Jump to content
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 90 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Drayke Newall said:

systemic racism was not even mentioned or talked about in both the studies Luna provided or my or  Luna's posts.

I don't understand the distinction you're making between racism and systemic racism. If tests show that someone is racist then this racism would manifest in the myriad of systems or institutions they encounter in daily life (most notably, for the specific institution we are discussing, this would be in the area of employment). A few other institutions in addition to employment where racism affects outcome relates to the wealth gap, housing discrimination, government surveillance, incarceration, drug arrests, immigration arrests, and infant mortality.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This graphic, which I saw over the road at VVO, distinguishes between the political and the non-political quite well, I think  

Why it can feel hard to talk about racial inequality, and why you should do it anyway.... So, anyway, as i mentioned in a couple of other threads, the company I work for gave us a paid day off in

Racism is defined as: prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior. You can't change the definition to

Posted Images

10 hours ago, Akane Nacht said:

I have not spent any significant time in America, that much is true. I have visited a couple times on business. I recall one visit to San Francisco where I observed something that shocked me. I saw people clearly suffering from mental illness, and by their state possibly living on the street. People around them simply gave them a wide berth as if it's normal. These people were a mix of ethnicities, including caucasians. 

That was 20 years ago, so perhaps it's better now. But from this, I think the reasons for social inequality and persistent poverty are probably complex there too.

Of course there are other groups you witnessed on the streets of San Francisco who were suffering from homelessness and poverty -- like Whites in poverty, other POC in addition to Blacks, veterans, the mentally and physically ill, the elderly, children, and women. Through my education and having worked in Social Work I understand the circumstances that affect all of these various groups in unique ways, and feel dedicated to both bringing awareness to their plight and helping with material means when possible.

For whatever reason(s) though, at this point in time, and most especially in America, we are focusing mainly on the injustice which has been levied against Blacks. This does not in any way negate the concerns other groups face; it does not take anything away from other groups who face difficulties in society. In fact, freedom for one disadvantaged group often causes other disadvantaged groups to do better as well. There's something very special about freedom in this way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Drayke Newall said:

something the other study Luna posted didn't even do so it created a skewed bias based purely on the researchers interpretation of why x didn't get a call.

Drayke, you seem like an intelligent person , and I see you have experience with resumes. I doon't mean to diss you in any way, but I trust these researchers with PHD's at Harvard, MIT, and others within well-respected organizations more than I trust you (and myself as well).  I feel confident that  Harvard Business School would know what should be in a resume in order to determine bias.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I don't understand the distinction you're making between racism and systemic racism. If tests show that someone is racist then this racism would manifest in the myriad of systems or institutions they encounter in daily life (most notably, for the specific institution we are discussing, this would be in the area of employment). A few other institutions in addition to employment where racism affects outcome relates to the wealth gap, housing discrimination, government surveillance, incarceration, drug arrests, immigration arrests, and infant mortality.

I meant in as far as your articles never proved there was systemic racism in the employment chances of those persons. That is to say, those tests didn't clearly without bias show that their employment rejection was due to systemic racism.

Perhaps I am wrong in my understanding of what systemic racism means but, I have always understood it to be not just a once off instance but a build up over multiple scenarios. For example poor neighbourhood upbringing, led to lower level of finances, which then constituted a lesser education and then impacted the employment chances. Systemic as far as I have understood it is affecting the system as a whole and therefore one things leads to another. So for a different example of my understanding of the word systemic, a plants roots are poisoned, then it travels up the plant to its tissue and then causes the plant to die.

So based on my understanding if those resumes were provided identically across all races then there was no systemic racism as there was no clear defined causes of rejection other than a person just basing it on race. Cant remember the exact term in this instance.

The study as I mentioned, I believe and as proven by the article MollyMews posted was flawed due to the manner in which it was conducted. As for the articles, you posted I also believe I showed that it wasn't a clear cut case of racial discrimination but more a case of those applicants negatively impacting their own chances. For example a college senior not putting on his resume he got a scholarship to a prestigious school. I assumed he took up the scholarship which would then imply not systemic racism but his own lack of confidence that he wouldn't be discriminated against. If for instance he was granted the scholarship however found somehow he was unable to attend due to family issues, other finance situations etc then I would say that may be a case of systemic racism.

