Oh come on Rosie! Men are not that bad...

Many of them are intelligent, sensitive, and strong enough to perhaps bring back more food for the group. But I know where you are coming from, and I wonder if there are lots of men out there think like you vice versa "I hope NOT to be trapped on an island with even one FEMALE...nag, nag, nag..." LOL (hey, I think that sounds familiar to me, go figure.)

Sigh, the war between the testosterone and estrogen can never end!!

It's probably true in most cases. However, I know a very strong female who is the head of a company and takes home great income (even more than her husband) with such a gentle soul. She is nurturing, caring, and loves to prep healthy dinner every night. I have heard her on the phone with her secretary once, and was amazed by her understanding and gentleness towards a stressed out employee. I remember wishing all my bosses were like her.

I am not sure about the female cop situation though.

I agree, Cara, that there definitely are exceptions and your friend certainly is one. It really is too bad that we (including myself, which I am shocked about) see stereotypes and assume that a particular title denotes a particular gender.

I believe I would still go with my original list, based on the title, regardless of the gender.

I think this is exactly what these type of exercises designed to bring to our attention. It's not about the answers, but it's about how and why we arrive to them. Everyone is somehow biased towards our own assumptions. I guess it's only natural as we must have some sort of social references to rely on even though they might not be accurate.

Why is everyone assuming the native islander would be a cannibal? This seems like a very racial stereotype. I would think a native island would be very helpful with their knowledge of the environment and resources of the island. Even in the extreme unlikelyhood that they were a cannibal, why would they practice cannibalism when they are one person against ten? I would keep the native island. Their knowledge and skills for survival vastly outweigh any risk.

Craig, only 1 person (Phylis) made the statement that she feared the native islander would be a cannibal. Every other time you see it mentioned - someone else was quoting her post, and generally debating it.

I actually did not assume the native islander would be a cannibal. I believe I said that because this person was from a remothe region that he/she may not be used to people and could possibly be a cannibal - or that I would at least wonder if he/she was.

Sorry, Phyllis.

I just meant to point out that there weren't a lot of people calling the islander a cannibal.

It was an interesting thought, though, and one I hadn't considered.

Wouldn't it be an irony if we had all concurred that the Pacific Islander was an absolute person of value, then we were all ritualistically killed and eaten? Then the question would have been, "How could we not have known?"

This is the ultimate lesson in making judgements on another human being; yet for our own survival, we do make these assumptions every day. What funny creatures we are.

Yet, other creatures of the wild make the same kinds of analysis against their own fellow creatures. For the females the question is, "Based on his colorful or solid markings and/or ability to rumble, and/or ability supply me with food, which male will offer me the strongest of genes?" And for the males, "Which female will have my genes to pass along, and which of my weakest rivals can I fight off for her approval?"

We would, as human beings, really like to believe that we are far more evolved than our animal counter-parts. But are we? Our complexities of judgement and war against our own species are clearly more complex, as only ants wage war against perceived band rivals as we do. Yet do we in fact act more aggressively toward other human beings than is truly necessary? Or have we uniquely devised ways of waging war to achieve territorial gains equalling to resources that surpass our needs? And...have we clearly defined what our needs are? Or are we truly the greediest species on the planet - having found ways to outsmart the workings of nature to ensure our bloated sense of survival and rivalry? If so, will our "needs" to attain all be the ultimate destruction of the planet we inhabit, leading to our ultimate undoing?

Shay

Thank you for this forum. This discussion has inspired me to use this idea as a lesson for my Sociology class. I have changed the cast of characters the students will have to chose from slightly and added one photograph to correspond for each character. I think this will generate a great discussion in class.

My list of people to choose from will include:

1. A muslim woman
2. A Korean man
3. A Rap singer
4. A cop with a gun, a white female cop.
5. A pregnant teenager
6. A cheerleader, Africian-American
7. A Business Executive
8. An Ex-Convict, white middle-aged man
9. An Elderly Rabbi
10. A homosexual man.

For the purpose of my class I deliberately added racial, ethnic and religious identities. My class is largely Africian American so it will be interesting to see the choices they make.