Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ok. I'm requesting an example for you to provide. Thanks.
I recently lived in a place where there were very few people of "my background". In many places, my background is often associated with poverty, gangs, illegal immigration, and inability to speak English.
In the two areas I've spent the most of the rest of my life in, people like me are expected to act and behave a certain way, not get very far in life, and are expected to live on certain ends of town.
If there is no significant population of your background around, there isn't anything for the ignorant population at-large to compare you to. There's no "side of town" for you to live on. You just live, and you can do so wherever you want.
Let's put it this way, the pressure to break through the "glass ceiling" that others within your background face won't be there in a place where there are no preconceived expectations of "people like you".
When there is nothing to conform to, there is no temptation to conform.
BTW, I don't think Minneapolis is it. I think where I live now (Denver), is pretty comparable to Minneapolis, and my experience in Denver hasn't been as positive (in this respect) as I thought it would be. Numbers on paper don't always compute in real life.
Throw "the numbers" out the window. If you are looking to think outside the box, first you have to step outside of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DinsdalePirahna
You could always live like the unabomber, without the anger and paranoia.
Yesterday, I had a co-worker say he was going to do just that, as soon as he's laid off. He's quite young (under 30) and has given up on society I suppose.
That's a great point, if you choose to live alone (a la Ted), the only person you have to conform to is yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas R.
Rereading it the stereotyping issue does seem to be the idea.
However it's not necessarily true that a place with few of a certain subgroup are less likely to have stereotypes. There was no black people in my entire school K-12, but there were certainly people with stereotypes of blacks. From the 13th-15th centuries England maintained several Anti-Semitic stereotypes even though there were no, or no openly, Jewish people in the entire country. (King Richard had exiled them during the Crusades and refugees from the Inquisition had not yet arrived)
I think this "few=no stereotypes" only works if it's a socially liberal area or if you're of a minority group that is comparatively obscure. If you're Walloon or of the Baha'i faith you might not be treated at all in a stereotyped manner in a place where there is few like you. However if you're Black or Mexican people are going to have heard negative stereotypes in most any part of the nation and in some cases they'll believe them. The two little towns I've lived in were both over 95% white and there are a fair number of racists or racial stereotyping in both of them.
Great points. The stereotypes can still exist in areas where there are few of certain backgrounds, but it is far more likely that the people stereotyping have very little justifiable personal experience with the people they are stereotyping. It's hard for them to back up there stereotypes if they have no actual, repeated, direct experience.
I don't think Denver and Minneapolis are that similar, but then again, I haven't lived in Denver. I think it will depend on what exactly you are worried about.
As to the Pacific Northwest, sometimes it seems that the places that talk up their "non-conformity" the most are the least tolerant if you don't fit the boundaries of that non-conformity. That might not be relevant in this case, and maybe others don't agree with that. I see it in San Francisco, though, and my husband complains about it all the time with the people in Seattle he has to work with on a regular basis. In some circles (although by no means all) there's a certain smugness and tokenism that sometimes can grate the wrong way. I don't see that smugness as much in Minneapolis, but I think that's because Minneapolis is so often overlooked and its residents are too busy feeling slighted and ignored and annoyed and feeling unappreciated by the rest of the country.
I agree that you shouldn't depend on numbers. If you're concerned mostly about race (which is my impression here) then you could find the most open places have people all of a different race. Or not. I'd focus first on finding cities or towns that you like for other reasons, and then work from there.
As to the Pacific Northwest, sometimes it seems that the places that talk up their "non-conformity" the most are the least tolerant if you don't fit the boundaries of that non-conformity. That might not be relevant in this case, and maybe others don't agree with that. I see it in San Francisco, though, and my husband complains about it all the time with the people in Seattle he has to work with on a regular basis. In some circles (although by no means all) there's a certain smugness and tokenism that sometimes can grate the wrong way.
Yep. There's a kind of self-righteousness around here because people feel so good about themselves for being so tolerant and open-minded towards everyone. Trouble is, they're not tolerant towards other people who aren't "open-minded" in exactly the same way. This is a generalization, of course, but it's the general vibe. Even though I agree on most things with most people here, I can't stand the intolerance. People better fit in here and conform to the standards, or they'll have a tough time. Of course, those standards are different from the standards elsewhere, so it might be a good place for the OP.
Yep. There's a kind of self-righteousness around here because people feel so good about themselves for being so tolerant and open-minded towards everyone. Trouble is, they're not tolerant towards other people who aren't "open-minded" in exactly the same way. This is a generalization, of course, but it's the general vibe. Even though I agree on most things with most people here, I can't stand the intolerance. People better fit in here and conform to the standards, or they'll have a tough time. Of course, those standards are different from the standards elsewhere, so it might be a good place for the OP.
Yep. Exactly. I am moving back to Portland soon and am looking into finding a room in a house, but I'm scared away from many of the roommate wanted ads in the city because I feel I'll be judged too harshly for not composting for the past 10 years or so and for doing too much unnecessary driving (a habit I do need to cut back on), and for a few unpopular political views that could be viewed as either very progressive or somewhat conservative (such as ending affirmative action). That's just what's left after eliminating the housing ads that say "ABOUT YOU: Vegetarian, NO MEAT in the household." I mean, raising animals for meat is terrible for the environment, but I want to eat my organic, locally grown, free range beef, eggs, and wild caught sustainable fish!
I mean, I'm a total lefty treehugger, belong to the Green Party, and I believe I'm way more "liberal" or "progressive" than at least half of Portland, but I don't want to have anything shoved down my throat. Hubris is not an attractive feature in anyone, especially in half of a city.
There is a definite pressure to conform to that in Portland, and probably Seattle too. Not sure if it's to the same extent or not.
Location: Where ocean meets up with the naked land.
324 posts, read 572,652 times
Reputation: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Aguilar
I recently lived in a place where there were very few people of "my background". In many places, my background is often associated with poverty, gangs, illegal immigration, and inability to speak English.
In the two areas I've spent the most of the rest of my life in, people like me are expected to act and behave a certain way, not get very far in life, and are expected to live on certain ends of town.
If there is no significant population of your background around, there isn't anything for the ignorant population at-large to compare you to. There's no "side of town" for you to live on. You just live, and you can do so wherever you want.
Let's put it this way, the pressure to break through the "glass ceiling" that others within your background face won't be there in a place where there are no preconceived expectations of "people like you".
When there is nothing to conform to, there is no temptation to conform.
BTW, I don't think Minneapolis is it. I think where I live now (Denver), is pretty comparable to Minneapolis, and my experience in Denver hasn't been as positive (in this respect) as I thought it would be. Numbers on paper don't always compute in real life.
Throw "the numbers" out the window. If you are looking to think outside the box, first you have to step outside of it.
Great points. The stereotypes can still exist in areas where there are few of certain backgrounds, but it is far more likely that the people stereotyping have very little justifiable personal experience with the people they are stereotyping. It's hard for them to back up there stereotypes if they have no actual, repeated, direct experience.
Sorry, but from what I've seen of midwestern cities, its pretty-much golly-gee-whiz-its-vanilla bland around here.
Of course we are talking about cities. Their are plenty of rural areas in the entire country where the locals just have their own way of doing things. But then you are still conforming to that local mind set.
You could always live like the unabomber, without the anger and paranoia.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.