Perhaps my understanding of the term is wrong however that is how I have always understood the word systemic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Drayke, you seem like an intelligent person , and I see you have experience with resumes. I doon't mean to diss you in any way, but I trust these researchers with PHD's at Harvard, MIT, and others within well-respected organizations more than I trust you (and myself as well).  I feel confident that  Harvard Business School would know what should be in a resume in order to determine bias.

Its a matter of something called peer reviewed research. Unless that research has been reviewed by its peers and acknowledged then a research paper in itself is worth about as much as the paper it is written on. That is also why you have two distinctive and different research papers from different universities showing different results in this thread and even one (MollyMews) going as far as saying the other method shown in your study presented is somewhat flawed.

I don't disagree that they know a lot and probably do know more than me however, I also know based on experience attending not only a top architectural school but also having attended a top business school in well respected universities that just because you are a professor or have a PHD doesn't mean you are correct. I personally wouldn't trust my research or group research either which is why peer reviewing exists.

Maybe resume writing is different in Australia and that is meaning my reasoning is incorrect, however I will say this. Those resumes in the study MollyMews posted would have been binned in many businesses in Australia as they appear to only be one page long. Well maybe not for a just graduation school leave however definitely at least 2 pages would be needed for a college leaver.

EDIT:

That said I also do acknowledge that practices in resume writing change. When I first started out and wrote my resume it was common practice to include your date of birth as part of the personal information at the top of your resume. This was later removed from resumes to limit discrimination against age. Perhaps they will evolve again somehow to stop discrimination against race. Who knows.

Edited by Drayke Newall
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:
13 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

Couldn't it be all 3?  Racism, classism, and "being traumatized by freedom"?

The author Shelby Steele in the talk I linked makes a good case for the lack of faith in one's freedom to lead to a continuation of seeing oneself as being a lower class as well as blaming supposed ongoing racism for that. I suggest a listen to it if you haven't already as he makes some great points for anyone who may see them self as a minority. The relevant talk is only 17 minutes. 35:00 to around 52:00 minute mark.

I like Mr. Steele overall from what I can see of him in these talks (yes I have listened to him) -- he's well-read, not a strident 'in your face' kinda guy, obviously cares about social issues, funny at times, a good speaker. And I actually agree with his idea that some Black people could be "traumatized by freedom" (not being able to cope with the freedom they now have due to enslavement for so many years, not knowing how to develop skills needed to succeed).

He provides an example in himself for clarification. He reveals how his father had a "you can do it" attitude which helped him succeed. And he points out the skills lacking as a Black man that needed to be developed on his own (the steps he needed to take to become a tenured professor, a path that was not known to the average Black man, and so the development of skills were needed). This begs the question though, what if he had not had this encouraging father with the "you can do it" attitude? I can tell you, without having adequate parenting it would make it very difficult if not impossible to be able to develop the skills he mentioned one must develop in order to succeed. Not everyone is a Barack Obama with a highly-functioning mother to help them, the "special Black person" those who deny racism use when they claim "if one Black could succeed then all should easily be able to".

I'm not denying that each individual is ultimately responsible for their own lives. I'm only saying that some, through their past experiences, have it much much harder, and that we should endeavor to provide assistance in ways that can help these people live a successful life, and not blame them for their problems (just pull yourself up by your bootstraps! -- The rallying cry of all conservatives who can't seem to comprehend that something outside their individual self called 'society' plays a significant role as well). Everything is simply not within individual control, and too much focus on the individual as the solution can cause us to miss the role society plays.  If we focus on what WE can do, becoming aware of how our implicit biases might be contributing to the oppression of Blacks, then we have within ourselves a very powerful tool to combat racism. 

Edited by Luna Bliss
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Drayke Newall said:

I meant in as far as your articles never proved there was systemic racism in the employment chances of those persons. That is to say, those tests didn't clearly without bias show that their employment rejection was due to systemic racism.

Perhaps I am wrong in my understanding of what systemic racism means but, I have always understood it to be not just a once off instance but a build up over multiple scenarios.

Here's a good link with a few videos explaining what systemic racism means.

https://www.raceforward.org/videos/systemic-racism

I think you mentioned being in the hard sciences?  Experiments in the Social Sciences are a bit different. It's more rare that we can actually prove that, for example, the person who indicated in a test they believed a Black person was more likely to be a criminal compared to Whites actually exhibits this behavior in real life. It's implied -- because they indicated Blacks were more likely criminal in the test compared to Whites, they would most likely view Blacks as more likely to be criminal in real life.  This is seen as a factor leading to higher incarceration rates for Blacks.

