by: Jay the Obscure ]
quote:
Originally posted by Jeff Kardde:
...Canada which [is] not part of the United States of America...
Didn't we annex them, yet?
Seriously, I have seen some US-bashing here and there in the forums, but nothing to get too upset over. I would say quite a lot of it was done in jest. (and some of it quite funny) If anything, perhaps we should be proud of US bashing because as negative as it can be, it is an exercise of one of the more noble points of our Bill of Rights. I can participate in an online community and say that I think George W. is an incompetent spoon-fed buffoon whose short-sighted agendas and defiant ignorance will only bring suffering and death. Cops will not come to my house and take me away from my family.
(Incidentally, If I should stop posting in the next few weeks, I'd just like to retract everything I said above except the part about GW.)
STEREOTYPE ARE THERE ONLY BECAUSE THERE ARE A LARGE POOL OF EXAMPLES.
Blonde jokes didn't just "pop-up" all of a sudden one day because people randomly decided that we should make fun of blondes.
Same apply for "American" stereotyping, maybe you guys should consider changing your ways before pointing fingers.
[ June 28, 2001: Message edited by: BlueElectron ]
quote:
Originally posted by BlueElectron:
...maybe you guys should consider changing your ways before pointing fingers...
Obviously i'm speaking to a group of 12 year olds, or at least 12-year old minds.
I'm too tired to deal with this. I�m very sorry that I didn�t reach a more mature audience. Perhaps some other time.
:-)
I have seen americans who get extremely obnoxious and bigmouthed when visiting other countries, mine for instance, and I know why too.
In most cases the person(s) are not jerks by nature, but when one leaves his/her own country to visit another, it's very common to feel out of one's element, exposed, vulnerable.
"Nationalism" (in that you compare certain elements in this new culture with your own and find your own more comfortable) and insecurity can go up quite a few notches.
I have met both enlightened americans and stupid ones, so I know there's more than meets the eye. And sometimes there isn't.
It's the same with us swedes, we can be pretty nasty party people on vacations and such.
Also, germans are wonderful people when you go visit them in Germany. But when they come to Sweden and 'partay' I have seen some of them that really scared me. 
Hope I made any sense.
Now, while that's true, you do know that there are other countries that have freedome of speech? And, shock horror, they don't even have a Bill of Rights. Or a US Constitution. And they can still say stuff without being hung! My God! The madness!
Yes, I'm one of those conservative Americans. STEREOTYPE ME!
Of course, when our rights are taken away in Europe, Canada, Australia, and everywhere except for the US, the you can say "Ha! I told you! I stopped the policemen at our door with our mighty piece of paper that NEVER CHANGES! Except when it's ammended. But it's NOT CHANGED! Just ammended. Or ignored. I am rule!"
[ June 29, 2001: Message edited by: PsyLiam ]
Besides the unsuccessful handgun ban, I mean.
I can see the difference now.
USA:
Gov. Guy #1. : I don't like this thing here. Let's enact a law that says that people can't look at it/write about it/think about it.
Gov. Guy #2. : Great... except that that's unconstitutional. You'd be in for a losing fight at the Supreme Court, and the public outcry would end your career.
Gov. Guy #1. : Oh, forget it, then. Damn Bill of Rights.
UK:
Gov. Guy #1. : I don't like this thing here. Let's enact a law that says that people can't look at it/write about it/think about it.
Gov. Guy #2. : Great! There's nothing to stop it, the public, not having that right, has no excuse to outcry, and even if they do and end your career, the law can't be struck down as going against the citizenry's rights, so it'll stay.
Gov. Guy #1. : Cool.
(Vastly oversimplified, I know.)
The radical idea that UK citizens might actually like handguns being illegal is crazy talk, isn't it?
Look, do we understand politics? If one party has a policy that causes public outcry, then an opposing party will say "vote for us, and we'll change it."
