I irish-american and I am drunk as I am typing this. Real assimilation is when you do what you want and nobody says shit.
I was hoping no one would comment on this thread. Stupid Irish, always ruining my hopes.
On the topic of the post referenced here, there was a similar kind of situation in high school. At track practice one day, we were coming back at the end of a run, when Karen (superfast star runner) freaks out and starts sprinting back to the school. The reason being, she saw someone driving her car down the road, and assumed that it had just been stolen. While in the process of calling the police, the car pulls into the parking lot--turns out it was some annoying sophomore who decided he'd take her keys out of her bag and go for a joyride. While we're all yelling at the guy, Jacques (gigantic shotputter/sprinter) literally picks him up off the ground and slams him into a wall, fully looking like he's about to kill him, and yells "just because you're black don't mean you gotta act stupid", or something to that effect. Note, both Jacques and the punk kid are black.
It sticks out in my mind because I thought it strange that his first thought was "don't fall into a stereotype", essentially. I've never really thought this way, do other people?
Mark Kleiman wrote about this:
Given that I'm part of a group that has a group reputation, then, reputational externality gives me a substantive reason to care about the behavior (or at least the behavior visible to outsiders) of the other members of my group. Someone who behaves badly provides what is called, in Yiddish, a shanda fur die goyim: a scandal that non-members of the group can use against its members.The desire not to provide such a scandal can be a powerful motivator of good behavior. Moreover, someone who is part of a group whose members are sensitive to the reputational externality needs to worry that, if he behaves badly, he will suffer the cold shoulder from fellow group members. (I can hear my father's voice, grumbling about a crooked Baltimore Jewish politician of my childhood: "They ought to sew the bastard's foreskin back on!") By contrast, a group that fails to administer such informal sanctions to erring members in effect licenses them to behave badly, at some cost to the group as a whole.
If you're my grandma -- or, as becomes apparent later in the post Mark Kleiman -- you will attribute the unfavorable situation of African-Americans largely to the (alleged) absence of a shanda fur die goyim principle in that community.
Which is, as Matt F's anecdote shows, ridiculous.
I was disturbed by the original post. Is there any chance you would have described Sapp's behavior as like a gorilla if Sapp weren't black? Why not a more neutral description, like "Acting like a pro wrestler"?
I'm not sure I agree with part of the premise. Many entirely successful and cheerful white people revel in their being the most uptight people you can imagine. Perhaps this is an option available to you only if you're not a minority.
Is there any chance you would have described Sapp's behavior as like a gorilla if Sapp weren't black?
Of course not; that's the point, no?
I think Kleiman is right that this impulse not to be the stereotype serves an important function, but I don't think the function justifies the impulse. But neither do I think the impulse is a wrong or shameful one: in part it's a manifestation of caring for one's group, but it's also a way of trying to make an identity for oneself apart from the group.
(Slol, yeah, non-minorities don't count.)
Actually, check that on non-minorities: I think this is something most prominent among immigrants and those who are having issues about assimilation. There's not much of this in the black community precisely because the more important principle there is that they don't have to assimilate because this is just as much their country and culture as it is the white man's--thus "keeping it real" etc.
but it's also a way of trying to make an identity for oneself apart from the group
What?
No, it's not the point. It's not even clear to me that Sapp's behavior is living up to any black stereotype other than "black people sometimes behave in obnoxious ways," which is, you know, true of all people.
So the reason I don't think that way is because of my blissful existence here in honkistan?
I think this all somehow a plot to keep the White Man down.
not even clear to me that Sapp's behavior is living up to any black stereotype
What about the "black people are gorillas" stereotype? I'm serious.
Wow. I've actually thought about this a lot. Growing up as someone who appears Western in a non-western country, I found myself getting angry at people who acted in ways that I thought a) violated cultural norms and b) enforced a stereotype. There's this perception in the Middle East that western (particularly American) women are "loose," and it is at least in part because of this perception that American women are subject to way more harassment in those countries than are Arab woman. There was a huge debate at my (American) school in Cairo centered around the school's dress code, which sought to be somewhat respectful of cultural norms (e.g. no tank tops, short shorts, etc.) A lot of the Americans were pissed off because they thought that they should be able to wear whatever they want.
