F is for Fascism (Ferguson MO)

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

This is clearly semantics, but I take systemic to mean the system as a whole, and results within a system are certainly included as "part of the system".

If somebody is consistently and provably not achieving at a certain level due to something completely outside of their control (especially gender or race), that is a systemic problem.

Quite frankly, I don't give a damn if you think it's "systematic" or "aggregation of experience". Those are distractions that prevent us from discussing what is really at hand here. Somewhat similar to focusing on how CK is protesting instead of what he is protesting.

Or, it could mean that they are not achieving due to their sucking, and you are attempting to cover it up by labeling it as a systemic problem.
The percentage of white American-born players in the NBA is significantly lower than the overall percentage of white Americans. Is that failure of achievement a systemic problem with the NBA? Or is it simply that white Americans aren't good at, or aren't focused on, basketball in proportion to their population percentage?

 

[DeaconSig]

Or, it could mean that they are not achieving due to their sucking, and you are attempting to cover it up by labeling it as a systemic problem.
The percentage of white American-born players in the NBA is significantly lower than the overall percentage of white Americans. Is that failure of achievement a systemic problem with the NBA? Or is it simply that white Americans aren't good at, or aren't focused on, basketball in proportion to their population percentage?

Pretty easy to determine meritocracy in sports, isn't it? Have you ever seen a lawyer with a large book of business who sucks at his job? I have. And I have seen good lawyers with very little work. Its amazing how who you know is as or more important than what you know in the legal profession.

 

[Deacsfan27]

Pretty easy to determine meritocracy in sports, isn't it? Have you ever seen a lawyer with a large book of business who sucks at his job? I have. And I have seen good lawyers with very little work. Its amazing how who you know is as or more important than what you know in the legal profession.

The "who you know" and networking is a big issue as to why it's so hard to get out of the poor class/lower middle class as well. Especially in this day and age.

The world is not a meritocracy. You get a lot of jobs based off of who you know as opposed to what you know in almost any profession. Your chances of knowing/meeting/networking with somebody if you come from a well-off family is much better than if you come from nothing.

Of course that can be overcome through hard work, and I'm not refuting that at all.

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

Pretty easy to determine meritocracy in sports, isn't it? Have you ever seen a lawyer with a large book of business who sucks at his job? I have. And I have seen good lawyers with very little work. Its amazing how who you know is as or more important than what you know in the legal profession.

Exactly, it is how the world works. The good lawyer with little work isn't going to get anywhere by bitching about the shitty lawyer with lots of business and blaming him for his failures. He needs to worry about himself and improve on his deficiencies if he wants to be successful. Improve his people skills and marketing, not blame the other guy.

 

[PhDeac]

The "who you know" and networking is a big issue as to why it's so hard to get out of the poor class/lower middle class as well. Especially in this day and age.

The world is not a meritocracy. You get a lot of jobs based off of who you know as opposed to what you know in almost any profession. Your chances of knowing/meeting/networking with somebody if you come from a well-off family is much better than if you come from nothing.

Of course that can be overcome through hard work, and I'm not refuting that at all.

Sure. But it's sad to see dozens of white guys essentially saying, "Yes, I expect black people to work harder than I do to get to the same place simply because they're black" and thinking that's equally of opportunity.

 

[Deacsfan27]

Sure. But it's sad to see dozens of white guys essentially saying, "Yes, I expect black people to work harder than I do to get to the same place simply because they're black" and thinking that's equally of opportunity.

I agree with that.

The post above yours basically labeled being black as "deficient".

 

[Wakeforest22890]

Sure. But it's sad to see dozens of white guys essentially saying, "Yes, I expect black people to work harder than I do to get to the same place simply because they're black" and thinking that's equally of opportunity.

Yep

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

Sure. But it's sad to see dozens of white guys essentially saying, "Yes, I expect black people to work harder than I do to get to the same place simply because they're black" and thinking that's equally of opportunity.

You are starting from the position that there is (a) a "same place", and (b) equal opportunity. (a) is both relative and irrelevant, and (b) is not guaranteed by anything or anyone.

 

[knowell]

Is the advantage of being white vs black more or less significant than being the following:

Attractive vs unatractive
Intelligent vs slow
Tall vs short
Athletic vs unathletic
Funny vs unfunny
High EQ vs Low EQ
Charming Personality vs Jeff Bzdelick
Rich vs poor
Supportive family vs unsupportive
Slim vs fat

 

[Shooshmoo]

Or, it could mean that they are not achieving due to their sucking, and you are attempting to cover it up by labeling it as a systemic problem.
The percentage of white American-born players in the NBA is significantly lower than the overall percentage of white Americans. Is that failure of achievement a systemic problem with the NBA? Or is it simply that white Americans aren't good at, or aren't focused on, basketball in proportion to their population percentage?

This is rich coming from someone who admitted he refuses to hire women who are around the age where they might get pregnant.

 

[wakephan09]

Geez this thread moves fast. Don't y'all have jobs?

Sure it does, if the claim is that the bias is generated by the institutional popularity of soccer in American society. The popularity is causing the bias, which is then reflected again the funding, which perpetuates the popularity.

