Effects of Harmful Stereotpyes
Recently, we have discussed the methodology and the history behind diseases and their associations. In the past, I have seen people with skin diseases, and I have also seen the public’s reaction to it. It’s sad that even though some skin diseases are harmless, a community’s reaction can lead the person to depression, and in some cases, contemplation of suicide. In addition, Sontag writes that cancer patients have their body portrayed as a battlefield with a military general in a safehouse commanding his soldiers to keep fighting as they battle to no avail. Do you know of diseases that can lead to unnecessary trauma and harmful effects, and how would you go about dismantling stereotypes about those diseases? What methods can we use to debunk harmful stereotypes? Can representation play a role?
I think pretty much every disease has some sort of stigma attached to it - it's just that some stigmas go much deeper than others. We've been talking a lot about TB and HIV/AIDs in class recently, and as we've learned there's a lot of stigma surrounding both of those diseases that can lead to a lot of personal trauma. I think there's an interesting (and harmful) stigma around mental health as well, which can be really isolating and prevents people from seeking the help, either in terms of therapy or medication, that they need. We haven't really talked about in class yet and I think it'd be something interesting to discuss.
ReplyDeleteI'm fairly involved with my local Planned Parenthood and so I help do a lot of prevention work with STI's and other topics that are suuuper stigmatized in society (mainly topics that have anything to do with sex). Hands down the best way to combat stereotypes around these diseases is to educate people. And I think that education should start young and it needs to be open and honest. And in terms of representation, I think that that can manifest in many ways. There's representation of people who live normal lives and also happen to have some kind of disease, and then there's representation of "regular" people who are just open and comfortable talking about stigmatized things (like STIs).
The reason there's stigma around disease is because we create that stigma. It's completely possible to dismantle it.
I had a friend in middle school with juvenile arthritis. This is a disease in which there is inflammation of the synovium. He was constantly in pain as the tissue lining his joints were always swelling. I middle school, we definitely knew of his condition, but no one ever saw him as "different." There were some scenarios where my friend could not participate in a game of capture the flag or basketball. Other times he was unable to engage in activities that demand physical contact. I also remember this one time where someone had a party at one of those trampoline places and he was bummed that he couldn't really take part in the fun.
ReplyDeleteMy friend actually gave a presentation on arthritis and at that moment I felt like I understood him and his condition a little bit better. We always knew he had arthritis but never really understood exactly what it was and how he goes about living with it everyday. Once he began to humanize it, my friends and I were much more considerate and helpful when it came to what was more comfortable for him. He actually played a lot of video games and this helped with his joints. Video games were his form of physical therapy and I remember going over to his house a lot to play video games. Even when I was 12/13, I think getting to understand how he lives with arthritis debunked the stereotypes around it. He had to deal with a lot back in middle school, but he learned to live with his disease and as a result of being his friend, I think I gained a better understanding of his day to day situation.
Like Rachel mentioned, I agree that there is a harmful stigma surrounding mental health. For slack a couple of nights ago, I attached article that I’ll include again that most of us read last year, titled “Mental Illness Is Not A Horror Show.” It talks about a theme park attraction called “Fear VR 5150,” and this number is significant because it is the California psychiatric involuntary commitment code. Basically, the people would wake up in a wheelchair in a hospital but after being knocked out with an injection, the person wakes up again in a violent and chaotic scene. his number is significant because it is the California psychiatric involuntary commitment code. After a ton of backlash, the amusement park decided to not open the attraction.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, I think that both Cole and Rachel bring up a really good point about education being a major factor in the stereotypes of diseases. When we don’t know much about something it’s hard to humanize it, so I think if we familiarize ourselves with the different diseases, we’ll be less likely to use stereotypes as our base knowledge.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/26/opinion/mental-illness-is-not-a-horror-show.html
While I am not sure of any specific diseases that have accompanying harmful stereotypes, I have noticed that many conditions that are visible such as burns, eczema, or rashes are extremely stigmatized. People suffering from skin conditions are often stared at in public which creates the stigma of being dirty or contagious. The best way to dismantle the stigma surrounding diseases is to educate people. Representation might be a possible solution, although it may place the person in an uncomfortable situation.
ReplyDeleteTo your point about the language we use when describing diseases, I too have been thinking about cancer and the description of it as a "battle." People often say when someone passes of cancer that they "put up a strong fight," were "fighting until the end," or "lost the battle." While I understand that this may be a way of coping for people close to the patient, I wonder how putting the onus on the patient changes the perception of patients and the disease at large. By discussing it as a battle, we are sort of implying that the patient has control over their fate, when in reality, they don't. I can't really think of better language, necessarily, but these are just thoughts I've been having on the stigmas and harmful stereotypes surrounding cancer.