Anyway, I'm getting off the point. I would get annoyed at my friends when they behaved in a manner similar to how you would behave in the US: getting flagrantly drunk, making out with guys in public, wearing skimpy clothing, etc. That's obviously fine, here (up to a point). But I felt like that behavior negatively affected me because the perception that Western women are "loose" and that Westerners in general have little respect for cultural norms made my life more of a pain in the ass.
I can think of countless other examples of being abroad (not just in Egypt) and wishing that my friends would stop engaging in stereotypical American teenager behavior. Even though I, for all intents and purposes, was an American teenager too.
Put another way: If you can provide a way of describing Sapp's behavior that captures the stereotype without using racially loaded terminology (as "cheap" for Indians), then you may be getting at an important if touchy point. [Previewing: Gorillas don't act like that!] If not, then I don't think you are. (cf this, which maybe could even have been phrased in a racially neutral way).
Analogy: If a non-Jew were to say, "It's a particular shame that Jack Abramoff's greedy behavior perpetuates a Jewish stereotype," we can talk. If a non-Jew says, "As a Jew, should Abramoff be particularly careful not to act like a bloodsucking vampire," I get annoyed.
Much shorter: Watch your mouth, honky.
(I'm going to make this my last comment on the thread, unless there's a turn toward cock jokes. Understand that I'm not accusing you of racism, I just think that we should be very careful about calling black people gorillas even when it's supposed to provoke thought.)
What?
It's a way of saying "I'm not what you think I am; I'm not like those others." Which is also a way of trying to get people to see who you are.
Ogged's obversation was objectionable. Warren Sapp didn't look like a gorilla at all—he used to quite literally prance around, waving his arms in a lolligag manner. He looked like a dandy (hard as that is to imagine about someone who measures in at 300+ pounds).
But even if Sapp had been dancing about in a way that could accurately be described as monkeylike, I still think even Mark Kleiman would agree that he's not at fault for the perjorative metaphor used to describe his behavior. Anyone who exhibits remotely silly behavior runs the risk of being called a monkey—black people should not be held to a standard regarding silliness because historically white people denigrated everything they did as such.
Weiner:
1. Ogged allows for the possibility that he's a Tom; that suggests that he's possibly more critical on the basis of standard norms that Whitey.
2. I can distantly understand people who take umbrage at the constraints group membership imposes, but I have to confess that, in the main, I find them childish and petulant. Ogged, in his desperate effort to prove himself American and avoid deportation, proves himself deeply un-American. He is to be pitied and forgiven.
3. I think ogged's reaction is not uncommon. I have an African-American friend who gets very uncomfortable when she sees watermelons in the grocery store.
4. Probably worth noting that the default oggedian position appears to be that Indians are child molesters. So it's not like he hates just African-Americans.
Well Matt, also "blacks don't respect the game, or their opponents." "Blacks are all about showboating...." I wish there were a video clip of Sapp doing what he did; really, he looked like a gorilla.
this perception in the Middle East that western (particularly American) women are "loose,"
AFAIK, this perception exists everywhere in the world outside the West.
he's not at fault for the perjorative metaphor used to describe his behavior
Well, this was the question in the original post. How best to react to these stereotypes.
20: Probably, but does it result in Western-looking women getting sexually harrassed? Dunno, never been outside Europe, the Middle East, and North America.
I think we're disagreeing here partly because we're approaching the question in different ways. You honkies in principle-land are thinking that it's an unfair constraint on people's behavior to tell them that they ought not act in accord with stereotypes, and though I agree, and wouldn't tell someone he doesn't have the right to act as stereotypically Iranian as he wants, I would rather he didn't.
22: Yes, though the attraction of white skin in some places also runs pretty high.
Ogged, in 23 you seem to be trying to take this argument out of ethics, and I'm not sure you can. Isn't the actual question whether you (ogged) have reasons that you'd "rather he didn't" which he should find persuasive? And doesn't the should make it an ethical argument, out in principle-land?
western (particularly American) women are "loose,"
It's funny because it's true.
OK, I'm back in--I agree with 23, mostly--it is unfair that certain members of certain groups are vulnerable to certain stereotypes, but in this way life is unfair, and if you are an individual trying to govern your behavior you may still have to take the existence of those stereotypes into account. And other members of the stereotyped group may have a claim on their co-members to avoid perpetuating the stereotype, insofar as that perpetuation hurts them.
What I'm objecting to is certain ways of criticizing the behavior by evoking the stereotype itself, which I think also perpetuate the stereotype. (I've also seen Sapp, and think Armsmasher is right about the prancing.) Especially non-members of the group ought to be cautious.
