Profiling a nice word for Stereotyping

[steppinthrax]

Essentially I?ve noticed something quite disturbing in today?s society especially after the fact of 9/11. I hearing on TV that many people actually are condoning the use of profiling in today?s airports as a use of terrorism prevention. The groups of people they are obviously profiling are those of Arabic descent.

I have come up with the following logic and I was just curious on any thoughts anybody had on this.

If we take for example that we have a society of people. In this society there are many different groups of people. However, in this society there are two groups that we wish to concentrate on: Group A and Group B. People whom are from Group A are said to have membership to Group A while people who are from Group B are said to have membership to Group B. Group A people interact with Group B people and vice versa. You can distinguish Group A people from Group B and vice versa.

Lets say for example every once and a while one person from Group B whistles. In this society that is classified as an undesirable event. People from Group A corrects the actions for the person whom is a member of Group B. However, this happens every once and a while and there is no way of knowing which person from Group B actually does this undesirable event. Therefore the Group A people comes up with an idea to investigate anyone whom is a member of Group B. This is due to the fact that throughout history people from Group B does an undesirable event.

Let me go over the definition for Stereotyping

Stereotypes are ideas held by some individuals about members of particular groups, based solely on membership in that group. They are often used in a negative or prejudicial sense and are frequently used to justify certain discriminatory behaviors. More benignly, they may express sometimes-accurate folk wisdom about social reality.

This was taken from Wiki.

By this definition when we are profiling we are actually stereotyping this group. We have some idea or belief of this person whom is a membership of that group. We act upon that idea by the means of investigation to satisfy the belief that this person may be a threat. At the same time it seems we violate that person?s rights, liberties and due process.

 

[steppinthrax]

Furthermore I forgot to add if we use this negative method for this Group B we must show fairity for all respective groups based on ideas he have about that. Group C, D, E, Etc. In our society since we do this to the peoples of arabic desent we must do this to Chinese, Blacks, Jews, Iranian etc....

 

[jrenz]

With all due respect, that's a terrible argument.

The vast majority of terrorist attacks today are from those of Muslim decent, or those practicing Islam. Why should we divert resources to investigate little old Mary Sue and let Jihad Joe walk onto a plane because it's politically incorrect?

 

[GoPackGo]

When the shoe fits.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
When the shoe-bomber fits.

Fixed.

 

[glugglug]

It's the same as "looting" vs. "finding" during Katrina. If uncle same endorses it it's "profiling". Otherwise it's "stereotyping".

 

[Jaskalas]

Security shouldn?t be focused on one single source of a possible threat ? any unforeseen threat needs to be dealt with. Yet things need to be looked at subjectively and prioritized. 80 year old grannies and 3 year olds shouldn?t be screened excessively if it means Mohammed sneaks his weapon past security.

Thankfully though this war has not yet begun in earnest so we don?t have many occasions where our security is being tested. I for one, do not believe it?ll come from hijacked planes next time when we have absolutely no control or idea what weapons cross our border.

 

[DaveSimmons]

More benignly, they may express sometimes-accurate folk wisdom about social reality.

If the chance of a person being a hijacker is:
- 80-year-old granny 1:25,000,000
- young Arab male 1:1,000,000

Then it is perfectly logical to profile and place 25 times as much scrutiny on the Arab male. It just isn't politcally correct.

Profiling works, or the auto insurance companies wouldn't stay in business.

 

[glugglug]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Profiling works, or the auto insurance companies wouldn't stay in business.

If auto insurance prices were based on actual statistics, and not politics, insurance for males would not be higher than females.

 

[glutenberg]

What would be the politics in making car insurance higher for men than women?

 

[blackangst1]

The fact of the matter is generally, generalities are true. Stereotypes are almost often accurate whether we like to admit it or not. Yes there are exceptions, but unfortunately the exceptions make the rule true.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: glugglug

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Profiling works, or the auto insurance companies wouldn't stay in business.

If auto insurance prices were based on actual statistics, and not politics, insurance for males would not be higher than females.

Proof?

The auto companies must provide such statistics to the regulators to justify their rates.

 

[zephyrprime]

In some sense, couldn't all facts be called stereotypes? Couldn't I say that the fact that "apples are red" is a stereotype since not all apples are red?

My point is, stereotype and profiling are often an accurate reflection of reality. In the case of terrorist searching, I would say that profiling is a more accurate reflection of the terrorist threat than pure random searching would be. I don't think that stereotyping and profiling are always bad.

 

[GoPackGo]

Its sort of like after 9/11, as to not appear to be "profiling", they were searching 90 year old ladies at the gate.