ReplyDeleteIn our world today, I think it would be hard to find a disease that doesn’t have at least some negative stereotypes surrounding it. I think that many diseases’ negative connotations are perpetuated through the entertainment industry, whether that be from the lack of proper representation or misrepresentation - particularly with things like mental illness. Here’s an interesting article about how Hollywood stigmatises mental illness and helps create our idea of what “madness” is: http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20180828-how-cinema-stigmatises-mental-illness. I think a simple step, and one that’s more so limited towards mental illness, would be to portray people with it as normal human beings rather than someone to be the subject of a horror movie, etc… There are also films about diseases other than mental illnesses that can help to make them seem like they always lead to disaster such as Contagion, which is also an issue.
ReplyDeleteI think that our society can dismantle some of these harmful stereotypes in rather simple ways, such as educating people more on the realities behind them and also showing people that they’re not as foreign or uncommon as they might think - they’re just another part of some peoples' lives.
Stigmas and public reactions to illness varies by disease. Like Kevin mentioned, there's still massive discomfort surrounding skin conditions, from diseases ranging from leprosy, where historically those affected were publicly shamed and sent to live-in colonies, to the most common types of afflictions like eczema and acne. Here's an article that discusses how the film industry perpetuates harmful stereotypes of people with skin conditions; it talks about how movie villains often have skin conditions, which are supposed to add to their aura of terror but really just advertise against the people actually suffering from them. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/apr/05/big-screen-baddies-and-their-skin-conditions-unpicked-by-dermatologists
ReplyDeleteI'm wondering, how are the stigmas surrounding people suffering from visible, external diseases (like skin conditions) different from those surrounding people with less visible, internal illnesses?
I think it would be interesting to discuss the ways in which certain diseases are stigmatized in relation to how they are contracted. Diabetes, for example, is a condition that is heavily stigmatized especially when it comes to diet and exercise. Many people associate diabetes with a fatty diet, a lack of exercise, and overall inability to care for ones self. While a bad diet can contribute to someone getting diabetes, many times it is hereditary and not due to diet at all (Type 1). Here is an interesting study on the stigmatization of diabetes:
ReplyDeletehttp://clinical.diabetesjournals.org/content/35/1/27
I also think that it's interesting to look at STIs in this context. Obviously STIs are contagious and are also contracted through sexual activity (a very stigmatized thing). Because of the stigmatization of sex, anything related such as STIs are also heavily stigmatized to the point where people don't even talk about them with their sexual partners and many feel shame or don't even know to get tested regularly. The stigmatization of sex as well as homophobia have been the causes of a lot of stereotypes / shame surrounding HIV, although I think the shame/stereotypes have minimized significantly since the late 20th century.
I agree with Kevin that diseases and conditions that are visible in public are often those with a lot of negative stigmas surrounding them. Because people can tell that there is something wrong with that person, they instantly connect it with being sick. Like Kevin said, skin conditions often lead others to see those affected as dirty, while other conditions such as ALS make people think of the patients as weak.
ReplyDeleteI don't know of any specific diseases but I know that skin conditions like psoriasis, eczema, rashes, or even acne are stigmatized, many are seen as dirty or contaminated. I have a friend with plaque psoriasis and they've talked about how other people make him feel ashamed when people stare at him in shock or disgust. I feel many skin conditions which come from things a person can not control are shamed into thinking that they are less than other people and are exiled from other people. Also as far as other illnesses/infections/diseases that are stigmatized, many STI's are stigmatized just for involving sex. As far as STI's go many girls are called sluts if they had or have an STI just because people know that they had to have sexual contact to have it. The stigma around STI's leads to people being afraid of getting tested which leaves them helpless in trying to diagnose what it going on in their bodies. This avoidance of getting tested also leads to more spreading of STI's because people don't know they have them. I think representation plays a huge role in the destigmatization of many diseases, if many media outlets showed how people with infections, diseases, or other conditions as normal people I think the feelings around the certain conditions that other people would see them as normal people.
ReplyDeleteI think it’s interesting to discuss the effects of visible or externally obvious diseases with those of diseases that are internal, primarily psychological conditions. For example, people with skin diseases face a lot more outward judgement (or even fear) from other people, but most people wouldn’t think to question if the person in question had some sort of disease. On the other hand, those with mental health issues don’t necessarily look different or stand out from the general population, yet they can struggle to make people understand that they are indeed struggling with illness at all.
