No Orders at the Window: Unsolicited Life Stories

HAMBURGER WISHES AND FRENCH FRY DREAMS! Lifestyles of the Whole Beef Patty!
I appreciate it! Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License


I may Have Answers to Questions   Submit


Reblogged from deliciouskaek

i gotta add an asterisk to that post about generalizations

so-treu:

deliciouskaek:

sonic-hip-attack:

deliciouskaek:

because generally speaking (oops. i. did it again.) generalizations are a good thing.

but i already know

i knooooooow

some fool is gonna take it and say “well then you can’t get mad when i do it!”

except no, actually, and here’s where it gets tricky, so pay attention:

when a generalization is based on a racial/sex- or gender-based/ethnic/what-have-you stereotype, and that generalization is used by a member of an set of people with privilege against an oppressed set of people, it is not only fucked up, it is actually harmful. actual harm can come to an oppressed set of people when this happens.

people get killed based on generalizations and stereotypes in far more numbers in a set of oppressed people than in a set of privileged people. i’d go so far as to say more than 250%

i’m probably off, but i rounded down.

All I think you need to point out is the difference between stereotyping and generalizing.  Generalizing is blending together a bunch of data points to estimate or approximate the population they came from. There is literally nothing wrong with doing this, as long as you’re always clear that some points may fall outside the generalization or your knowledge base.  Generalizing is really just the process, and you can have “good” and “poor” generalizations. 

Stereotyping is an example of poor generalizing.  In this, you take a bunch of data points, trim them down to the bare “essentials” so that you’re only left with a few data points (and refusing to ever revisit your findings or include new data after you’ve done so), and then make broad claims and take (likely hurtful) actions against the entire population based on spurious findings.

It’s such a red herring to demand that someone argue from a place of complete individual knowledge of every single person within a population before they can be taken seriously.

Using my statistics knowledge for good, yeah! :D

tossing this up here for even more clarification

the bolded the bolded

(Source: deliciouskaek)

Notes

  1. thatmuchlove reblogged this from deliciouskaek
  2. attackofopportunity reblogged this from deliciouskaek
  3. missdorotheabrooke reblogged this from deliciouskaek and added:
    oh hey how did all these words about empiricism and judgment and bias and everything that are essential components of my...
  4. thebigblackwolfe reblogged this from deliciouskaek
  5. zenodotus5 reblogged this from deliciouskaek
  6. deliciouskaek reblogged this from deliciouskaek and added:
    and so does this.
  7. coorio reblogged this from deliciouskaek and added:
    Just bolded some parts that I think always get left in the dust when this passes through more’n more folk.
  8. genderqueer-dragon reblogged this from genderbitch
  9. wallflowercries reblogged this from exceedinglytrans
  10. exceedinglytrans reblogged this from genderbitch
  11. telegantmess reblogged this from genderbitch
  12. contradictme reblogged this from karnythia
  13. algandarsmanor reblogged this from hamburgerjack
  14. thesmallandmeek reblogged this from misandryspice
  15. misandryspice reblogged this from so-treu
  16. the-city-mouse reblogged this from paradife-loft and added:
    Wait yes this is a really good explanation.
  17. holyfuckmeinthemouth reblogged this from genderbitch
  18. glossophiliqueer reblogged this from so-treu
  19. paradife-loft reblogged this from hamburgerjack
  20. goddess-of-somethingorother reblogged this from karnythia
  21. hollowpikeman reblogged this from genderbitch
  22. princessneeshydoomcuddles reblogged this from hamburgerjack