There are numerous experiments out there revealing the types of bias that lead to poorer outcomes for Blacks compared to Whites.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, FairreLilette said:
12 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

Couldn't it be all 3?  Racism, classism, and "being traumatized by freedom"?

Yes, but I think it has varying degrees depending upon where you live in the country.  

Yes, though we all are affected by social media, each area of the country has problems with racism specific to their area of the country.

And with the notion of how much responsibility any individual bears to overcome their circumstance (embedded in the "being traumatized by freedom") theory, we simply can't know the answer as each individual grew up differently. Even the Black person's therapist would be cautious in estimating what their client should be able to do to overcome their problems, as even knowing a person up close we can miss things. 

In other words, I can agree that those having problems succeeding in society need to develop skills, but it's not helpful to blame people who don't have these skills yet. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Elisaisabel Munro said:

Mobs raging in the streets, in universities... I heard that thanx to BLM many places went out of police, and there were murders and more.  That's what you get for following an extremist minority group, or staying quiet in fear the mob call you "racist". 

No politician wants to go against them because it is a political suicide.

"When someone asks me about violence, I just find it incredible, because what it means is that the person who’s asking that question has absolutely no idea what black people have gone through, what black people have experienced in this country, since the time the first black person was kidnapped from the shores of Africa".

 
 
 

angela davis incredible 2.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Drayke Newall said:
2 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Possibly it correlates to findings of bias in top legal firms who see women as perhaps being less dedicated owing to potential marriage and or kids which would risk the investment they have put into them by that point.

This may be true. I recall years ago my old employer looked very harshly at female applicants on the basis that he would have to pay a female not only full pay maternity leave for 7 months (12 months now) but also her replacement for those 7 months resulting in an unsustainable financial situation for him, or so he said.

"The U.S. is the only country among 41 nations that does not mandate any paid leave for new parents, according to data compiled by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and current as of April 2018. The smallest amount of paid leave required in any of the other 40 nations is about two months".

A couple of states do have paid maternity leave now though, so maybe your old employer was in one of those states?

Many employees are single mothers though, and need to work. So we need to remove this unfair burden against them via the government supported maternity leave that other wealthy countries have.

Edited by Luna Bliss
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

"When someone asks me about violence, I just find it incredible, because what it means is that the person who’s asking that question has absolutely no idea what black people have gone through, what black people have experienced in this country, since the time the first black person was kidnapped from the shores of Africa".

What happened in the past is not a justification for the present. As Shelby Steele points out: 

What do whites have to do? I think that what whites have to do is acknowledge and accept one interesting fact. It’s not a theory. It’s a fact. Since 1965 to roughly this, our own time, white America, I think, has made one of the greatest moral evolutions in all of human history. There is no example that I’m aware of, of a society determining to correct itself morally that has been more consistent and more relentless than what white Americans have done.

I am of the opinion that this violence could undo a lot of the progress that has been made and make people wonder if the prejudice of the past was justified. Shelby has a lot more wisdom on how to motivate people to try even harder through an acknowledgement of that progress.

I'll be quite frank Luna that I was much more motivated to look at any potential bias's I may still have when i heard him say that then I have been from any of the hundreds of posts condemning white people for their supposed inherent "privilege". Shaming as a motivator does not work well and neither does violence. No doubt there are studies to prove that.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Luna Bliss said:

"The U.S. is the only country among 41 nations that does not mandate any paid leave for new parents, according to data compiled by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and current as of April 2018. The smallest amount of paid leave required in any of the other 40 nations is about two months".

Wow the more I see in these forums about American society the more they just seem backwards.

I do have to correct myself being 1am (now almost 2am D:) when I posted that response it should have read about 5 months + paid maternity leave. In Australia we have for females 5 months paid maternity/parental (newborn or adopt) leave that is paid directly from the government however the employer can if they wish add to that without impacting the government payment. In addition to that if I recall there is allowance for up to 12 months of unpaid parental (male or female) leave whereby your job is secure. Believe in the new Australian financial year this July 1st that is changing again to a form of Flexible paid leave.

It used to be all funded by the employer hence my previous employers issue with it. Male parents or caregivers also now get 2 weeks paid parental leave when the have a newborn or adopt.

1 minute ago, Luna Bliss said:

A couple of states do have paid maternity leave now though, so maybe your old employer was in one of those states?

