user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Voted : yes
Yes, especially if you are blind.
Voted : no
I *try* to leave raceout of issues, but sometimes, circumstances and/or small minds force me to enter the fray on that platform. IMO, it costs us valuable tim and resources in any discussion, to be forced tp venture into these avenues when the issues themselves deserve those expenditures.
Not if you are a white liberal it seems.
Then you are inevitably biased against your own race, for some perverse, guilt driven reason.
Not me, I love the white boys!
Voted : yes
Certainly. I'm partial to the human race. Beyond that, I don't think it really matters where (geographically) a persons origin is, we are, after all, the same down inside. Why is it relevent to anything if one person is born in asia and another in Europe or North America? Those are cultural and national differences, but it shouldn't constitute some faucet of racial division. At least it don't for me.
Passivon, but a person's experiences often influence a person's persective, don't they?
FFSLD, yeah, and face blind too (that's a real condition)
by aya on Fri Feb 09, 07 2:20pm
[+]
This is true Aya, expeience does influence perspective. And race issues are divided in society because of Ego, Greed, Hatred, Peer pressure, national orientation, culture, etc. The list goes on and on.
But individuals, no matter what race can unbias perspectives based on experience by becoming emotionally detached from the experience.
Racial division is not a wide stretch from The Hatfields and McCoys lore.
That's the situation everyone faces when it comes to Choosing sides of the issues. Hatfields side with hatfields, McCoys with McCoys. And it's feudalism. But both Hatfield and McCoy are white arkansas hillbillies with no cultural or racial differences. So why do they feud?
As an observer, we see it as unnecessary. They should get along, but they don't. Why?
It depends on the individual, their value system, the environment from which they came, their confidence level, whether they are dividers or uniters, and many other factors including levels of wisdom, education and life experiences...yet many people overlook anything that doesn't bolster their convictions...at the end of the day, the only person you really know is yourself...(hopefully)
I don't think that it is impossible but improbable. Stereotypes are largely true. Irish tend to drink to much, Arabs tend to abuse women, Asians tend to be good students, Blacks are better jumpers.
Voted : no
Not impossible, but a lot of people still get emotional about the issue.
Voted : yes
It helps if you don't focus on it and use it as the sole defining characteristic of a person.
Such as saying that a college should bring in more blacks because they all have the same black experience to share. Or say, setting up months to focus exclusively on their skin color. Or using every opportunity to point out when the first black person achieved (blank) when (blank) is neither new nor remarkable, the only difference is that now a black guy is doing.
Yep, some people set up laws and regulations that force us to constantly notice race. I guess a certain leftwing party would disappear if race politics were done away with.
Voted : yes
Yes, that is possible. There are many caucasians that support affirmative action, and there are many non-caucasians that oppose it. One's own race can be irrelevant to their assertions on the way race relations should be.
Yep, some people set up laws and regulations that force us to constantly notice race.
But you need affirmative action and things like that. By treating everyone EXACTLY the same, you perpetuate bias.
by aya on Sat Feb 10, 07 9:06am
[+]
There are many caucasians that support affirmative action, and there are many non-caucasians that oppose it.
Soc, then being unbiased is in the eyes of the beholder, isn't it?
by aya on Sat Feb 10, 07 9:06am
[+]
When the term white boy is used you are implying that whites are somehow less than men.
aya- From a grander philosophical perspective, I believe that all perspectives are impossible to be unbiased on any issue. A perspective is merely a point of view. A point of view is always subjective.
That is merely my perspective, which could be wrong.
Soc, uh yeah, ok,
LCB, I didn't use White boy
by aya on Sat Feb 10, 07 11:30am
[+]
"By treating everyone EXACTLY the same, you perpetuate bias"
Let's take a moment to reflect on this . . . by treating everyone as equals, you are in fact treating them unfairly because minorities aren't given any preferential treatment.
Think about that.
Aya: I want you to imagine something with me for just one minute. Imagine a society of many different ethnicities, but one that is indifferent to such superficial differences. They don't see black people, white people, they just see people. They don't say "this is the greatest black scientist in our country right now" or the "first black president" or things like that, they simply comment on that individuals personal characteristics, independent of melanin levels.
Would you say that is a desirable society that we should move towards, or a horrible one that we should work to avoid?
Aya, I was talking to Cranks.
NO, it is completely impossible, and what is funny is that you will find the people who are most adament that they are 'totally impartial' and take the most offense to being told otherwise are typically the worst offenders of all because they fail to see where they to it.