Notice that when the Conservatives banned handguns, Labour didn't say "Hey, all you gun lovers! We'll make them legal again! Vote for us!". And that none of the major parties have policies that involve the bringing back of handguns?
You consider it a right to own items that are designed to kill over long distance. We don't. And we're happy.
We also don't have a Bill of Rights. There is the Magna Carta, but that's obviously DOS to the US's Windows. How the hell have we survived?
[ June 29, 2001: Message edited by: PsyLiam ]
"...you do know that there are other countries that have freedome of speech? And, shock horror, they don't even have a Bill of Rights. Or a US Constitution."
What's your point? You have laws that give people freedom of speech. We have laws that give people freedom of speech. Our laws just happen to have a name: "the Bill of Rights". Just because your laws don't have that name, how does that make them any different?
Why not be proud of both the good things?
quote:
Originally posted by PsyLiam:
We also don't have a Bill of Rights. There is the Magna Carta, but that's obviously DOS to the US's Windows. How the hell have we survived?
I don't think you can ever have too many rights.
Honestly, you think that people don't have a right to kill under any circumstances? Even if their lives and the lives of others are threatened?
The NRA & the gun lobbyists are right on certain things: guns don't kill people, people kill people. Guns merely make it easier, thus shortening the thought-to-action process by removing the difficulties involved. Ironically, this is known as the "Reagan effect," after the former president's ability to go directly from subconscious thought to speech, circumventing the step of conscious reviewal.
The key is responsibilities, & not just on guns; this is a universal constant now. There is no such thing as "personal responsibility" in this nation anymore. Get burnrd because the coffee was hot? Sue the company. Never might that you're a fuckin' clumsy oaf, you get $25 million. Your donut-monster fat ass can't fit into the movie seats? Don't think about a diet, Shamu, just sue for discrimination & make the rest of us pay for your laziness via rising costs. Almost die because you decided to eat suet made for birds? You're not an incompetent fuck, you're a victim. Sue the company for not printing "NOT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION" on it! Never MIND that it said right on there that it was 35% crude fat, 25% crude protein, 35% crude fiber, & 5% seed. A friend of mine said he was tired of "hearing all these fucks whine about Microsoft. 'I WANT SOME OF THAT GUY'S MONEY!!' And they'll get it, too."
People in this nation today seem to think that HAVING the right means that we'll lose it unless we exercise it, & exercise it CONSTANTLY. This might be true for some--freedom of expression, right to a swift & fair trial, defense against self-incrimination--but others it is.
Excuse me, but I'd just like to point out that "America" is the name given to the combined continents of North and South America, not one single country. Thank you.
They don't. That was the point I'm making. Against Omega saying that US rights CAN'T be violated, because you have the Bill of Rights, and against First of Two saying that UK rights ARE violated, by giving the example of the handgun ban.
Yes, the Bill of Rights is great and all. But it's hardly unique in what it's produced.
I was also being with the funny. I = Master of the humour. Duh.
Also, I don't recall comparing "all the good things about what the UK is proud of to all the bad things about what the US is proud of". I was just pointing out that nearly all the stuff the US is proud of applies to other countries, who don't go on about it all the time.
Freedom of speech? Not in it. Peacable assembly? Nope. The common man petitioning the government for a redress of greviances? Nope.
Mostly, it was written solely for the rights of the aristocracy, and it's mostly about who can own what land and such... and then there's the anti-environmental Article #47, and the nicely written Article #54, which says that no man can be arrested for murder on the testimony of a woman... unless he killed her husband. I guess women make lousy witnesses?
And forgive me, but I don't think that the Magna Carta IS the supreme law of the UK, anyway. When Parliament enacts a new law, does anybody check to see if it conflicts with the MC? I doubt it, unless it gives the royals power, which isn't likely.
The Brits DO have a "Bill of Rights" from 1689, but again, speech and peaceable assembly are not included, although the redress of greviances is.