Australia actually 😉.

1 minute ago, Luna Bliss said:

Many employees are single mothers though, and need to work. So we need to remove this unfair burden against them via  government supported maternity leave that other wealthy countries have.

Yes fully agree. Should also do what Australia does and offer a smaller paid parental leave for male employees in the first weeks so they can also enjoy their new gift of life.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Drayke Newall said:

Congratulations you have also made my block list and join the esteemed company of only one other person who was a spammer years ago. 

Translation: LET ME THROW THOUSANDS OF WORDS OF YOU AND THEN I'M GOING TO BLOCK YOU BECAUSE I LIVE IN A VACUUM AND CANNOT HANDLE PEOPLE DISAGREEING WITH ME!

You'd be a lot happier if you kept your head buried in that fine Australian soil and just skipped right on past threads about racism in a country that you have little to no understanding of instead of bloviating about resumes. 

You don't think racism is a real problem throughout the entire world. You don't like anything to do with the actual topic we're attempting to discuss here. You've shown your distaste quite clearly. 

Why can't you just skip past it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

"When someone asks me about violence, I just find it incredible, because what it means is that the person who’s asking that question has absolutely no idea what black people have gone through, what black people have experienced in this country, since the time the first black person was kidnapped from the shores of Africa".

 
 
 

angela davis incredible 2.gif

She's from a different country though, Luna.  This is our problem to fix.  Outsiders looking in don't understand the issues here nor the corruption in denying POC their rights in this country.  They think "land of the free" or something.  

 

1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

Yes, though we all are affected by social media, each area of the country has problems with racism specific to their area of the country.

Yes, California tends to be more open to all aspects of the human race than some states.  However, when I state this, this does not mean all Californians are like this - open.  

Beth is challenging me that California has racists.  Well, no doubt.  Racists could be anywhere.  But, I'm talking about my own experience as a Californian and my ex husband's experience as a person who grew up in Philadelphia but became a Californian when he was 19.  My ex told me the whites and the blacks hate each other in Philadelphia.  And, from what I've seen of upper middle class Ivy League suburban Philadelphia, it is all white.  

Growing up in California, my first boyfriend was Lebanese; my best friend is Jewish; one of my sister's best friends is Japanese, and on and on that list goes.  It's not like that in upper middle class Ivy League areas that I've seen; it's white, upper middle class white period with snobby lineage.  

The whites and the blacks for the most part do not want to mingle in Philadelphia.  I lived in a town in Southern California where I met people from every country in the world.  In my current building I live with Russians, Armenians, Israelis, Iranians, along with various white/black/hispanic Americans.   No Asians currently in my building except for a visitor I've met.  

People need to stop equating that one person's experience with prejudice is the same as theirs or statistics on the internet.  I don't know how many racists are in California but I've not met any.   People have fear of drugs and gangs and guns here in California.  We have a drug war and gang war here which needs replacement opportunities for to get out of poverty and to be a more legal job growth state.  We need to lessen the charges for a small possession though until these drugs are gone.  People might say that's stereotyping minorities in California.  Trust me, all people of all classes and all colors are involved in this drug war here.  

Another thing a person visiting California from another country may not even realize is that we have undercover cops who pose as the homeless too.  There are good cops too trying to help who live as homeless people to try to get to the main connections of where the drugs are coming from.  It's all very involved.  

So, in this way, this is California's fight.  An outsider looking in doesn't understand the problems here nor do statics paint an accurate picture as one could find 20 different sites with different statistics on the amount of drug addicts in California for example.  

Another thing is most of us who don't come from money and can't afford college, the Armed Forces give us a free education.  Many Blacks and Hispanics become cops after serving time in the armed forces and they care a whole lot about people but they are often looked at as traitors to their own people.  Why we cannot beat this g-ddam drug war in California is beyond me.  Better opportunities are badly needed but to where those coming out of the inner cities don't feel inferior or are afraid of freedom.  L.A. County has had school over-crowding since I was in school.  Did it take coronavirus for them to finally fix the problem of the schools here?   There aren't any easy answers but some countries are going to have to realize this is our responsibility to fix the problems here, and it's going to have to be state by state as many laws are in the states hands. 

