James Rogers wrote,
>At 05:30 PM 12/4/2000 -0500, Michael Lorrey wrote:
>>I've also found that rural people
>>will tend to trust a 'city slicker' if they don't fit in previously
>>formed categories that equal 'con artist', while few city people would
>>distrust a rural person at all, though they may have prejudices about
>>them being quaint, simple, etc..
>
>I have to agree with Michael on this part at least. Most rural
>people will generally give city people the benefit of the doubt if
>you don't already fall into some category that has a well-deserved
>reputation for being "no good". Odd or unusual people are usually
>viewed as a curiosities and are generally dealt with in a friendly
>manner.
I'm sorry, but I can't buy this as a generalization. When I was in
high school in rural Illinois, I saw local community members
physically attack strangers because they were perceived to be gay,
black, Mormons, atheists, communists, government agents, homeless or
foreigners. In my experience, many rural people are not very
tolerant of those who are different.
-- Harvey Newstrom <HarveyNewstrom.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:33 MDT