It’s understandable if you don’t recognize the name Favell Lee Mortimer. Had you lived in Victorian England, however, you might well have read Mrs. Mortimer’s books to your children at bedtime. In her long career she wrote 16 children’s books and became a literary superstar in her day. Her most famous book was The Peep of Day (1833), a religious primer for young children, which eventually sold at least a million copies in 38 languages. Mrs. Mortimer’s writings were colored by the strict religious conventions of the day, and no doubt the effects of a miserably unhappy adult life had a strong impact on her world view as well: In a 1901 biography her niece recalled that her doctor had said that she was the only person he ever met who wished to die.
Between 1839 and 1853, she published three books on geography for young readers, the first of which was The Countries of Europe Described, followed by two volumes that featured Asia, Africa, Australia and America. In these books, Mrs. Mortimer writes authoritatively, with very specific descriptions of peoples and places. Her pronouncements are dogmatic and judgmental, to the point of scornfulness. Her descriptions are almost universally negative. For instance, she writes that “Spaniards are not only idle, they are very cruel”. Also, “No people in Europe are more clumsy and awkward than the Portuguese, and their language is not as pretty as Spanish because it is spoken in harsh and squeaking tones.” Turks are “so grave that they look wise. But how can lazy people be wise? They like to spend their time in eating opium, sipping coffee, and sitting still.” Of India (Hindustan) she writes “It is a miserable thing to be a Hindoo lady. They are not taught anything and spend most of their time in idleness, sauntering about and chattering nonsense.”
As for Egyptians, “It is a rare thing in Egypt to speak the truth. There is a story of an Egyptian who spoke the truth so constantly that his countrymen began to call him ‘the Englishman’.” The Italians are “ignorant and wicked, caring more for beautiful things than useful things’. And “it is dreadful to think what number of murders are committed in Italy.” After painting a positive picture of Belgians, she sadly must add, “Alas, they worship idols. They are Roman Catholics.”
Her characterizations are put forth with a persuasive style and level of specificity that must have engendered in her readers the confidence that this expert knew what she was talking about. Now, here is the amazing part: Mrs. Mortimer had set foot out of her native England only once before writing these books, when she was in her teens! She had never even visited Wales, whose border was only a few miles from her English home. She gleaned her exhaustive “knowledge” not from personal experience with other cultures but rather from a variety of available books, many of them already decades old.
A first reading of her books elicits amusement at the absurd and uninformed descriptions of different cultures, but then an unease settles in, as two things dawn on us: First is the realization that most of her young readers would not ever have opportunity to travel and would have formed their perceptions of other countries through Mrs. Mortimer’s books. Information sources were limited, so these “non-fiction” works would have helped shape many a Victorian world view.
The second realization is that, to a lesser degree, and though we don’t put them in print, each of us may view the world through the lenses of broad and sometimes inaccurate stereotypes.
What is stereotyping? A common definition is “Ascribing specific characteristics and behavioral traits to individuals based upon their membership in a certain group.” They put people in boxes and minimize individual differences. Stereotyping is a universal phenomenon.
What is the difference in a stereotype and a generalization? There are similarities but significant differences. We generalize when we group information and experiences together to form logical categories. Our brains take shortcuts – and lots of them – to reach answers quickly, for expediency and effectiveness. This serves to simplify how we perceive and think about our world and make that process more efficient. We make these unconscious generalizations constantly, and this helps keep us sane. If we didn’t wake up each morning with a certain degree of predictability about what to expect, we could not function. But the downside is the formation of biases, which can then lead to sterotyping.
But let’s focus on conscious generalizations we make about our fellow human beings, especially those that are different from us. It is normal to draw certain conclusions about others, but a generalization should be based upon knowledge – commonly-held and corroborated information and personal experience. Generalizations are descriptive, whereas stereotypes are evaluative. Generalizations are provisional and fluid, open to modification by subsequent information and experience; stereotypes are inflexible and often not swayed by reality. They become calcified and unconscious over time, as we selectively notice anything that supports them and ignoring evidence that refutes them.
So, when uninformed stereotypes warp our view of others and lessen our interpersonal effectiveness, what can we do to change our perspective? Here are four suggestions:
1. Acknowledge that you have biases that can lead to stereotypes. Self-awareness of our own biases is an important first step. Reflect upon the roots of your stereotypes.
(1) Social Identity. Social identities are labels that people use to categorize or identify themselves and/or others as members of specific groups. Some common social identities include: nationality, gender, ethnicity, race, religion, generation, sexual orientation, (dis)ability, political affiliation, relationship status, profession, and socioeconomic status. Social identities are powerful because as humans, we categorize ourselves and each other into groups along social identity lines. This categorization often lays the foundation for bias, stereotypes, prejudice and discrimination.