Edited by FairreLilette
Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep hearing the argument that people don’t want to support what is going on because of terms like “white privilege”. To me this sounds like a branding issue. The thing is, with all of the facts pointed out about racial disparity, what would a better term be?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Beth Macbain said:

Translation: LET ME THROW THOUSANDS OF WORDS OF YOU AND THEN I'M GOING TO BLOCK YOU BECAUSE I LIVE IN A VACUUM AND CANNOT HANDLE PEOPLE DISAGREEING WITH ME!

There is a difference between disagreeing and people outright overlooking what I write. Take Luna for instance, we have disagreed on many points in this thread but she reads my arguments correctly and responds correctly to them as do I (at least I hope) with her posts and my responses. We have engaged in a good conversation disagreeing and agreeing on many points. She has taught me some things and I hope she has learnt some things from my posts.

I am always open to debate as through that I learn many new things and I hope others learn new things from my points and point of view as well.

Innula on the other hand, has multiple times in multiple threads completely overlooked my point entirely or even not understood that I have said exactly the same thing over and over. Then has the nerve to post back saying I don't understand that a study said x when I did, of which I then showed I stated the very same thing.

So no sorry, I want to engage in a civil discussion where people have basic reading comprehension which in turn shows respect to the person.

7 minutes ago, Beth Macbain said:

You'd be a lot happier if you kept your head buried in that fine Australian soil and just skipped right on past threads about racism in a country that you have little to no understanding of instead of bloviating about resumes.

I have more of an understanding of America than you do of Australia that I am sure. That said, like I mentioned open and polite discourse, including debating is how we learn. I am not afraid to say I have learnt many good and bad things about America through these threads, as well as many things about racism I didn't know. You hark on about people being closed minded to racism and needing to educate themselves about such issues however, then turn around and say I am not welcome in such threads whereby I am educating myself about such issues. Pretty hypocritical.

As for your accusation of me bloviating about resumes. It is my right of free speech and was in direct response to Luna's post and I thought it was prudent to offer a differing opinion based on my experience as an employer. If you don't want to read my posts then don't. I'm sorry you feel that they are long and nothing but empty. But by stating such things it shows your maturity level.

7 minutes ago, Beth Macbain said:

You don't think racism is a real problem throughout the entire world. You don't like anything to do with the actual topic we're attempting to discuss here. You've shown your distaste quite clearly. 

Why can't you just skip past it?

I would ask where have I shown such things but I would assume like all other times where you have constantly said this and that about the same thing will still fail to prove that I think that way.

This thread was continuing perfectly fine and on topic as far as both the OP and by replying within context of what other people had posted trying to keep within the bounds civilly so as not to have another racism thread locked due to abuse. Yet once again, you Beth and Innula have turned this civil discussion into a mess by yet more abuse and unsubstantiated claims slung at other people. All that is missing is your other partner in crime who seems to have gone very quite of late.

So lets count, how many threads about racism that were carrying on civilly have you already forced closed (locked) due to your abuse 3? Will this make it 4 now?

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Janet Voxel said:

I keep hearing the argument that people don’t want to support what is going on because of terms like “white privilege”. To me this sounds like a branding issue. The thing is, with all of the facts pointed out about racial disparity, what would a better term be?

Off the top of my head, words like equality, equal rights, safety, reform, solidarity, even what you just said, racial disparity. Spend some time in a thesaurus or dictionary, or even just giving it thought, and a person could easily come up with more. There are lots of options out there.

There's no need to sound racist in the fight against racism. It undermines the effort.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Janet Voxel said:

I keep hearing the argument that people don’t want to support what is going on because of terms like “white privilege”. To me this sounds like a branding issue. The thing is, with all of the facts pointed out about racial disparity, what would a better term be?

It's not a branding issue.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Janet Voxel said:

I keep hearing the argument that people don’t want to support what is going on because of terms like “white privilege”. To me this sounds like a branding issue. The thing is, with all of the facts pointed out about racial disparity, what would a better term be?

For several centuries it was white Ivy League male dominant money privilege because that was actually the establishment the anti-establishment people of the 1960's during The Civil Rights Movement and The Women's Rights Movement were over-throwing.  It has also been discussed in decades past regarding white middle class and white upper class privilege.  These are privileges that were very real in this country.  Money can buy a lot.  How much privilege can be painted with one wide sweeping brush of "white privilege" I am not sure.   Even as a woman with supposedly women's rights behind us now, I have been discriminated against.  So can we paint with a wide brush "male privilege" or even "white male privilege"?   I'm not sure.  As far as do white males tend to be all the presidents except Obama as a mixed race, yes, it's true.  It follows a pattern in the presidency, so does that mean that white male Ivy League money privilege still exists today?  I don't know but I remain suspicious. 