What Weiner said. Someone in the group can help to quietly break down stereotypes through criticism; someone outside of the group is only perpetuating that stereotype (perhaps unintentionally, but it usually sounds like 'see, you're proof that our stereotype isn't wrong.')
Also, ogged is reading the screen through the eyeholes of his white hood.
Well, this was the question in the original post. How best to react to these stereotypes.
I'm making a distinction between a metaphor that acts as a stereotype and a straight-up stereotype. "Looks like a monkey" and (say) "is stingy" are different in kind. The former is a perjorative observation that does not especially relate to characteristic behavior by the group. That latter can be a slur, too, but it can also be true and self-admitted in the way the former cannot.
I've already conceded that point, smasher, but you know, feel free to kick me again.
[stagewhisper]
There's a stereotype about Indians and tipping?
[/stagewhisper]
There's a stereotype about Indians and tipping?
It's been nice, actually, to find that the stereotypes I think are just part of everyone's background knowledge (asian drivers, cheap indians, bullshitting iranians) are news to so many people.
All of those are news to me, ogged.
I must have grown up under a rock.
I didn't know about the bullshitting Iranians. Does this mean I'm not getting a 10% share of the $100,000 that Iranian guy is going to store in my bank account?
What about the chronic farting of the Scythians?
Ahem, not all Iranians are bullshitting, just the ones you might do business with.
And other members of the stereotyped group may have a claim on their co-members to avoid perpetuating the stereotype, insofar as that perpetuation hurts them.
While it doesn't appear to be intended as such, I'm taking this as a response to 25. Then I want to ask if isn't open to objections very similar to the cosmopolitan objections to the ethical relevance of nation-membership?
Dude, text, everyone knows about the chronic ogging of the Scythians.
I both want and do not want to open a thread where we list all the ethnic stereotypes we know about.
True Cala -- the ogging of the Scythians is almost as well known as the massive phalli of all men who grew up in northern virginia.
I dunno; I think it's pretty hard to control the perceptions of racists. I was at my Orthodox cousins' house for Sukkot one day a couple of years ago and they'd read somewhere about a Palestinian man who'd shot his family, then himself. (Or something, I don't recall.) The matriarch-cousin said something grossly offensive like, "These are the kind of people we're dealing with; they aren't even really human." (I don't remember exactly what.) There wasn't any political motivation for the act IIRC; it was just an act of interpersonal violence. But my cousin still managed to take it into her fold of Reasons to Hate Palestinians. Furthermore, the right thing to do is usually arrivable at through other arguments. Americans should not get publically drunk in Cairo because it's disprespectful to the culture and its norms. You shouldn't steal people's cars because you shouldn't steal people's cars. If this is a useful policing technique, and it gets people to do the right thing quicker, that's great. But it's not necessary for people who are capable of sound moral reasoning and motivated to act in accordance with their conclusions.
people who are capable of sound moral reasoning and motivated to act in accordance with their conclusions.
Oh man, would I love to work with some of them. Do you know any?
I both want and do not want to open a thread where we list all the ethnic stereotypes we know about.
Norwegians have square heads.
That's not the one I've heard about Iranians, either. I thought they were supposed to be materialistic and garishly ostentatious. (Not that there's anything wrong with that.)
Does it help if we move this over to totally unobjectionable stereotypical behavior, like Iranians (particularly in L.A.) driving expense black German cars? There's absolutely no reason for them not to, but I still roll my eyes when I see one, and wouldn't ever do it myself.
materialistic and garishly ostentatious
That too.
Somewhere at home I've got a book of something like 10,000 jokes. The book was published in the 60's, before PC became PC.
It has entire sections devoted to the stereotypes of the times - Scottish - stingy, Irish - drunk, English - snobs, French - promiscuous, German - cold precise engineers. Polacks, stupid. Gypsies - thieves, tramps and thieves, we'd hear it from the people . . .
Outside of Europe it had Chinese - cunning and sly. And African American stereotypes I think you know.
I don't recall that it had anything granular for the middle east - it was all nomady camel jockeys with multiple wives.
Oh, in the US it had Boston snobs and NY fast talkers and stupid southerners and hillbillies with a zillion kids.
I think I've covered most everyone, whew.
Or about the Basques' gross habit of public onanism?
Ok, I think I am going to do the ethnic stereotype thread, unless someone stops me in the next couple of minutes.
