|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2010 6:33 pm
Aneyana   Just looking for clarification on the use of the statement in the title:
was it meant to imply:
-not being able to tell the difference between Asians from different countries/areas
or
-not being able to tell individuals apart
I feel like each implication could lead to very different discussions.
But the body text in the OP does make sense. If you have less exposure to some sort of group you'll have a harder time identifying variation with said group.
Like for example: random person looking at a rock/mineral collection may be like "oh look, a bunch of rocks", while someone who spends time looking at rocks will be able to identify the differences and won't think of them as simply rocks.
Also, in the case of humans I feel people are more likely to notice the big differences that set themselves apart from another person as opposed to noticing the smaller differences that set that individual from another individual. The title was an attention-getter for a discussion. I used "asians" because that's the race I, personally, hear being used within those statements. I'm sure that on the other side of the world, there's someone in China saying the exact same thing about Caucasians. o3o I would sincerely hope nobody would think I meant it as a "I think all asians look the same and here's my excuse" thing. D: I'll edit the title. To be honest, I can't even really tell Caucasians (my race) apart, either, and I grew up in a place that was 99% white. I'm horrible with names and with faces - of anyone. I'm kind of like Lambo - a person's hair color (and the way they style their hair) is really the only feature I notice. Which doesn't help when almost everyone has brown, blonde, or black hair. o3o It can be annoying, too. People seem to pick up my name right away, but it takes me a lot of interaction with someone to recognize them and recall they're name. People will say hi to me and I'll have no idea where I know them from or what their name is. D:
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2010 6:43 pm
CleoSombra Aneyana Just looking for clarification on the use of the statement in the title:
was it meant to imply:
-not being able to tell the difference between Asians from different countries/areas
or
-not being able to tell individuals apart
I feel like each implication could lead to very different discussions.
But the body text in the OP does make sense. If you have less exposure to some sort of group you'll have a harder time identifying variation with said group.
Like for example: random person looking at a rock/mineral collection may be like "oh look, a bunch of rocks", while someone who spends time looking at rocks will be able to identify the differences and won't think of them as simply rocks.
Also, in the case of humans I feel people are more likely to notice the big differences that set themselves apart from another person as opposed to noticing the smaller differences that set that individual from another individual. The title was an attention-getter for a discussion. I used "asians" because that's the race I, personally, hear being used within those statements. I'm sure that on the other side of the world, there's someone in China saying the exact same thing about Caucasians. o3o I would sincerely hope nobody would think I meant it as a "I think all asians look the same and here's my excuse" thing. D: I'll edit the title.
I didn't think that's what you meant.
There were just two ways in which the phrase could be meant (like when people actually say it) and I was wondering which version you meant for the sake of the discussion. Basically "all these groups look alike" vs. "all the individuals withing this large umbrella group look alike"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2010 6:47 pm
Oh, is this like an "I can't tell the difference between two faces" thing? Because oh my god, I thought I was the only one. Unless there's some really distinctive feature like a wart or a prominent scar, literally every face looks exactly the same to me. I never understand when people talk about "facial structure" and "nose shape" and "jaw line" or whatever, and if you show me two people I will honestly have no idea whether or not they're related. If two people have hair with the same basic color palette (dark, yellowish, orangeish) and the same basic length (short vs. long), I'll confuse one for the other regardless of how "different" anyone else would say they look; for me, hair is my "tertiary characteristic", so to speak, because I have nothing else to rely on, but even hair looks very much alike. Show me a light-blonde with hair to the shoulders and a dirty-blonde with hair to the ears, I'll never tell 'em apart.
And it gets really embarrassing.
I honestly wish people would wear the exact same clothes every day, like in cartoons...that's the only way I'd be able to keep everyone straight. gonk It's also a part of why I watch so many cartoons, and can never understand what's going on in live-action TV and movies...I can't tell one character from another. (The other major factor is because I can't ever understand what people are saying, so when I'm stuck watching in a group and nobody else wants captions on, I'm ******** pretty pissed off at them for ruining my fun with their annoying and seemingly pointless hatred of a device I rely on. That applies to cartoons too though.)
Of course, I've probably completely misinterpreted the point of the thread and now I look crazy, but...god, I'm so confused. crying Faces are just blurs to me, it's like...there's no easy difference between people. And I want there to be.