Edit:  However, Janet, you over-looked one thing here...we need to look at and focus on police privilege too.  The police granted themselves a privilege with qualified immunity they do not possess the right to have as it was not voted in by the people but rather by only the police granting it to themselves.  There is real and dangerous police privilege we need to over-turn here and it's a very serious matter that's endangering our citizens if we don't over-turn this privilege.   

Edited by FairreLilette
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, FairreLilette said:

She's from a different country though, Luna.  This is our problem to fix.  Outsiders looking in don't understand the issues here nor the corruption in denying POC their rights in this country.  They think "land of the free" or something. 

Actually, She's a Alabama girl.

I do agree though that people from other countries don't understand the issues here, just like people in our own country don't understand the issues here..

Many look at the U.S. as one huge state when it's 50 of them.. Many people think Africa is a country..hehehe

Over in Europe they look at each place as a different country or state..The U.S. never gets looked at as that..it's one big unit to everyone on the outside.. When really each state has it's own laws and more than likely if someone hasn't been to a certain state, then they haven't a clue..let alone they'd need to spend a good amount of time to know the real deal anyways..

Slamming everything into one big basket just saves time for many and is much easier way to define things than really digging in and finding the real troubled spots..

Most any time you hear me talk ,it's about the places I know and my experiences and things I know and have seen or picked up from people i know in the know..

Because you can't really ever go wrong from what you know...

I've had people that have never been to Chicago argue with me on what's going on in Chicago.. If I could just have one internet wish,it would be to B*tch slap through the internet in cases like that.. hehehehe

Things I don't know or haven't seen with my own eyes, I research the hell out of and look for the most untainted politically motivated free as possible information and then try to double and triple down on other sources to see if things line up..

The main thing I look for is the truth, not for anyone else but myself..Because I'm not raising my children on lies or a means to an end.. I want my children purely educated, not modified..

This is why they have no phones of their own to fill them up with clutter..When they are out of the house and on their own and old enough to buy one themselves, I just hope then we did well enough a job as parents that they can sift through the debris to the truth on their own..

My father said something one time when we were on two week trail ride.. one of the riders with us was looking at a map..This guy was like are you sure we are supossed to go that way? this looks like we are supposed to take this other trail..

He turned to me and said, Do you want to follow the guy with the map or the guy that knows the trail? I started laughing..

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that some of you love to get involved in citing articles back and forth but that's not what I intended for this thread.  This thread is more about personal response to trying to awaken your consciousness to the fact that we are all living in a systemically racist society and in order to change that we need to feel it, and feel the wrongness and rise up to demand changes to the system. we are not a bunch of scholars debating here. we are people.

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Arielle Popstar said:

What happened in the past is not a justification for the present. As Shelby Steele points out: 

What do whites have to do? I think that what whites have to do is acknowledge and accept one interesting fact. It’s not a theory. It’s a fact. Since 1965 to roughly this, our own time, white America, I think, has made one of the greatest moral evolutions in all of human history. There is no example that I’m aware of, of a society determining to correct itself morally that has been more consistent and more relentless than what white Americans have done.

I'll be quite frank Luna that I was much more motivated to look at any potential bias's I may still have when i heard him say that then I have been from any of the hundreds of posts condemning white people for their supposed inherent "privilege". Shaming as a motivator does not work well and neither does violence. No doubt there are studies to prove that.

Nobody has denied that Blacks made tremendous strides in overcoming their past oppression, and that situations for them are much better now. What Shelby leaves out in his analysis though is that we need to change society as well as the individual person in order for Blacks to overcome poverty and receive less harsh treatment by the police and the judicial system. The violence, starting with slavery, continues!

To remedy this we need to focus on the individual (what Blacks can do themselves via developing the skills needed to succeed, as Shelby recommends) AND we need to focus on what society can do. We need to realize we have unconscious attitudes that label them in an unfair manner -- a manner that assigns criminality and 'not as good as Whites' characteristics to them, increasing police profiling and longer sentences for incarceration. These negative stereotypes of Blacks ends up ruining their lives in some cases, and depriving them of educational and employment opportunities.