That whole exercise was a joke.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: jrenz
With all due respect, that's a terrible argument.

The vast majority of terrorist attacks today are from those of Muslim decent, or those practicing Islam. Why should we divert resources to investigate little old Mary Sue and let Jihad Joe walk onto a plane because it's politically incorrect?

You don't make any sense. You didn't fully understand my argument. The point was the fact that Profiling is similar to Stereotyping and it's pointless to do such an act. When I made the Group A's and Group B's they were a generalization of any ethnicity, race , religion etc. When people feel to profile they use anything as a characteristic they want to profile a person. They have beliefs about that particular ethnicity, religion etc...
And they apply this. In this case it's a mean of security (investigation). The statement that you make is a further advacement as the kind of thinking people have in this country.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

More benignly, they may express sometimes-accurate folk wisdom about social reality.

If the chance of a person being a hijacker is:
- 80-year-old granny 1:25,000,000
- young Arab male 1:1,000,000

Then it is perfectly logical to profile and place 25 times as much scrutiny on the Arab male. It just isn't politcally correct.

Profiling works, or the auto insurance companies wouldn't stay in business.

OK,

Think about this here. If we really really really wanted to base statistics on auto insurance we would have blacks pay one rate while whites would pay another. We would have jews pay one rate while arabics pay another. If that were to happen there would be outrage.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: zephyrprime
In some sense, couldn't all facts be called stereotypes? Couldn't I say that the fact that "apples are red" is a stereotype since not all apples are red?

My point is, stereotype and profiling are often an accurate reflection of reality. In the case of terrorist searching, I would say that profiling is a more accurate reflection of the terrorist threat than pure random searching would be. I don't think that stereotyping and profiling are always bad.

OK think about this here. The terrorist that you are ovbiouslly saying from your words are mainly arabic. Which in this case is true. Let me drop you a name here Timothy McVeigh. I guess we never talk about him.

 

[jrenz]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: zephyrprime
In some sense, couldn't all facts be called stereotypes? Couldn't I say that the fact that "apples are red" is a stereotype since not all apples are red?

My point is, stereotype and profiling are often an accurate reflection of reality. In the case of terrorist searching, I would say that profiling is a more accurate reflection of the terrorist threat than pure random searching would be. I don't think that stereotyping and profiling are always bad.

OK think about this here. The terrorist that you are ovbiouslly saying from your words are mainly arabic. Which in this case is true. Let me drop you a name here Timothy McVeigh. I guess we never talk about him.

How many Timothy McVeigh's are there? How many muslim terrorists are there worldwide? How many terrorist acts has Timothy McVeigh carried out? How many terrorist acts have muslims carried out worldwide in the last 15 years?

You're coming up with 1 name as compared to an overwhelming majority. In today's society, we are much more likely to be attacked by those of islamic influence than by a hillbilly from the backwoods. Common sense > political correctness.

 

[WiseOldDude]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
Essentially I?ve noticed something quite disturbing in today?s society especially after the fact of 9/11. I hearing on TV that many people actually are condoning the use of profiling in today?s airports as a use of terrorism prevention. The groups of people they are obviously profiling are those of Arabic descent.

Well DoH! the body cavity search of little old ladies so that they won't be accused of "profiling" is the ultimate in stupidity. But what else can we expect from our government?

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: zephyrprime
In some sense, couldn't all facts be called stereotypes? Couldn't I say that the fact that "apples are red" is a stereotype since not all apples are red?

My point is, stereotype and profiling are often an accurate reflection of reality. In the case of terrorist searching, I would say that profiling is a more accurate reflection of the terrorist threat than pure random searching would be. I don't think that stereotyping and profiling are always bad.

OK think about this here. The terrorist that you are ovbiouslly saying from your words are mainly arabic. Which in this case is true. Let me drop you a name here Timothy McVeigh. I guess we never talk about him.

Not a very good argument. If you can't see why, me explaining to you will not help you much.:roll:

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: jrenz

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: zephyrprime
In some sense, couldn't all facts be called stereotypes? Couldn't I say that the fact that "apples are red" is a stereotype since not all apples are red?

My point is, stereotype and profiling are often an accurate reflection of reality. In the case of terrorist searching, I would say that profiling is a more accurate reflection of the terrorist threat than pure random searching would be. I don't think that stereotyping and profiling are always bad.

OK think about this here. The terrorist that you are ovbiouslly saying from your words are mainly arabic. Which in this case is true. Let me drop you a name here Timothy McVeigh. I guess we never talk about him.

