To say that all women have babies is false, because they don’t. But if you see one woman who is pregnant, or ten women, you just assume the stereotype is correct because “you’ve seen it yourself”. It still does not hold true to the entire group and what “you’ve seen” is very little of the group you’re discussing.

However people want to categorize things and often want stereotypes to come true. In a situation like this, it is evident they already had a prejudice against Aborigines but decided it hire her anyway. For that year, things were fine. After it, something changed within the family that (obviously) the woman did not know about. Whether it was marital issues, financial or something as simple as a friend of theirs had a bad experience with an aborigine. Social influence can be very persuasive (aka “I can’t believe you would let one of them in your house” can make a huge impact, even if it’s just one person’s opinion).

If the woman had not said that at the end – had she not labeled the woman an aborigine and simply told her she stole and to get out – I wouldn’t think twice. But she did. She went out of her way to mark the girl and confirm this stereotype for some sort of reason. It also means the woman was thinking about the difference between them for a long time. If you had a maid who was a minority and you didn’t care, why would you bring it up during an argument?

The change in behavior might not have initially been racial, but it quickly turned to that. So, my vote is both. The strife within the family was coincidental, but they made it about race in the end.

Most people will automatically assume racial attack because it's easier and it's (often) what people want to hear. However, the woman made a point to point out her race, which mean the family is not 100% innocent. But I do agree with you -- there isn't much evidence to support either conclusion.

I disagree. Yes, stereotypes are a big issue among races, but aren't we stereotyping what a race is? What is an American? Oh, some stereotype it as Caucasian people or maybe people that wear red, white, and blue. We're even stereotyping what a "Caucasian" is. Why do we do this? To make everything simpler in this complex world of ours. Why would you want to say that Americans are people that wear red,white, and blue; Caucasian people; or people that live in a "first world country"? Nobody would do this, they would just stereotype it to the point that Americans are people that live in the United States.

The point that I'm trying to make is that in this story by Smith, the family that hired the Aborigine was always stereotypical and racist to the speaker of the story. Why do you think they even hired the Aborigine even though they were a "rich" family so to speak? Most likely because he/she was cheap or easy to find. This is a stereotype already. I'm sure there was an Aborigine that was rich, but why would the family want to bother thinking that. It's way easier to generalize something as one thing for everyone to acknowledge.

You would probably go on saying why did the family treated the speaker so nicely? They probably did because they wanted to actually help him, they wanted to trust him and to see that he was a "good" housekeeper, but they always had their doubts back in their mind. They were always stereotypes, but just not to the potential that they would see an Aborigine as solely a no-good-untrustworthy person. They had another factor that weighed in that wanted to believe that Aborigines were good, their conscience, which determined the stereotype that some Aborigines were still good. So then comes the day when the family loses their precious belongings, they might have just forgotten where they last put the belongings and thought they lost it but instead, they would choose the belief that the Aborigine did it. Why not? It's simpler and more effective. They also could prove that their current stereotypes of Aborigines were true, that Aborigines were poor and not to be trusted of. Thus, this would bring satisfaction to themselves that their generalizations were correct. The true facts that the family believed in would override their conscience. It would be more easier to acknowledge their stereotype on Aborigines being untrustworthy as they had "witnessed" an event. Their friends, family, and neighbors would definitely support their standings, as most of them had probably witnessed an Aborigine stealing or doing an action that the community thought of as intolerable.

Towards the end, as the family witnessed more disastrous events happen, they regarded it as the doing of the Aborigine. Why would they think their "precious children" could trash the house? Their conscience was fully ignored on it's own stereotypes while the real-world went into effect, the world of peer pressure.

Thanks to Pyro for this signature.

BUT on the topic of "stereotyping" and "what are races", I am aware that there is no biological thing as race. There is no gene that says "you're caucasian". That is a fact. Races scientifically don't exist. However, humans have created what they believe to be races and now categorize people based off of these simple characteristics. As much as I would love to simply say races doesn't exist, we have to acknowledge that they do because we make them. Races, at the heart and center of their creation, are stereotypes or generalizations. If you have dark skin and you were born in Australia, you MUST be an Aborigine and if you say you're not, no one will believe you because you fit their basic qualifications.

Hence why my argument was that stereotypes are the most dangerous and biggest social issue between humans.

Racism is not, and never will be, exclusively from white people. The speaker of the story (which is a female, by the way.. I could make a large argument about feminism and why you assumed the speaker was male .. but I won't. XP) is potentially racist themselves, however she is the victim of the story and the question was whether or not the family racially attacked her or not. So her views aren't in question.

P.S. I just want to say, Remo .. I'm not surprised you defended the family. ;P

ah well, too tired to write it all here... so catch you on vent...

Racism is simply one form of that attitude, in which “people from your group”.

To read more click here