No, actually this was not the claim! The claim was that institutions reflect, reinforce, and perpetuate biases, not generate them. American bias against soccer, for the sake of your analogy, is underpinned and perpetuated by its lack of popularity in the US (and, thus, its lack of coverage and fanbase), but biases are born out of early experiences and socio-cultural training.

The truth is, soccer is boring or pretentious or uninteresting or whatever, and for those reasons you hate it. You aren't actually implicitly biased against it. It's not a great analogy for that reason.

LOL. PH, you are the Spin King on the boards....though you have lots of competition.

And while we are on this "implicit bias" kick, I have a couple of questions:

1) Can black people have implicit bias, too.... or is implicit bias something reserved for only white people?

The answer, of course, is yes: everyone has implicit biases (though not everyone acts on them in the same ways). The difference -- and the crux of the particular argument I'm positing -- is that it is primarily (but not exclusively) biases against black people that are institutionally- and structurally-enacted in American society.

There are definitely some systemic issues, but I think more often than not the PC crowd confuses aggregation of experience with systemic. If the DMV's licensing regulations are facially neutral, then there is not a systemic issue within the DMV. However, if in practice when aggregating the individual DMV inspectors, 85% of them have had unfavorable experiences with Asian women drivers, then that is an aggregation of experience. If the result is that the inspectors are in general tougher on Asian women drivers, then that is not a systemic issue but rather an aggregate reflection of reality. That doesn't mean the system needs to be changed, it means that Asian women need to be better drivers if they want to change the perception of them.

Yes, the example of racist stereotyping you offer here is not systemic but cultural. That's not always the case. An example of system racism at the DMV -- and I'm just making this up, here -- would be if some of the documentation required to obtain a license, for instance, wasn't equally available to all races because of certain government policies which made more difficult the process of obtaining it.

 

[Coach O]

So...if you burn at the stake and succumb to either smoke inhalation or incineration, then your death is proof that you weren't a racist-by-implicit bias and you're exonerated posthumously.

If you do not burn at the stake, then you are a racist, and should be put to death.

If you admit your biases, you're biased.

If you don't, you're in denial.

Am I doing this right?

No

 

[PhDeac]

Is the advantage of being white vs black more or less significant than being the following:

Attractive vs unatractive
Intelligent vs slow
Tall vs short
Athletic vs unathletic
Funny vs unfunny
High EQ vs Low EQ
Charming Personality vs Jeff Bzdelick
Rich vs poor
Supportive family vs unsupportive
Slim vs fat

What are you hiring somebody to do?

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

This is rich coming from someone who admitted he refuses to hire women who are around the age where they might get pregnant.

No, that is the perfect example. I was more than happy to hire them, and did. They are the ones who repeatedly insisted they were coming back after maternity leave so we held their job (and incurred giant pains in the ass to do so) but then they decided at the last minute not to come back. That is the fact of them failing, not me having any preconceived bias. The result is future experienced decisions, which you want to then try to label as preconceived bias.

 

[tigerswood]

Do you at least agree that hiring practices have something to do with who gets hired?

Yes. Do you at least agree that water is wet?

 

[knowell]

What are you hiring somebody to do?

Does it matter? Is there any job interview where some of these do not come into play?

 

[Shooshmoo]

No, that is the perfect example. I was more than happy to hire them, and did. They are the ones who repeatedly insisted they were coming back after maternity leave so we held their job (and incurred giant pains in the ass to do so) but then they decided at the last minute not to come back. That is the fact of them failing, not me having any preconceived bias. The result is future experienced decisions, which you want to then try to label as preconceived bias.

Long winded way of saying in the future you are not going to hire young females because of a preconceived bias.

 

[Deacsfan27]

My entire point is that hiring should essentially be color and gender blind period. It shouldn't even be a question of "well there are other things that come into play too". The research sorts that out and still finds that there is a gap based on race and gender that other categories simply do not equate to. All wage gaps are not explained away by discrimination, and nobody on this thread is saying it (to my knowledge).

If you are an employer, then the goal is to hire the best person capable of doing the job. If somebody is less intelligent than somebody else, then you want to hire the more intelligent person. That's pretty clear cut. Somebody who is less intelligent than somebody else is almost certainly going to do a lesser job than somebody who is more intelligent.

I'm guessing very few would argue that there is proof that white people do better work than black people (unless, like Ph asked, you want to define a job) across the board with all jobs.

 

[Deacsfan27]

Long winded way of saying in the future you are not going to hire young females because of a preconceived bias.

In his case, and I have no idea how many times this happened to him, he very well may not have had a preconceived bias that he was aware of.

If he got burned three straight times then (I am guessing without knowing the stats on time period that mothers come back/if they come back) i't's statistically unlucky for him that it occurred.

He is just placing all the weight on anecdotal evidence versus what stats after smoothing would tell us.

 

[Shooshmoo]

In his case, and I have no idea how many times this happened to him, he very well may not have had a preconceived bias that he was aware of.

If he got burned three straight times then (I am guessing without knowing the stats on time period that mothers come back/if they come back) i't's statistically unlucky for him that it occurred.

He is just placing all the weight on anecdotal evidence versus what stats after smoothing would tell us.

How do you deal with smoothing stats related to these women hating their jobs because 2&2 was a shitty boss, so they got there benefit entitlements and GTFO?