How many Timothy McVeigh's are there? How many muslim terrorists are there worldwide? How many terrorist acts has Timothy McVeigh carried out? How many terrorist acts have muslims carried out worldwide in the last 15 years?

You're coming up with 1 name as compared to an overwhelming majority. In today's society, we are much more likely to be attacked by those of islamic influence than by a hillbilly from the backwoods. Common sense > political correctness.

Ok i see what your saying. If this is the case we need to be equal to everybody. Lets generate some sterotypes we already know about blacks, chinese, koreans etc... and use those in everyday law enforcement. Someone said that sterotypes are generally true so if they are I guess there are several sterotypes for blacks. Lets apply them in education, crime, employment everywhere.

 

[CPA]

There is no problem with each in my opinion.

Profiling is highly used by police departments in all crime work.

 

[bobdelt]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: jrenz

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: zephyrprime
In some sense, couldn't all facts be called stereotypes? Couldn't I say that the fact that "apples are red" is a stereotype since not all apples are red?

My point is, stereotype and profiling are often an accurate reflection of reality. In the case of terrorist searching, I would say that profiling is a more accurate reflection of the terrorist threat than pure random searching would be. I don't think that stereotyping and profiling are always bad.

OK think about this here. The terrorist that you are ovbiouslly saying from your words are mainly arabic. Which in this case is true. Let me drop you a name here Timothy McVeigh. I guess we never talk about him.

How many Timothy McVeigh's are there? How many muslim terrorists are there worldwide? How many terrorist acts has Timothy McVeigh carried out? How many terrorist acts have muslims carried out worldwide in the last 15 years?

You're coming up with 1 name as compared to an overwhelming majority. In today's society, we are much more likely to be attacked by those of islamic influence than by a hillbilly from the backwoods. Common sense > political correctness.

Ok i see what your saying. If this is the case we need to be equal to everybody. Lets generate some sterotypes we already know about blacks, chinese, koreans etc... and use those in everyday law enforcement. Someone said that sterotypes are generally true so if they are I guess there are several sterotypes for blacks. Lets apply them in education, crime, employment everywhere.

They already do.


If I walked into a clothing store wearing a suit, and you walked into a clother store wearing sweat pants, who do you think will be offered help first? That's profiling based on what we wear isnt it? The same thing happens if youre wearing a fubu or football jersey and chains (white or black). People wearing suits are less likely to steal from best buy then stupid teenages wearing raiders jerseys, and the personell at best buy will pay more attention to them to.

Employment? Of course it does. First impressions are the most important right? Because they are basically profiling you on what you look like, what you wear, how you sound, etc.

 

[Craig234]

We should be cognizant that we have tendencies to dehumanize people who are different in other ways, like Muslims, and it becomes irrational and can cycle into a fear.

The 'they are different' issue can esily become a 'how can we trust them not to commit terrorism' type of paranoia, and as we begin to treat them worse because of this, it actually causes tension which creates enemies where there were none.

It's easy to get caught up in the hysteria and fail to notice how this approach is causing the problems, and the need to try to overcome the natural tendencies to treat people who are different badly.

Regarding the Timothy McVeigh example - he was part of a conspiracy, and there have been many little-publicized arrests of similar right-wingers with big weapon and explosive stashes.

These same types are the ones who killed liberal radio talk show host Alan Berg in the 80's.

But since people don't see the members of those groups as 'different' in other ways, they're slower to leap to grand generaliations, which would be uncomfortably close.

So, the right-wingers are treated as 'bad apples' without much over-generalization about things like being 'Christian', while others more different are easily generalized about.

This is why it was relatively easy to rund up the 'japs' in WWII; funny how German-Americans were not similarly treated; they were a little too much like 'us'.

 

[Fern]

Stereotyping =! Profiling. Your analysis is excessively simplistic.

Profiling is much more analytical/complicated than your explanantion of it. Profiling would not/does not mean assuming ALL Arab Muslims are potential terrorists. There are many other factors which are looked for. Profiling is also flexible. If terrorists realized utilizing Muslims of asian (non-Arabic) decent would decrease the risk of detection, they would likely attempt to use that tactic, and profiling methods would change to recognize it as well.

As noted above, the FBI etc uses profiling rather effectively in such things as searches for serial killers etc. The profile general says "white male". As a white male I reject your assertion that such profiling is merely the same as stereotyping me as a serial killer. I.e, I am not offended nor feel "stereotyped".

Profiling can be/is an effective tool and should be employed IMHO.

Fern