[/rant]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2010 7:50 pm
CleoSombra Warrax1 Oh, I've heard this statement before. I suppose the theory Cleo has given does make sense. However, there is a lack of effort on the part of those who make such a claim, as all things are easily distinguishable if you try. To clarify, the concept of a fusiform face area is not a theory, nor is the fact that people can best distinguish between people of the race they see the most of, even if it's not their own race. If you've seen 10 caucasian people in your life, you've seen a limited amount of variability in faces. You don't know which features can have more variation (size and shape of noses, position of eyes, etc). You don't see where detail comes into place. That's different if you've seen 1,000 different caucasian faces. You've seen a ton of variety. You've seen the different nuances and you know what to look for (automatically/unconsciously). The more we look at something, the more we can distinguish their features. Several people in this thread have stated that sometimes they can't tell people of various races apart. Does that make them lazy or racist? No, of course not. I don't think ignorance is absolution. Saying that it isn't necessarily racist to make racial generalizations just because the person making the generalizations doesn't know any better doesn't change what it is. Many children whose fathers have beards develop the conclusion that all fathers have beards. As they grow up and gain experience and knowledge they figure out that facial hair isn't necessary for procreation. A multitude of elasticities are visible in the media of every 1st and 2nd world nations and are all over the internet. Unless someone has the relatively rare processing deficit that inhibits facial recognition (like Chuck Close) there really isn't much of an excuse
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2010 8:14 pm
kittycross CleoSombra Warrax1 Oh, I've heard this statement before. I suppose the theory Cleo has given does make sense. However, there is a lack of effort on the part of those who make such a claim, as all things are easily distinguishable if you try. To clarify, the concept of a fusiform face area is not a theory, nor is the fact that people can best distinguish between people of the race they see the most of, even if it's not their own race. If you've seen 10 caucasian people in your life, you've seen a limited amount of variability in faces. You don't know which features can have more variation (size and shape of noses, position of eyes, etc). You don't see where detail comes into place. That's different if you've seen 1,000 different caucasian faces. You've seen a ton of variety. You've seen the different nuances and you know what to look for (automatically/unconsciously). The more we look at something, the more we can distinguish their features. Several people in this thread have stated that sometimes they can't tell people of various races apart. Does that make them lazy or racist? No, of course not. I don't think ignorance is absolution. Saying that it isn't necessarily racist to make racial generalizations just because the person making the generalizations doesn't know any better doesn't change what it is. Many children whose fathers have beards develop the conclusion that all fathers have beards. As they grow up and gain experience and knowledge they figure out that facial hair isn't necessary for procreation. A multitude of elasticities are visible in the media of every 1st and 2nd world nations and are all over the internet. Unless someone has the relatively rare processing deficit that inhibits facial recognition (like Chuck Close) there really isn't much of an excuse The "gain experience" is key. A kid learns that not every father has a beard because he meets fathers who do not have beards. What if you lived in a community where only men who had beared children had beards (and all men without children did not have beards)? You would grow up not knowing anything different. Seeing faces now and then does not make you an expert on them (that is, give you a strong fusiform face area). If you see someone of a different race for one hour a day in which you do not interact with or speak to them (on television or the internet - on the internet, I mean face to face), your FFA is not going to be strong for that person. An "expert" has to spend hours a day, every day seeing a variety of things in order to become an "expert." I see tons and tons of squirrels every day when I'm walking to and from classes. That doesn't mean I can tell squirrels apart or what species of squirrel any particular one is. Furthermore, television is a poor source for seeing people of different ethnicities. Not only are you seeing people of different races for a short period of time per day and not only are you not interacting with them or seeing them up close, but the distribution of race in television is not equal to the distribution of race in the United States. White men are overrepresented by 25% and latino men are underrepresented by 7%. Source.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2010 8:20 pm
CleoSombra What if you lived in a community where only men who had beared children had beards (and all men without children did not have beards)?
...Bearded children? Thanks for the mental image XD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2010 8:58 pm
Little Miss Fortune CleoSombra What if you lived in a community where only men who had beared children had beards (and all men without children did not have beards)?
...Bearded children? Thanks for the mental image XDI misread it the same way at first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:04 pm
Jennivieve Little Miss Fortune CleoSombra What if you lived in a community where only men who had beared children had beards (and all men without children did not have beards)?
...Bearded children? Thanks for the mental image XDI misread it the same way at first.
