By Carole McNall
http://stream.publicbroadcasting.net/production/mp3/wbfo/local-wbfo-691623.mp3
St. Bonaventure, NY – I'm a baby boomer.
So what does that tell you about my politics?
I'm female.
Any guesses on where I stand on candidates? (Be very careful with this one.)
I grew up (and still live) in small towns in the northeast.
Do you know where I stand on issues?
I'm a journalist, a lawyer and a college professor.
Have I confused you completely now?
I hope the answer to those early questions is somewhere between "beats me" and "how should I know?" And I hope your answer to that last one is "well, yes."
But any number of people, ranging from pundits to people I love, will tell you they know how I stand on one or more issues simply by knowing which groups I fall into.
In a word: baloney.
Consider this: Baby boomers are generally defined as those born between 1946 and 1964. Someone born in 1946 turned 18 in 1964. A middle-pack boomer (1955) turned 18 in 1973. Someone at the end of the boomer line turned 18 in 1982.
Three very different experiences, I'd say. So how, then, do pundits continue to believe that all boomers favor this or object to that?
I've noticed a wide range of views on issues among my female students, and they are all similar ages. Crank in the wild card of age and you should stop assuming that gender tells you much of anything. (The same is true, by the way, of my male students.)
Yet we will hear pundits proclaim that "all women" are leaning a certain way for the presidential campaign ... or even "all women" over a certain age lean one way and "all women" under that age lean another. Someone who should know me better (acquaintance, not spouse or colleague) assumed recently he could guess my preference in presidential candidates by my gender. I hope the Look he got made him rethink that assumption with all women.
Latinos and blacks have objected, with much justification, to the idea that they are this homogeneous block of people, believing all the same things and planning to vote for all the same people. Consider the individuals (I stress that word) you know in either group and it should take you only a minute or two to realize how ridiculous that is.
Now broaden that beyond the campaign. How often have you had a forwarded e-mail from a friend/family member who assumes you will share his/her view on a particular subject? Too often, the e-mail is written in absolutes -- all of this group is bad, all of our group is good, your safety or your rights are at risk ...
Stop. My patience is at risk.
I'll probably let the e-mails simply go to the delete key, since they're too often sent by people I like. But for the campaign assumptions?
Next time someone predicts that I will vote for x candidate because I am y, I may be telling them I did get the memo indicating that all members of y group are supposed to vote (or believe) the same way, but I threw the memo out.
Listener-Commentator Carole McNall is an assistant professor in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at St. Bonaventure University.
Click the "listen" icon above to hear the commentary now or use your podcasting software to download it to your computer or iPod.