(2) Popular culture and media. Mrs. Mortimer’s books were based on published information, the popular culture of the day. Many of our views are shaped by the broad stereotypes prevalent in movies, television and literature. And others’ views of U.S. culture are likewise shaped by what they see in movies and television. I recently spoke to a group of university students from 20 countries, most newly-arrived in the U.S. I told them I was originally from Texas and asked them what came to mind when they thought of Texans. Their responses included “They ride horses.” (I drive a Honda but have ridden in a Mustang.) They wear cowboy hats and boots.” (Not really a good look for me.) “They live in a hot place.” (True, but I can’t be held responsible for the weather.) “They are ignorant hicks.” (This observation from the one U.S. American in the group.) “They live on ranches.” (OK, one out of five was accurate for me.) I then asked them if any of them had been to Texas or had met a Texan. No hands went up. Obviously, their impressions were based upon the 80’s TV show “Dallas” and generations of Western movies.
(3) Limited personal experience. Ask yourself: On how many personal encounters or first-hand experiences am I basing my view of this particular group? How many members of this group have I interacted with and gotten to know on more than a surface level? Several years ago, one of my friends took his first trip to Rome and stayed for three days. This experience evidently equipped him with the expertise to make a number of authoritative statements about what “Italian people are like”. A research scientist who based his conclusions on a sample of 2 or 3 would be laughed out of the lab, yet many of us make pronouncements about a country or culture group based upon a very narrow sample of first-hand experience.
2. Practice making fewer universal statements and use more disclaimers.
Begin to view stereotypes as provisional and open to modification. Listen to your language about different others: If you find yourself describing groups with words such as “all” and “always”, or even “most”, stop and reflect. Stereotypes may be representative of many people in a given culture or group, but by no means everyone. After all, a particular Korean is like most Koreans in some ways, like some Koreans, and like no other Korean who has ever lived.
Over time, you may observe common characteristics and behaviors among members of a group, and it’s OK to use that as a tentative starting point, as long as you’re willing to allow for individual differences and abandon the stereotype when it doesn’t fit in a given situation. For instance, after numerous visits to Helsinki and dozens of interactions with people from Finland, I observe that Finns tend to be a fairly reserved lot, not given to being overly expressive and “out there” interpersonally. But then I met Ralf, who is boisterous, expressive, and humorous. And I know that there are other Ralfs in Finland – after all, I’ve met only a relative handful out of the millions of people in Finland, so I‘d better be very cautious about trying to describe “all Finns”. So, start mentally exchanging your stereotypes for generalizations which you acknowledge as “first best guesses” open to revision.
3. Continue the lifelong process of building up your personal database of information about different groups and cultures.
It is ignorance of cultures, geography, and history that fuels an unhealthy dependence of stereotypes. Sometimes we just don’t know no better! (This is how all Texans talk.) The more information we can access, the less we are prone to stereotype. That information comes from two sources:
(1) The published body of information on countries, cultures, and other social categories. There exists a vast reservoir of reliable data that will help you make informed generalizations about others. Understanding these various social dimensions help us make generalizations about how people may be/act, but we must constantly remind ourselves that individuals may or may not conform to the generalization. There are also rich learnings to be had by studying current events from a variety of sources, articles, some popular books, and many other written sources.
(2) First-hand experience with others. The more personal encounters you have with people from a different group, the more your stereotypes fade, indeed become unnecessary. You may have a provisional generalization at the ready, but you begin to more readily see each person first as a unique individual and second as a member of a certain group.
Start with an evaluation of your own Cross-Cultural Comfort Zone. How often do you create and take advantage of encounters with “different others”? For some, it is admittedly not an easy thing to do. But what if you decided to push fear and inertia aside and take more initiative to broaden your interactions with people who are not like you? It’s not like you have to go out of your way in today’s increasingly global world. Our workplaces, schools, and neighborhoods reflect a rich diversity of differences.
4. Don’t collude with others in perpetuating inaccurate and harmful stereotypes and prejudices.
There is no simple formula for practicing this. How do you do this without coming across as holier-than-thou or judgmental? This is not to say that you become overly uptight or that we can’t have a sense of humor. First of all, don’t be cowed by talk of political correctness, which is a false equivalence in regard to this topic. The path of least resistance is to just sit in silence. One helpful thing you can do is to regularly share our firsthand experiences that refute the stereotypes and prejudices and hope that it is contagious.
As we look around and see the increasing polarization and divisiveness around us, ask yourself, “What can I do to be a positive role model and a force for change?
Mrs. Mortimer