43: It was so intended, but I don't see how the objections work here. Do you mean that those objections show that everyone is in a position to object/criticize? I think that's potentially true, though what Cala said in 29--only meant to argue for the weaker claim that some people are in a position to object. And I do think it's important to distinguish those harmed from those not harmed.
I'm for it. But I will turn on you if it goes badly.
Call me prudish, but I'd sort of rather you didn't.
I say go for it. What could possibly go wrong?
I knew *you two* would be against it. Anyone with street cred opposed?
I don't think anyone is meaningfully harmed by Iranians driving expensive German cars, except for the small children in their way.
(It might be that simply typing the list will provide me the relief I seek.)
Is this relief like "happy ending" or relief like "I lanced my boil?" I mean, either one could entertain me, I'm just trying to prepare myself.
I'd include a statement of intent to govern the comments. You really, really don't want a thread on stereotypes to fill up with only things about, for example, African-Americans. The idea is funny, but mostly because most minorities (or at least members of that group likely to read here) don't have to worry too much about the effects of such stereotypes. I'm not sure that's true for every group.
(I'm trying to start a new bad driver stereotype)
I am, however, in favor of a thread regarding the stereotypes surrounding Ogged's mother.
Lady #1: I don't care what anyone thinks!
Lady #2: Yeah!
Lady #1: I like watermelon!
Lady #2: I hear ya! We can eat whatever we want!
--Central Park
http://www.overheardinnewyork.com/archives/002347.html
(I know what ATM means, but I still don't know how to make links.)
There's no real turning back now -- that would be just like an Alsacian. And you aren't from Alsace, you tease.
The problem now is that it's going to take so long. I have Google Earth open, and am just going from country to country...
<a href="http://www.overheardinnewyork.com/archives/002347.html">linked text</a>
I was thinking along SCMT's lines. Perhaps we can restrict the thread to ethnic sterotypes for ethnicities that don't currently face huge amounts of racial prejudice in the U.S.? (I'm thinking blacks, latinos, and American Indians, here).
One caveat: members of these minorities can comment on their own ethnicities, especially if they want to do so about some subgroup within their larger group (I'm thinking it would be funny if a Lakota wanted to slag on Dakotas, or a Mayan wanted to slag on a Mestizos).
Yeah, I was thinking of excluding American stereotypes altogether.
text--Are you from Alsace? That's where my Dad's family hails frpm, though they wound up in Buffalo before the 1830's. (No Ellis Island ancestors.)
I wouldn't mind seeing Jewish stereotypes excluded also.
I'm torn between agreeing with Chopper, and favoring some sort of restraint, and anticipating ogged's destruction in the fires of his own creation, which I would enjoy watching, I think.
I'm from Lorraine, mortal enemies of the Alsacians.
Ooh. text's comment is intriguing, actually.
I've heard that Lorrainians are men who last forever in bed...with a moustache.
you aren't intrigued by my hot, Lorraine-ish blood?
the massive phalli of all men who grew up in northern virginia.
go us.
I wouldn't mind seeing Jewish stereotypes excluded also.
I don't see how Jews are currently faced with huge amounts of racial prejudice in the U.S., what with secretly running the government and the banks, and drinking the blood of Christian babies--I mean seriously, if you were oppressed, somebody would put a stop to that, right?
Well, you could try to strip me of my prejudices by manning by trench, I suppose.
You are confused, Tia. It's that the Lorrainii groom their phallic hairs into a sort-of handle-bar moustache, which is remarkably easy, and requires only a smidgen of wax. The lasting long in bed part is true.
Ok, not going to do it. I mean, it's looking like it's going to be around 100 items, and my soul will be crushed in typing them.
84 to 82, sorry. Though I appreciate the invitation.
manning my trench. I had a nose cold in my last comment.
ogged is an Alsacian after all. May you drown in your rose colored wine, and choke on your sauerkraut.
"pointy-headed people never follow through on their commitments"
Not that I won't probably participate if it happens (I have an ethnic joke about Brazilians and Mexicans told to me by a Uruguayan friend that is tailormade for such a thread), but this can only lead to sorrow. Someone's going to get offended.
