I am not my stereotype

After reading the article “Mediamakers, het is geen humor meer om blondjes als dom te stereotyperen” by Sahar Noor in the Volkskrant, I wondered what the correlation was with Double Consciousness. I found it very interesting to acknowledge the relation between humor and stereotyping. Let’s be honest, we all had that moment when we laughed when someone confirmed a certain stereotype. However, is it still funny if people experience negative consequences due to stereotyping? My hypothesis is that people who experience being stereotyped could also experience a negative double consciousness.

Plurality of imposed identities

Understanding what stereotyping means brings us to key concepts of my research: the definitions of diversity, and inclusion.

I define diversity as the recognition of the plurality of identity. Inclusion, as I define it, is the recognition that these different identities are equal. The problem is that the rules of a group are decided by the norm. In order to resolve the problem it’s important that all members share the same values regarding diversity and inclusion. Thus, it all starts with awareness and understanding.

When there is stereotyping, the dominant culture decides the plurality of identities. For example, the norm decided that there’s the Moroccan, the Surinam, the Blond, etc. Thus, the person they are talking about can’t choose or they can’t be who they are. Or at least, they can choose who they are but they are also someone else in the eyes of the norm that’s stereotyping. They are pigeonholed to confirm their stereotype. The minority identity in this case could have the feeling they have to assimilate into one of those identities, because they are hyper-sensitive to their stereotype. Here, an aspect of double consciousness comes in.

Double consciousness is a concept in social philosophy created by W.E. E Du Bois. It includes the identity declaration, and the identity judgment. The declaration explains who you are, a human being with a Surinam identity, Moroccan identity, or being a blond person. Then there is the judgment, the second consciousness imposed by the dominant culture. Historically, the was the observation that the minority identity is not good enough, and they are not equal compared to the status quo. This observation generalizes who the minority identity is: the person with a Surinam identity is always late, the Moroccan identity is always a criminal, and the blond person is not smart. Along with that, is a hyper sensitivity of the minority identity to the group, where they feel they have to assimilate or overcompensate certain behavior to be ahead of the comments. This hyper-sensitive character causes that the minority identity is aware of their difference, and by this awareness feel that they have to assimilate in the dominant culture to succeed. They are afraid to speak up or, in case of stereotyping, they talk about it (usually by making jokes) to be ahead of the comments.

Generalizing & simplifying

Talking about double consciousness is talking about awareness & understanding, and about empathy and acceptance. Talking about stereotyping means assuming that the characteristics of one person are equal for a whole group of people. It is simplifying our thoughts about a particular person by having a generalized belief about who they are. If you are generalizing you are not acklowledging the other person’s identity, which correlates with the ideas of double consciousness. Experiencing double consciousness is experiencing an identity judgment made by the status quo which causes disorientation, because they are seeing you in a different manner than who you truly are. It’s this disorientation which results in a split identity. Double consciousness shows a lack of empathy and acceptance of the dominant group, and it shows the hyper-sensitive character of the minority which generates hyper-acceptance of the dominant identity.

So what now?

The answers, I believe, are in the concepts of empathy & acceptance. Empathy is the answer to a lack of diversity and acceptance is the answer to a lack of inclusion. Putting yourself in someone else's shoes creates empathy, so you recognize the plurality of identity. You become "aware" and recognize the difference. Besides empathy we need acceptance. I can empathize with another person and still find that person inferior or treat them differently. Acceptance is the key. Acceptance literally means “not trying to change something”. It’s about understanding that someone is different, and understanding that this is okay.

I imagine that a better understanding would have a positive consequence in experiencing other people, so let’s change the narrative.

Thus, in the case of stereotyping most of the associations are grounded in the dominant culture. By preserving them we are accepting that it’s okay to have less empathy for the people who experience stereotyping. We should start with ourselves. It starts when each person becomes aware when they are stereotyping, and acknowledges what that means for someone. It’s important to become aware of the consequences of having a dominant culture decide what the plurality of identities are within a group, especially as it pertains to stimulating double consciousness. When we understand this vicious circle: we are then at the beginning of a new state of awareness.