MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > The ultimate crime against people: dehum...

The ultimate crime against people: dehumanization?


Dehumanization is basically denying or failing to recognize that a person (usually others, but sometimes also the self) has human qualities such as feelings, aspirations, and free will. This has occurred many times throughout history (for example: concentration camps and unethical human experimentation) and exists a lot today (examples: objectification of women and holding racist stereotypes in mind).

I've been studying a little bit about it and many of the forms of prejudice and discrimination can be grouped into the umbrella of dehumanization. Perhaps this dehumization - is basically where all crimes against people originate?

reply

I think you are correct that prejudice and discrimination fall under the umbrella of dehumanization, but I think dehumanization is the result of a deeper root. The root of the problem is a lust for power and control, often mixed with corruption and mental illness and deep-seated insecurity. This root is what leads people to dehumanize others.

reply

That's true as well - that it's all about the desire for getting power and control. Thanks for the input!

reply

Dehumanization is worse than death is as an old trope in debate.

Simple refutation: death is permanent, dehumanization may be transient, one is an end the other may be ended and so on.

Then you can go on listing examples of people that have been dehumanized contributing to society and leading fulfilling happy lives while the dead are...dead.

Anyway, like I said that is an old debate trope and was routinely encountered for some time.

reply

But we're looking at the causes of death, of which dehumanization can lead to that.

reply

So then murder (death) is the ultimate crime against people.

reply

The next step after COMPLETE DEHUMANIZATION is always genocide.

I recently watched man-on-the-street interviews in which numerous people are rejoicing and in full support of babies and toddlers being killed in an ongoing genocide.

A book I recently read said genocides and other atrocities are ignored or supported because there is profit to be made and criticism would get in the way of that.

reply

Yeah, just as I said to SemiAnimus...dehumanization can lead to death and other bad stuff.

reply

You pretty much covered it in your OP.

Dehumanization allows people to rationalize atrocities by reducing their victims to objects. It’s easier to commit harm against an object, like a chair, than a human. Over time, consistently referring to or thinking of someone as less than human makes it easier to see them that way, reducing cognitive dissonance and justifying harmful actions.

To your final question: Crimes against people may not be born out of dehumanization, but they are often rationalized that way. In other words, crimes can be driven from various motivations -- greed, power, ideology, opportunity -- but dehumanization frequently plays a role in justifying or enabling those actions to be carried out.

reply

Thanks for your input! I totally agree with what you said! Yes, there are other motivations as well.

reply

"I'm a human being godammit! My life has value." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RujOFCHsxo

reply

Interesting scene!

reply

Prophetic wasn't it? I feel like I've been experiencing deja-vu.

reply

Indeed.

reply

This is exactly why Israel referred to Palestinians as human shields. They were no longer beings, they were just shields, easier to slaughter.

reply

Good point and example.

reply

Have you seen the Black Mirror episode Men Against Fire?

reply

Not yet. Why?

reply

It touches on what VinceD was saying above.

reply

Ah, I see.

reply

"examples: objectification of women and holding racist stereotypes"

wut?

Women OBJECTIFY themselves. Just because 7 ugly feminists aren't getting laid doesn't mean they can yell about all women being sexified. Since the dawn of all recorded history, women want sex for kids and WORK to attract mate. It's kind of thing.

Stereotypes: a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing.
WHERE do you think stereotypes COME FROM? No one invented them, they simply exist. Every time I visit a section of town of differing races, I can easily SEE stereotypes, existed, right before my very eyes, and those races are fine with it. As are most non-political correctologists and reality based anti-SJW humans. Life is what it is.

Reality is reality. It is not going to bend for someone's wishes of how they want things to me. Reality always wins out in the end.

Want to stop hurting humanity? Talk to me about eliminating COMPETITION: Sports, business, mating, all of that... we can REASON past competition, right? Yeah, no. Just more wishful thinking - never gonna happen. COMPETITION causes all manners of conflict, and everyone embraces it, even pays hundreds of dollars for tickets, just to practice hating others for zero logical reason, because they like another team based on geographical location. THAT is insane. And makes mega billions also.

reply

But you (and I'm assuming you're a man) were also objectifying women in that post - reducing women to their looks (calling feminists "ugly") and assuming all they want is sex.

Stereotypes may have come from observation, but as you said they are a oversimplified and generalized image of a group of people. They don't apply to all members of a group and you are harming them by assuming something about a person that shouldn't apply to them.

Also sometimes stereotypes are reinforced subconsciously. There's a lot of studies in sociology about that idea...I think it's called the Pygmalion Effect?

You do have a point about competition though, but that's a natural thing since living beings first appeared on this planet. Also, competition has it's merits: capitalism, free markets, and even sports and games (which are just entertainment) like you mentioned.

reply

In my personal experience and observation about the world, MAJORITY of women are fine being sexy, enjoy and appreciate the attention - and there is nothing wrong with that. Ugly (i mean ugly at heart here and see that didnt come through well) people are the ones that want things to be very very VERY unnatural. And see it as objectifying. I don't see objectifying... I see reality. A sexy feminist GENERALLY doesn't exist being an oxymoron of perspectives. Ergo, feminists be ugly. :D

What is bad about stereotypes? I'm a white guy and I can't jump and it matters not at all. There's stereotypes that connotate NEGATIVE things, but most likely, they are stereotypes based on fact numbers of things. Not going to mention here to avoid THAT fight..... do you have specicific stereotype examples you think are incorrect?

If MOST all giraffes have very long necks, is it wrong to assume meeting a new giraffe would NOT have a long neck? Maybe a poor example.... back to my white guy can't jump thing.... that's a negative, and surely some white guys CAN jump, but being as a majority can't (creating the stereo type) if you met a white guy, assumed he couldn't jump, what is so wrong with that, given that stats say majority of us white guys can't jump?
Is that 'profiling' as well, and also, what is wrong with PROFILING? maybe those are interrelated?

there's def pluses in competition, but also much overlooked bad stuff from it. There's no good answer, it will never go away because it will always exist naturally... .... same as objectifying (because we're sexual beings), and sterotyping (because the numbers prove it exists)

reply

YOUR WHOLE BLOCK OF SHIT STARTS WITH....In my personal experience and observation about the world, MAJORITY of women are fine being sexy, enjoy and appreciate the attention -



SO....THE SAME AS MEN....WHO WANT TO BE ATTRACTIVE AND SEXY AND RECIEVE ATTENTION FROM THE OPPOSITE SEX?

reply