I didn't hear you denying that you personally don't believe some prejudice still exists, as you're saying you'd be much more inclined to help Blacks if you were not labeled as having "white privilege". What I don't understand is why you would feel people are blaming you, or saying you are bad somehow? For me, the term just means I have some advantages because I'm White, and it was interesting to go back through my lifetime and recognize how I might have had a much harder time had I been born Black (I listed some examples of white privilege, like my mother getting a better paying job that was denied Blacks, thereby having a nest egg that was passed on to myself and my brothers, making our lives financially easier. Also, having a White child caused me to worry less my child would be gunned down in the streets or even die).

I see you as being more worried about what others think of you (somehow blaming you for having white privilege) than the reality of the profound abuse that Blacks have suffered, and still suffer, today.
Your concern seems petty, compared to the horrific injustice Blacks have endured.
I'm sure you don't like me labeling your concerns as petty. I'd be willing to change my mind if you can convince me they are important.  Are you on Twitter a lot or something where people are shaming others?  I honestly have not seen it much in this forum.

Edited by Luna Bliss
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, kali Wylder said:

I know that some of you love to get involved in citing articles back and forth but that's not what I intended for this thread.  This thread is more about personal response to trying to awaken your consciousness to the fact that we are all living in a systemically racist society and in order to change that we need to feel it, and feel the wrongness and rise up to demand changes to the system. we are not a bunch of scholars debating here. we are people.

Well you know one thing I'd like explained is why the word you brought up in the title (being 'woke') is now such a derogatory term for quite a few people.  Being 'woke' just means 'being aware of racial injustice'.    So being aware is now wrong in America????

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, FairreLilette said:

Yes, California tends to be more open to all aspects of the human race than some states.

My experiences in California are very different from yours. Of course, I worked with black and Hispanic teenagers from Watts, Compton and east LA, and not the lily white Valley. I also have friends from Philadelphia that I know and love that are the kindest, most accepting, loving people I've ever known. 

22 minutes ago, FairreLilette said:

People need to stop equating that one person's experience with prejudice is the same as theirs or statistics on the internet. 

You do, too, Fairre. You've painted the entire north east part of the country as racist, the entire city of Philadelphia, the entire southern US, yet while you acknowledge that there is racism in California, you won't acknowledge that it is just as racist as any other area of the country. Being from another one of those areas of the country, as well as having lived in your area of the country, I find that offensive. 

I live in Louisville, KY. Breonna Taylor's home. We have a problem with racism. You live in Los Angeles. Home of Rodney King. You have a problem with racism. This is the United States of America. We have a problem with racism. 

27 minutes ago, FairreLilette said:

Another thing is most of us who don't come from money and can't afford college, the Armed Forces give us a free education.

That ain't free. For many, it's a hell of a price to pay. And why would anyone sign up willingly for anything where the actual price could be their own death, or the killing of others, in some other man's war?

21 minutes ago, Janet Voxel said:

I keep hearing the argument that people don’t want to support what is going on because of terms like “white privilege”. To me this sounds like a branding issue. The thing is, with all of the facts pointed out about racial disparity, what would a better term be?

People who have a problem with terms like "white privilege" are going to have a problem with any terminology. It's just another attempt to deflect.

And, sorry, @Drayke Newall... Luna has more patience for this than I do. There are all different sorts of racism, but they're all still just racism. This is a fight for a better world. I'm fighting that fight. And I'm fighting the closing of those threads as well, and I'll fight it on this one, too, if I have to. 

LL has asked us to stand in solidarity alongside them in support of BLM. They have plainly stated their intent to fight racism. In their own words, "Now is the time for us to come together as a community and to stand up for what is right, just, and decent. We hope that you will stand with us in our fight for a better world and in recognition that Black Lives Matter today and every day."

I'm working my way right up the LL food chain to protest the closing of those threads. Silencing everyone rather than silencing the racists is antithetical to the Lab's own words. I'm not going to be civil to racists. I didn't bring the fight to you - you came to these threads - and the discussions haven't been civil on your part, either. Using all the words you can fit on the page isn't civility. You, and others, are trying to discredit what black people know to be the truth, by coming into these threads with no intent to learn about their own personal racial biases and how to recognize them and how to overcome them, or how to help BLM, or the progress BLM is making.

You come to these threads to disrupt. You can couch it in all the words you want, and pretend that you're being civil (colonial might be a better word for it) but that's the truth of the matter. 

I won't tolerate it, I won't be civil, and I won't fight pretty. 

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 90 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...