The right to bear arms for self-defense IS included... but only for Protestants.
[ June 30, 2001: Message edited by: First of Two ]
Call me guilty of Stereotyping but .. Whenever conversations like this happen - it always goes to the damn bill of rights!
Wanna talk about stereotyping ... LET'S...
Candian have long endured the stereotyping of Americans...
"Noo doot aboot it.. Eh!"
Everytime I speak to an american.. I have to endure the annoying observation, "You must be a Canadian... EH.." and "Why can't you people talk up there ..??"
Like the american way is the ONLY way to talk.. well I'll tell ya something .. The mid-southern United States has much to be proud of when it comes to Language Brutalization!!
We Canadians, or Europeans, or Aussies or whatever stereotype.. SURE WE DO...
But Americans are no better !!! They stereotype too .. Problem is.. We Canadians, European and etc... simply don't give a shit! Americans seem to take is personally (Some of them do.. not all!!! Let me add that!)
I'm not an American basher by any stretch .. but c'mon .. bring up American StereoTyping??? .. first look at yourselves before judging the rest of the world!
quote:
Everytime I speak to an american.. I have to endure the annoying observation, "You must be a Canadian... EH.." and "Why can't you people talk up there ..??"
EVERY time? I don't believe you. I think you're stereotyping, probably due to defensiveness about being a Canadian.
quote:
because the level of ignorance and hypocrisy that is exibited by the USA in one day totals to that of the rest of the world put together in a year
You can't back that up. Therefore, it is a stereotype. You are a dupe.
For instance, if I said "MCInfinity's town is full of inbred, mentally-deficient hen-teasers", that would be a stereotyped statement put forth as FACT, which is what you did.
If, however, I had said "the STEREOTYPE or COMMONLY HELD BELIEF is that MCInfinity's town is full of inbred, mentally-deficient hen-teasers", then that would be 'admission of a stereotype.'
Which is NOT what you did.
I'm sorry if what you meant isn't what you said, but that's hardly my fault.
To quote Scott Evil... "Ass."
Yes there is a large number of Americans who are so full of themselves it is really pathetic. However there are those of us who are not ignorant of things outside our countries boundries. (yes I call us Americans because we have America as part of our country name and since nobody else does it shouldn't matter)
Stereotyping happens on this forum and it does seem to be mostly aimed at Americans. Maybe we do take ourselves to seriously or maybe those of us who are taking it seriously are just tired of it all.
quote:
Originally posted by MC Infinity:
...By that I am not including all of those "fundy" countries that are inhabited by creatures with the intellectual capacity of sheep.
I think that I may be grossly offended by this apparently radically stereotyped statement, however, I am not certain to what you are referring. Please let me be wrong.
[ July 01, 2001: Message edited by: Balaam Xumucane ]
I've just registered to this forum, although I've been reading it regularly for several years now (no joke!). I'm a longtime member of the trek bbs (*URL removed, for obvious reasons*, visit us, we'd be happy!). I didn't dare to post here because of my only fundamental knowledge of the English language, but this topic is too interesting for not taking part in the discussion. Please apologise and don't take me for a moron if I make a lot of spelling mistakes.
To the topic: I'm from Switzerland, and this country is known to be a very conservative one. It's the only country in middle-europe which is not part of the European Union. The average citizen in Switzerland is very sceptical about the U.S., because the U.S. democracy is completely underdeveloped compared to the Swiss version, so don't be to proud of your "Bill of Rights." Swiss citizens are allowed to vote several times a year about different political matters. This is called "Direct Democracy".- What you need is about 100'000 signatures of Swiss citizens who are above 18 years, and you can start a vote which concerns every possible matter which doesn't touch our Version of "the Bill of rights", "die Bundesverfassung".