Ah, text makes me totally redundant.
hhhmph. My green fields of France are going to remain unploughed. They've already been polluted by the hot blood of thousands of Lorrainites anyway.
a) 43: More that being born a member of a particular stereotyped group shouldn't create special intra-group obligations to only other members of that group, though typing it out I'm not so sure I even buy that.
b) I had just finished writing exactly what Weiner wrote in 72, except that I wrote "link" instead of "linked text." Since I'm too slow for that advice to be valuable, let me also add that if you're too insecure to admit that you don't know things by asking questions (something I might have experience with) about how to do particular bits of html, clicking view, page source (or just "source" in explorer), and then searching for the bits of text which have the particular html formatting you're trying to copy is a good way to go.
Thousands?
There's a slash story I'd like to see.
Ogged, do you hurt inside when journalists deride technocratic policy wonks as "pointy-headed"? Is such a stereotype insensitive?
Did you know that Eastern European men have thick penises?
No, I revel in my square-headed glory. Makes it easier to get through doorways. I just figured there had to be something horribly offensive already said here, though what that might be I canna say.
The Unfogged commenters search far and wide for evidence of the stereotype enumerated in 104, but finding none, conclude Ogged could only have learned from experience.
99a: Well, the thing is that only other members of your group can be harmed by your behaving in a stereotypical way. If I undertip, that may reinforce the stereotype "Jews are cheap," not "Indians are cheap" (I hadn't heard that one either). So that's why the obligation is only to other members of my group.
Italian men are terrible cricketers.
"Indians are cheap" (I hadn't heard that one either)
This is amazing. I thought that was one of the most well-established stereotypes. Fun to think that we're all to some extent living in different worlds.
Cala and I are from the same area, FWIW.
I wonder if the "Indians are cheap" stereotype underlies the policy at Gaylord's (Indian restaurant on Dearborn in Chicago) of including a 15% gratuity no matter how small the party is.
"Indians are cheap" (I hadn't heard that one either)
Huh. Maybe there just weren't enough Indians around these parts, but the only stereotypes I remember about them from growing up were 1) arranged marriages, 2) worshipping cows, and 3) running all the local hotels.
So, do my wino ways confirm the Irish stereotype or defy it by broadening the scope of our wanton drunkenness beyond whiskey and Guinness? I love potatoes, too.
Thanks, MW and WD. Prepare for the coming storm of links. Except I actually have to work today. What kind of nightmare world is this?
"Jews are cheap," not "Indians are cheap"
Indians are the New Jews!
That's not an Alsatian -- an Alsatian is a German Shepherd. It is, however, a pretty good facsimile of DogBreath (who is an Australian Shepherd / Border Collie Cross).
And a few posts down, I waxed baa-ish about the war in Iraq, and got no comments at all
And a few posts up, Bob makes a prophesy:
"Now, I do sort of believe that there are responsibilities that arise from historical legacies. For instance, I would be doubly angry at a Japanese-American politician advocating internment of Muslims as a homeland-security measure."
Leave it to LizardBreath to start enforcing racial purity, and publically calling out dogs who aren't real Germans.
That dog seems plainly German, with a moustache.
I don't think he was either posting or commenting regularly when I first started reading Unfogged, but I still miss Bob.
The early google links for "with a mustache" (quotes in actual search) appears to primarily be gay porn. Can we give the phrase the same treatment as AOTW?
Was it here on unfogged that had that big list of URLs that could be parsed in incredibly funny ways by breaking up the words differently?
Never heard about Indian tippers, but in BR servers at nice restaurants (heard through many an anecdote) don't like serving blacks because many of them barely tip. Servers are supposed to serve everyone equally nonetheless, but in small ways I'm sure it affects the quality of service of most black people in restaurants, unless they are regulars and good-tippers.
My sister who, like me, is white would probably confound one of those tests. Her basic attitude is that black people are warm, nice people with interesting cultural backgrounds. White people, on the whole, are uptight and boring. It's pretty much "oooh, black people." I tease her that she's a reverse racist, but she concedes that it might be true.*
*No moustaches were involved in the production of this comment.
Re 123 and 127. I just took the demonstration test, and I'm not sure that I buy the reesults. It said that I had a moderate preference for black people.
I did make a couple of mistakes, because I have a hard time sorting some things into good/bad categories. I accidentally put failure in the good category, because so many of the truly good people I know are failures by objective societal standards, and I've known a few jerks who were humanized by the experience of failure.
The stereotype of Indians in my medical-school bookstore was, "Fusses forever over small purchases or none". Not an affectionate stereotype. I have seen instances of its being true.