ReplyDeleteI would assume that any disease can lead to some sort of trauma or lasting negative effects, because the term disease describes something that is inherently not normal, and human nature seems inclined to be wary of things that are unusual or different, which means that there will generally be some sort of stigma to contend with, as people have mentioned above.
It’s important and probably often forgotten that diseases aren’t usually the faults of the people who suffer from them. I think a big part of dismantling stereotypes is to separate the person from the disease that they have and that that will do a lot to debunk some of those stereotypes, like the one about the “cancer personality” (although I had never heard that before so I’m not sure if that’s still a common thing or not) or the stigmas around HIV/AIDS. And of course, representation of these diseases in situations that are different from the norm (i.e. a triathlon contestant with diabetes or something) can also play a part in lessening the biases or false understandings that we all have.
From what I can observe, we have generally been addressing diseases and illnesses that have clearly visible effects on an individual. Late stages of TB and cancer are both perfect examples of diseases that display their detrimental impact on the body. Therefore, as Sontag noted, we are more prone to creating new stereotypes based on these external factors. On the flip side, issues with mental health are not as clear cut. Most of the time, there is no clear indication that one is affected. Unlike, TB and cancer, there is this ambiguity surrounding mental health which leads to fear and confusion for those who simply don't understand the potential detrimental outcomes of such diseases. This combination of fear and uncertainty leads to even more stereotypes which generally only attempt to invalidate those who are affected. I think it would be interesting to devote some class time to exploring the ways society has reacted to both "internal" and "external" diseases.
ReplyDeleteIn response to debunking harmful stereotypes, I think it's crucial we as a society separate the individual from the illness or disease. For instance, STI's are constantly stigmatized by popular media in a way that creates an environment in which no one ever talks about them. There are so much shame and guilt involved that, on many occasions, people purposely don't get tested which only strengthens this hysteria as the STI's are transmitted. By separating the two, we are effectively acknowledging this growing epidemic, but stripping the same and guilt that comes with it.
For Luke:
ReplyDeleteWe as a society have developed attitudes about diseases, ranking and qualifying them. How we conceptualize these illnesses has direct implications on whether we demonstrate compassion or wariness toward those that fall to this sort of misfortune. Due to racism and economic disparities, different racial groups do not have equal access to care. Sickle cell disease is a mutated form of hemoglobin that distorts red blood cells into a crescent shape creating low oxygen levels. This particular disease is common in people of African-American descent. Because this disease targets a certain minority group, government funding/research is not prioritized.
"The funding disparities for research on sickle cell compared to other pediatric diseases are huge. Cystic fibrosis, a disease that affects primarily Caucasians, occurs in only a third of the numbers affected by SCD, but received 3.5 times more NIH funding. "
If you would like to read more about the funding disparities visit,
http://www.phillytrib.com/news/health/inequities-in-funding-and-research-on-sickle-cell-disease/article_17b38be1-7d35-5dfc-97ad-916c1644930b.html
I think we should be more aware of the adjectives we use to describe certain things. Like Harper stated in class, we should stay away from using words like “cancerous” unless used appropriately. Using heavy and sensitive words carelessly and inappropriately can be extremely harmful to those with the disease and harmful to the ways in which people perceive that disease. I think informing ourselves about certain diseases can help us change the way we talk about diseases. I think this can also help take stereotypes off specific races and groups of people.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Harry that, because mental health conditions and disorders play out internally and may not have obvious external symptoms, people experiencing mental health problems may experience a different form of stigmatization and isolation. In many communities, understanding of mental disorders and their effects has only recently become a topic of research; in America, mentally ill people were long shut out, locked away, and excused as “crazy” until the field of modern psychology sought more concrete understanding and information about their experiences. Women’s mental health was long ignored, and women seeking psychological help were labeled “hysterical” and dismissed. In today’s society, a more comprehensive medical understanding of mental health exists but generalizations about people with mental health conditions continue to affect the way they are treated. Stereotypical representations of depression and anxiety often don’t match the reality of anxiety or depression as they affect hundreds of thousands of people, and those with non-stereotypical symptoms face widespread skepticism that they are even suffering from mental health problems. Furthermore, there has not been significant, realistic representation of the cycles of depression and anxiety in media, decreasing public awareness of the ways they impact an individual’s behavior and what the recovery process looks like. The lack of widespread societal discussion of these issues, perpetuates discrimination and generalization of people with mental health conditions.
ReplyDelete