I don't want to bash the U.S.A. in any ways, but I dare to say that our political System is far more developed, and has grown during the last let's say 100 years. I'm not proud to be Swiss (nationalism is a crime, like G.R. said), but I'm happy to live here, and not in the U.S.A. I'm afraid that especially the proud conservative U.S. Citizens like Omega would be shocked at how ridiculous the U.S. System seems to an educated European citizen. We still don't know how it was possible that someone who is that simple-minded and right-wing could be elected to the president of the most powerful country in the world. George Bush is considered extremely right-wing, even in a especially conservative country like Switzerland.
It's true that we Europeans are very influenced by U.S. culture. But this doen't mean that we feel in any kind inferior to the U.S., because there is absolutely no reason for it. If you talk about military power, ok, but which educated person is proud living in the most armed country?!? I'm happy that we have a good health system, and if someone loses his job, he won't become homeless.
I know there are some stereotypes in this text too, but this is our impression of the U.S.A. I have to say that there is a wave of Anti-Americanism in Switzerland right know which goes far beyond my "prejudices". So don't think I'm extreme in my point of view.
Anyway, I enjoy this forums, so I'll keep reading, if you flame me or not
Voivod
[ July 01, 2001: Message edited by: TSN ]
The Swiss. Ha. We all know what Scott Adams said about them. Look at them. Great watches, bitchin' chocolates, & no one's fucked with them in, what, 1200 years? The seed for the Zakdorn race, tell you. They even guard the damn Pope. And they luscious sweet 50-boat Swiss Navy on Lake Geneva--simply a thing of beauty.
And isn't a "participatory republic" what Vulcan's supposed to have?
Just one thing, though... It's difficult to compare the US and Swiss governments on the basis of representative vs. direct democracies. Your country has slightly more than one-fortieth of the US' population. It's a lot easier to have a direct democracy of seven million people than one that's approaching three hundred million.
I'm sorry for the "adverstisent" of my favorite Discussion Board, I didn't want do do any promotion. It's ok you deleted it.
[ July 01, 2001: Message edited by: Voivod ]
ROCK ON OMEGA!
By the way, is "Bubba" an insult? I really don't know!Yes, I know the name "Omega", because the bad things are easier to be remembered. Don't care about me, Omega, just some silly words from a newbie
I have to say, it's one of the more interesting posts to come up. Swiss democracy is obviously far more different from US democracy that, say the UK's or Canada's. And it's nice to have a different point of view.
Tim: You say it'd be hard. Sure it'd be hard to do in the form it is in Switzerland right now, but that doesn't mean it'd be impossible. I'm sure you could make the argument that democracy only works in small groups, and for large numbers of people, a single leader is required, otherwise you'd get bogged down in committees. But it's been proven that you don't need a monarch to run a country, or a dictator.
I do wonder where US politics will end up. Will we end up at the point where the split between national and EU politics will be the same as state and national US politics?
quote:
Originally posted by Balaam Xumucane:I think that I may be grossly offended by this apparently radically stereotyped statement, however, I am not certain to what you are referring. Please let me be wrong.
And a participatory democracy wouldn't be as impossible as it used to be anymore. The advent of the internet & all that.
[ July 01, 2001: Message edited by: Shik ]
Welcome, Voivod. I look forward to your input into our discussions.
*reads Shik's "soulbond" link* Ye gods... You truly are insane, aren't you?
And if we're going to compare governments, I shall remind you all that the United States government is based on the British Parliament. We're not as far apart as we think.
Actually, our government would work a lot better now if the idiotic fucks over at congress hadn't changed things around in the 1800's.
But what do I know? I'm a woman. And we all know that women are so weak-minded that they cannot be trusted with property, let alone the vote.
The problem with my country is that we can't keep the most ignorant among us away from the media. Believe it or not there are tons of intelligent people in this country. It's just that we dont' get out much. We hide in our houses because we fear the rest of the world. *shudder*.
quote:
Posted by Infinity: That's probably the smartest thing I've heard anyone say at this board.
