The article provides an overview of relevant theoretical models of the stereotyping and representation of otherness. Based on an analysis of examples from literature and the mass media, the author follows S. Gilman in comparing the pathological and non-pathological forms for perceiving and representing Others. The first set of approaches takes a hegemonic attitude to otherness, whereas the second one recognizes that otherness has its own value. The author describes and gives examples of such pathological forms as depersonification, fragmentation, fetishization, exotization, pathologization, and homogenization. In addition, the author identifies three counter-strategies (nonpathological forms) for representing Others that are practiced in the media that challenge, overcome, and transform the dominant mode of representation: the creation of new positive stereotypes about Others; the application of positive images to those manifestations of otherness that are perceived as purely negative and undesirable; and finally the search for and confrontation of ambivalent stereotypes that are attributed to Others through a critical analysis of the discourse and allowing people who have been othered to be heard. [Translated by Kenneth Cargill.]