In this chapter an ingroup is defined as a group that someone identifies strongly with. An outgroup is the opposite, and is a group or social category that you don’t identify with. From this reading it seems that ingroups and outgroups are determined by things like where you were born and raised, race, religion, language, and many other things rather than from individual choice. Related to this, one part of the reading that was interesting is when it touched on “intergroup boundaries”. It talked about how these group boundaries can even be found in food and how someone uses utensils. Americans don’t put their knives down while eating and that is identified by Brits just by seeing it.
One thing I was thinking while reading is how unfair the idea of ingroups and outgroups seems. Maybe I don’t completely understand the concept but it almost seems like a stereotype. There is not much room for choice and personal preference in ingroups and outgroups. Rather then getting to choose what group you identify with, you are placed there by how society sees you. Some things such as where you come from or what language you speak are automatically grouped in ingroups and outgroups, but there are some things I think should be more of a choice.
I completely agree with you that the ingroup and outgroup terminology seems very rigid. I think that it’s difficult to force people into categories. While creating these generalizations may help people conceptualize those who aren’t like them, it isn’t necessarily reflective of the person that they’re judging.
I agree with you that these groupings seem very systemic and based in stereotypes. The definitions are very misleading in that way because they make it seem like an individual can decide where they belong, when in reality society doesn’t necessarily allow that to happen.
I agree that ingroups and outgroups seem like they are based on stereotypes. The requirements to be in a certain group seem almost too harsh at times. People might identify as a member of one group, but have others push back against that because they do not fit all the stereotypes.
I agree with you that ingroups and outgroups may be based on physical identity and how people see you on paper. However, I think we are moving to a time to listen to what people want to identify with, and not just sorting them under a title.
While I agree with what you say, I feel like it is not only a societal thing. People are more likely to go along with people who look and act like them. However, the article does fail to talk about how, especially now, there is a push back on this.