Oh, I didn't even realize I was misreading it!!!!! I was just picturing little kids with like... giant beards @___@
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:34 pm
CleoSombra kittycross CleoSombra Warrax1 Oh, I've heard this statement before. I suppose the theory Cleo has given does make sense. However, there is a lack of effort on the part of those who make such a claim, as all things are easily distinguishable if you try. To clarify, the concept of a fusiform face area is not a theory, nor is the fact that people can best distinguish between people of the race they see the most of, even if it's not their own race. If you've seen 10 caucasian people in your life, you've seen a limited amount of variability in faces. You don't know which features can have more variation (size and shape of noses, position of eyes, etc). You don't see where detail comes into place. That's different if you've seen 1,000 different caucasian faces. You've seen a ton of variety. You've seen the different nuances and you know what to look for (automatically/unconsciously). The more we look at something, the more we can distinguish their features. Several people in this thread have stated that sometimes they can't tell people of various races apart. Does that make them lazy or racist? No, of course not. I don't think ignorance is absolution. Saying that it isn't necessarily racist to make racial generalizations just because the person making the generalizations doesn't know any better doesn't change what it is. Many children whose fathers have beards develop the conclusion that all fathers have beards. As they grow up and gain experience and knowledge they figure out that facial hair isn't necessary for procreation. A multitude of ethnicities are visible in the media of every 1st and 2nd world nations and are all over the internet. Unless someone has the relatively rare processing deficit that inhibits facial recognition (like Chuck Close) there really isn't much of an excuse The "gain experience" is key. A kid learns that not every father has a beard because he meets fathers who do not have beards. What if you lived in a community where only men who had beared children had beards (and all men without children did not have beards)? You would grow up not knowing anything different. Seeing faces now and then does not make you an expert on them (that is, give you a strong fusiform face area). If you see someone of a different race for one hour a day in which you do not interact with or speak to them (on television or the internet - on the internet, I mean face to face), your FFA is not going to be strong for that person. An "expert" has to spend hours a day, every day seeing a variety of things in order to become an "expert." I see tons and tons of squirrels every day when I'm walking to and from classes. That doesn't mean I can tell squirrels apart or what species of squirrel any particular one is. Furthermore, television is a poor source for seeing people of different ethnicities. Not only are you seeing people of different races for a short period of time per day and not only are you not interacting with them or seeing them up close, but the distribution of race in television is not equal to the distribution of race in the United States. White men are overrepresented by 25% and latino men are underrepresented by 7%. Source. It could be argued that you just aren't paying attention to the squirrels. I can tell all of the neighborhood cats apart and give you their breed and I don't even see them every day. Do you care about the squirrels or think of them as people? Same question, but this time about minorities: Do you think of them as people? I don't think I had seen a Black person in person until I was about 10 and began working with tourists. I didn't have any of the "they all look alike" feeling. Seeing a bunch of shoulder length blonds together is confusing, but they still all don't look alike . Excepting neurological problems, doesn't it all come down to personal values and how you chose to perceive externally? If what you perceive most about others is hair, is that not because you personally attribute value to your own hair and your expression of identity? Yes, the media really sucks with equal and adequate representation of minorities, but it still puts out a massive amplitude of images. Even if they are not directly interacting with them, people are still seeing a considerable diversity all of the time. It's how they chose to process the information that makes the difference. It's the Us and Them mentality. When you encounter a new face are you choosing to see that individual as a person or do you immediately categorize said individual as a Them, a minority and not one of Your Kind?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:36 pm
I don't think it's fair to blame it on the person or to assume closed-mindedness. Some people just don't see the differences in faces. sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:39 pm
@ Cleo for the record, I don't think this means that you or anyone who can't tell races or ethnicities apart are inherently bad or discriminatory in a negative manner, just that maybe you aren't really looking at people
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:39 pm
Kestin Sha I don't think it's fair to blame it on the person or to assume closed-mindedness. Some people just don't see the differences in faces. sweatdrop
This.
Also, there's a thing called Face Blindness. Some people can't recognize faces at all. (not the same thing, but similar idea taken to the extreme)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:55 pm
Little Miss Fortune Jennivieve Little Miss Fortune CleoSombra What if you lived in a community where only men who had beared children had beards (and all men without children did not have beards)?
...Bearded children? Thanks for the mental image XDI misread it the same way at first.
Oh, I didn't even realize I was misreading it!!!!! I was just picturing little kids with like... giant beards @___@ Like Peyo?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 25, 2010 10:00 pm
Jennivieve Little Miss Fortune Jennivieve Little Miss Fortune CleoSombra What if you lived in a community where only men who had beared children had beards (and all men without children did not have beards)?
...Bearded children? Thanks for the mental image XDI misread it the same way at first.
Oh, I didn't even realize I was misreading it!!!!! I was just picturing little kids with like... giant beards @___@ Like Peyo?
Or Timmy XD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 4:28 pm
Aneyana Kestin Sha I don't think it's fair to blame it on the person or to assume closed-mindedness. Some people just don't see the differences in faces. sweatdrop
This.
Also, there's a thing called Face Blindness. Some people can't recognize faces at all. (not the same thing, but similar idea taken to the extreme)
Face blindness is an entirely different thing than not being able to tell individuals of the same race or ethnic background apart. Face blindness is neurological condition usually related to brain damage and is usually accompanied by other recognition impairment like car recognition and such. I mentioned the artist Chuck Close before because he has face blindness. Ironically, he works mainly in portraiture and his work as a color theorist. In a recent interview he said that he couldn't recognize someone in front of him, but could recognize pictures. Every time he sees some one seeing their face is like meeting a stranger. Race wouldn't have anything to do with Face Blindness. Sure it's not fair to assume that someone is close-minded or blame a person for their own choices and behavior, but life really isn't fair. I'm really curious how people get this idea that the world is a kind and gentle place of fairness. If you're embarrassed now by how you've visually assessed people in the past, then just take responsibility and and act in a way you feel is appropriate. Excuses will not solve anything
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