You must stop reading only the top 2 lines of large posts, Infinity. Really, child. But I bet you're not even reading this now, are you? Because this is at the bottom of my post.
Lee: Why, THANK you! That warms my heart.
Jubey-chan: Werd to that, yo. But I think Congress needs to be MORE like the British Parliament. Or the Australian one. Whichever. They both have fistfights between members. We could well use that in Congress. I'd liek to see John McCain roundhouse Trent Lott, then turn around & hamme rthrow Hillary Clinton. Might make C-SPAN's ratings run through the roof.
There was the egg incident, but that wasn't in parliment.
Are you sure?
[ July 02, 2001: Message edited by: Jay the Obscure ]
[ July 02, 2001: Message edited by: Jay the Obscure ]
He's the South Carolina senator, I believe. He's been in the Senate since, what, 1930 something?
Isn't he president pro tempore of the senate, or something? At one point in time, that would have put him in line for presidential succession, but I'm not versed on the current laws.
Order of Presidential Succession
Was the parliamentary option that awful?
Basically, he's a US politician who's really really really old.
quote:
but I'm not versed on the current laws.
Which explains quite a bit ...
[ July 03, 2001: Message edited by: Jay the Obscure ]
I'd hate to say it, but have you ever lived in the United States, or does your information only come from the Swiss angle? Personally, I would have to live anywhere I would make judgements on before I expected people to take my words for what they are.
Er, how would the information change if she (where'd I get the idea that she is a "she"?) came from a different country?
"Personally, I would have to live anywhere I would make judgements on before I expected people to take my words for what they are."
Sorry, but that's frankly ridiculous. Only Yanks can make comments on the United States and be taken seriously? Only Brits can comment on the UK?Can we not criticise Iraq unless we spend a few years there?
Heaven forbid you could learn about other countries actions by watching the news. Or reading.
And in any case, the US varies a lot more from place to place than most countries, due to your state system. I'm sure your experience of the US is very different than some other peoples.
Do you truly belive everything the media has to offer? People I know that have lived in russia say that anyones image of it - even from National Geographic and such - is completely diffrent until you experience it.
The fact remains, one's view is not fully complete unless that person has first-hand experience of it.
The media that once almost reported on-air that the Previous Bush had died during that Tokyo summit? When he had the flu?
I remember my mom had an exchange student from Costa Rica who said that the media in their country had reported that terrorists blew up the space shuttle, and three people had survived.
And let's not even TALK about state-run media, or corporate media, self-censorship, and the twists and turns they'll take to get ratings and/or avoid losing valuable sponsors...
So i'll explain it a bit to you. Here goes:
The House of Commons, in Parliament, is the house of people who are voted into office by their peers. This is the structure the House of Representatives was based on.
The House of Lords, in Parliament, is the gauranteed spot of anyone who owns a certain amount of English soil. At the time we were build the government, these people were the aristocracy, the rich people, etc. The common people DO NOT get to vote on this. They are simply there, no election. This is the structure the Senate was based on. BACK THEN, we did not vote for our Senators. There was a different selection process based on land.
The President, of course, is like the Monarch, only without absolute power.
So it goes like this: You have representation of the needs of the "commoners" or "poor people". You have representation of the needs of the "Nobles" or "rich people", and the Monarch was there for both and of course, himself... and cast the deciding vote. This was a system of checks and balances. The nobles would, of course, vote in thier own best interest and the commoners would vote in THIER best interest.... and the monarch voted in the best interests of the country itself. In theory.
The President, then, cannot be elected by the common people OR the nobles, as he'll sway in either direction instead of being impartial. THIS is the reason the electoral collage was created.
Now... why does it not work the way it should? Because we are now allowed to vote for our senators and presidents.
*ahem* and that's the end of my lecture.
*gets off the podium*
[edited 'cause people vote for peers not pears]
[ July 11, 2001: Message edited by: Jubilicious ]