Brian Weatherson says the Implicit test made him out a Yankees fan, which is not the case. He criticizes its methodology.
Re 126, 128. It's actually expected that some people will have different results, depending on what sort of things they've observed in the past--what sort of media they've consumed, what sort of culture they've participated in. Were you really not expecting to have a preference for blacks? (Actually, dark-skinned people, as the tests calls them...)
There's a long paper about all this here.
Well, in practice I don't think that I do--not in real life.
Re 129. Most or all stereotypes (except perhaps for ones born of pure xenophobia and applied by racists to any group indiscriminately) have some basis in reality. At some point in history the behavior of some ethnic group statistically exhibited more of this or that behavior. The problem with the stereotypes is that a statistically significant difference doesn't have to even come close to being a majority, and probably never does in the case of stereotypical traits, so applying it to the group as a whole more than is warranted by the actual percentage of people in that group with the trait is prejudice.
Re 130. The Kang paper I linked above goes into detail about the methodology and some of the confirmatory studies done. But the applicability is still very sketchy, I agree.
Re 132. Even if you don't prefer dark skin in real life (which is to say, you're not prejudiced), what I'm wondering is this: are the results you got are really counterintuitive? When you put up two images in your mind, of some generic black person, and some generic white person, which one do you have a better gut feeling about?
I tried that little thought experiment myself before I took the ageism test. Both my reflections and the test confirmed that I have a strong bias towards youth. :-( But, as BG and most people, I would think that the bias would be supressed in real life. One of the good things about the test, perhaps, is knowing that you have the bias and being able to actively compensate with that knowledge.
re:122 But the acronym would be WAM, which might not dissassociate it from gay porn.
re:118. I failed to consider the possibility that LB in fact has Ogged collared and chained in her yard, and has been masterminding the blog for months.
No pdf23ds, I probably am prejudiced, but I'm guessing that I prefer white people in real life. I know that I prefer most Europeans to most Americans. Barring other class-based signals, I will prefer the English person nearly every time. I'm not particularly proud of this, but I think it's the truth.
Re: 185.
Them's fighting words. What makes you think I have a yard?
I wasn't objecting to the association with gay porn. I was stating my preference that the usage we've now settled on 'lo these past couple of days be higher in the google ranking
BG, maybe you prefer adorable soot-faced chimney sweeps, and that's why the test said you liked darker skin.
Also, as a matter of pure prejudice, I may be attracted to black people, but I find the Brazilian immigrants near me really off-putting. (Loud, tired old skin, bad blonde hair dye jobs.)
And I feel very differently about different sub-groups of African Americans, people from different Caribbean countries and the more recent African descendants I know.
So basically, I think that I'm very prejudiced about a lot of different things, but that this test doesn't gauge my prejudices very well.
Because I thought that you'd ultimately too compassionate to chain him to the radiator pipe, now that autumn's upon us. Apparently I was wrong. Clever misdirection, there pointing me to a comment that didn't exist. Though we'd forget all about poor ogged.
This site discusses a new paper that indicates many believed differences in national character appear to be unfounded stereotypes. Americans believe americans are aggressive; Canadians believe canadians are unaggressive; but in reality they are both about the same level of aggresiveness. This probably just shows that such high-level personality traits are not as susceptible to cultural control as people think.
Hmm. When people think about "cultural traits", they tend to think about the sort of traits they'd have when their nationalistic chords are being stroked as opposed to their individualism. So, an actual behavioral analysis wouldn't catch it, because most people aren't in a nationalistic frame of mind most of the time, unless they're in some foreign country as a representative of America (e.g. a soldier or diplomat). So, the stereotypes aren't so much stereotypes as they are part of the group identity and identification (if I can make that disctinction), i.e. an a role to be played rather than a characteristic. Of course, stereotypes can take on this feature sometimes, as the study about the effects of stereotype activation on mathematical test scores of female Asians mentioned in the Kang paper shows, but the only requirement there is that they be internalized by the affected person, not that they be true.
So, I think I agree with the paper, but in your comment, Joe, I think "cultural control" misses the point. Having some characteristic as a part of your group identity doesn't mean you necessarily have more of that characteristic if your actual participation in group activities is low. But when your group membership thought patterns are activated, so will that characteristic.
he had tried using at the cafe the night before The Pawnbroker started betting guide handicapping though he was a good hundred pounds overweight he was eating a Babe .
