Spelman

I cannot pull a good example out of my head of stereotypes that have one meaning for white women and another for black women that Spelman did not touch upon, although those particular differences she mentions (delicate, passive) can possibly be attributed to the fact that they are black, and have only found their "public voice" in more recent times, where women are expected to be more outgoing. I do, however, think that she could have talked more about how these differences are arguably more exacerbated by the type of class or even geographical location one inhabits. There is more distance between the stereotype of a poor white woman in the South and a poor white woman in Chicago than there is between a poor white woman in Chigaco and a poor black woman in Chicago. Spelman does a service by pointing out the complexity of stereotypes and oppression, but her scope is certainly ignoring many groups that completely change stereotypes, and I am sure she would agree with me that things like location, age, class, political disposition, etc., sometimes end up obfuscating certain groups, such as conservative black women. Obviously this is not the best example because "conservatism" is not usually seen as an identity that is oppressed, but hopefully you understand my point.

On to some easily identifiable differences in stereotypes for my brain right now, thinking of white housewives (or grandmothers), it could be said that there is a stereotype of them drinking an awful lot of wine. Lots of movies and television shows show them almost constantly with a wine glass in hand. But if you put an Alaska Native, or any American Indian, in said position, it would start to become another, much more negative stereotype of a dangerous, crazy alcoholic. The truth of someone constantly with a wine glass in hand probably lies somewhere between the two stereotypes (the first mostly neutral, the second certainly negative), but there is probably no dispute that they are treated differently. I suppose this is more a case of how stereotypes shape our conceptions of people in the same position rather than pointing out what we believe the different positions to be because of stereotypes, but I believe it basically gets across the same point.

I think that the majority of women do have some things universally in common, and that these things are enough to support a movement that benefits their mutual welfare; although the things I think they have in common can easily be seen as things that most humans have in common.