....most people understand what that means & there's no negative perception.
Well, thank goodness for that. But, I do have to wonder what people in the US consider to be loitering. Lying in in the sun, in a park, hanging out at a cafe.... Loitering is not untypical of legit backpackers...... Though, I prefer to call it, soaking up the atmosphere.
Reply to this Moderator comment: One post deleted. Please keep comments impersonal.
Reply to this I'm not sure that all these generalizations are 100%!a(MISSING)ccurate.
Of course they are not. That is why they are prejudice.
No. That's why they're generalizations.
Reply to this Well, I suppose people would prefer to think of themselves as people who generalise, rather than people who are prejudiced......
But, when the generalisations involve picking out negative aspects of a group, even if these aspects are not displayed by the group in general, and using these aspects to characterise the group... Call it whatever you want, but lets get back to discussing if the US is really as unfriendly to backpackers as this thread suggests. Any other Americans out there who want to contribute an opinion?
Reply to this But, I do have to wonder what people in the US consider to be loitering. Lying in in the sun, in a park, hanging out at a cafe.... Loitering is not untypical of legit backpackers...... Though, I prefer to call it, soaking up the atmosphere.
Again, it depends on the circumstances. For example, I'm in Miami and people love hanging out at cafes, lying in the sun, and soaking up the atmosphere. It's a national pastime here and no one would connect loitering with those activities.
I get the feeling that you're painting a picture of America with broad strokes of your own generalizations, mischaracterizations, inaccuracies, and half-truths. America is a
wonderful place with genuinely good-hearted people. But like any other place in the world, it has it's own unique set of problems and bad apples.
Reply to this I get the feeling that you're painting a picture of America with broad strokes of your own generalizations, mischaracterizations, inaccuracies, and half-truths.
Before this thread, I didnt know anything about what Americans think about backpackers....... But, yes there are quite a few negative threads on travel sites about the US. Yes, these threads have swayed me to put the US low on my list of places to visit. I will visit the US again, when things change though.
Reply to this Well, I suppose people would prefer to think of themselves as people who generalise, rather than people who are prejudiced...... But, when the generalisations involve picking out negative aspects of a group, even if these aspects are not displayed by the group in general, and using these aspects to characterise the group...
Prejudice is an irrational generalization about an entire category of people based on little or no supporting evidence. A generalization is an idea having a general application that is based on fact. As an example, if I said Asians are short or Mexicans like spicy food, I have feeling you would say I'm prejudiced. But I would call these generalizations because I can point to empirically validated data supporting my generalization that Asians are typically shorter and Mexicans eat spicier food than, say, the French. Generalizations are not bad per se -- they are a fact of life. I'm sure you have your own.
Before this thread, I didnt know anything about what Americans think about backpackers....... But, yes there are quite a few negative threads on travel sites about the US. Yes, these threads have swayed me to put the US low on my list of places to visit. I will visit the US again, when things change though.
I haven't found this thread to support your conclusion that Americans think poorly of backpackers. In fact, I've come to the opposite conclusion and think this thread highlights the variability in thought, definition, and ideas about backpackers in the States. So waiting for 'things to change' simply doesn't make sense to me.
Reply to this So waiting for 'things to change' simply doesn't make sense to me.
As regards this, it is more than the backpacker thing. The backpackers being tramps and bums... thing is just yet another off putting thing about the US.
The most off putting thing and the biggest reason I dont want to go to the US in the near future, is because of what the US immigration have become like in the last few years. Msg 28 of this thread is another of the long string of horror stories I have heard about them. I think things will change with this, because if something is that severe it is bound to change. The US is a democratic country afterall.
Back to defining prejudice: I think a good way to determine if a comment is prejudiced against a group of people is to remove the name of the group of people and replace it with Women, Indians, Black People, Jews.... If the comment is still politically correct after you do this, then prejudice does not apply.
Reply to this The backpackers being tramps and bums...
Then I think you've missed the point: "backpackers" are hard to define and, thus, may or may not be considered tramps and bums. And the consensus seems to be that they're viewed very differently depending on the situation, so it's unfair and prejudicial to say that backpackers are tramps and bums in the eyes of Americans.
The most off putting thing and the biggest reason I dont want to go to the US in the near future, is because of what the US immigration have become like in the last few years.
Unless I've overlooked something, only message #28 concerned immigration so this seems like it's coming out of left field and I don't even know what you're referring to because it's so vague and ambiguous. And message #28 didn't seem like a
horror story -- it was an immigration official that simply asked if he was a backpacker which is a perfectly legitimate question.
I think things will change with this, because if something is that severe it is bound to change.
You have yet to identify this
severe problem and thus I'm not seeing change in the immediate future. Indeed, I don't see what there is to change.
Reply to this I think a good way to determine if a comment is prejudiced against a group of people is to remove the name of the group of people and replace it with Women, Indians, Black People, Jews.... If the comment is still politically correct after you do this, then prejudice does not apply.
I think you're improperly conflating the terms and then throwing political correctness in the mix to compound the problem. In my opinion, political correctness has nothing to do with reality and isn't the issue. But let's test your theory. Suppose I say women are generally not as strong as men. Even that statement is not "politically correct" but it's based in reality. Replace women with gays = Gays are generally not as strong as men. Now that statement is politically incorrect, prejudicial, incorrect, and nonsensical. Which means that the original statement, women are generally not as strong as men, is prejudical. I wouldn't say it is, but I would say it's a fair generalization.
Reply to this ...so it's unfair and prejudicial to say that backpackers are tramps and bums in the eyes of Americans.
Alright, thats your opinion...
I have seen never ending discussions online where somebody says 'that is rascism, sexism....' and the discussion then continues for pages of Prejudiced, Not, Prejudiced, Not....... Then at some stage the person who made the prejudiced? comment in the first place turns around and says the one who said 'rascism, sexism...' is in fact the one who is prejudiced. My sympathies in these cases certainly go towards the groups who are put at a disadvantage in society as a result of prejudice? as regards their earnings, employment and educational opportunities, personal freedom.....
Reply to this 