Everyone has stereotypes based on race, people who say they do not are either flat out lying or they are ignorant, it's when you allow those stereotypes to negatively affect your interactions and opinions that you become racist.
Would you say that is a desirable society that we should move towards, or a horrible one that we should work to avoid?
Herzog, here's the problem though, let's say you were a minority from a poor inner-city school, you passed and went on to college, but let's say you needed to take calculus, but didn't have the appropriate background in calculus b/c you came from a crappy school. There are others, though, who have had the advantage of tutors and coming from a good school and are doing just fine in calculus, would it be fair for the school to simply disregard the needs of the innercity-school students, and not try to provide programs to allow them to catch up, or simply say, "Well, you're on your own?"
Or, in the case of disabled students, would it simply be fair for the school to simply say "Well, we know you have special needs, and you need longer to complete your exam, but in the interest of treating everyone EXACTLY the same, we're not going to accomodate your needs."
That wouldn't be fair, would it? That's why affirmative action is needed, isn't it? So those who've been historically disadvantaged can catch up. However, a little boost is necessary, but not going overboard.
by aya on Sun Feb 11, 07 10:08am
[+]
LCB, ok
by aya on Sun Feb 11, 07 10:09am
[+]
"
Herzog, here's the problem though, let's say you were a minority from a poor inner-city school, you passed and went on to college, but let's say you needed to take calculus, but didn't have the appropriate background in calculus b/c you came from a crappy school. There are others, though, who have had the advantage of tutors and coming from a good school and are doing just fine in calculus, would it be fair for the school to simply disregard the needs of the innercity-school students, and not try to provide programs to allow them to catch up, or simply say, "Well, you're on your own?" "
Here's the thing, minorities aren't the only ones who come from the inner city. There are whites and asians who likewise come from shitty inner city schools, or tiny underfunded rural schools. And yet the assumption is made that they have recieved a top notch education but all the blacks at the exact same school were at a disadvantage. Does that make sense?
Besides which, if you went to a great highschool then the first year of college is simply a review and you can take it easy. If you didn't then the first year catches you up but is definitely doable. Essentially if you can read and write, do basic math and you have the drive you can get through your first year of college, and after that first year you're on par with everyone else.
"
Or, in the case of disabled students, would it simply be fair for the school to simply say "Well, we know you have special needs, and you need longer to complete your exam, but in the interest of treating everyone EXACTLY the same, we're not going to accomodate your needs.""
If they have a mental disorder then reasonable accommodation's should be made. But I wouldn't put being black in the same category as having a mental disorder. Apples/oranges.
"
That wouldn't be fair, would it? That's why affirmative action is needed, isn't it? So those who've been historically disadvantaged can catch up. However, a little boost is necessary, but not going overboard"
But it doesn't apply to poor whites, not exactly the best represented people in the country. Some white trailer trash from the sticks is probably at a disadvantage compared to oprahs kids, wouldn't you say? But according to affirmative action the little black millionares are in need of a hand up, while the poor crackers are on their own.
Now, if you wanted to base it on your parents education level, and income that'd be one thing. But to base it on race is ludicrous.
"Now, if you wanted to base it on your parents education level, and income that'd be one thing. But to base it on race is ludicrous."
Well, that's just it, the families of Blacks and minorities are usually worse off than poor Whites. Whites still control all the major institutions of power.
"Some white trailer trash from the sticks is probably at a disadvantage compared to oprahs kids, wouldn't you say?"
Blacks are more broken down than poor whites. Blacks have a higher infant mortality rate, higher poverty rate, and b/w the ages of One in three black males in America between the ages of 20 and 29 are either in jail, on parole or probation.
" Besides which, if you went to a great highschool then the first year of college is simply a review and you can take it easy. If you didn't then the first year catches you up but is definitely doable."
However, if Blacks make it to school, they're more likely to be backtracked into remedial and special education courses based on skin color instead of performance.
"But it doesn't apply to poor whites, not exactly the best represented people in the country"
88% of Whites over 25 have graduated with a degree from college; while 79% of Blacks only have a high school degree.
But even if a Black person gets into college, and gets a degree, it's still hard to find a job. The U.S. labour department says that the unemployment rate for Blacks is double that of Whites.
so, poor Whites are most likely at an advantage compared to poor blacks.
by aya on Mon Feb 12, 07 12:36pm
[+]
" Well, that's just it, the families of Blacks and minorities are usually worse off than poor Whites. Whites still control all the major institutions of power."
So why not base it on actual discrepencies of power, such as the very poor, rather than assumed ones? Essentially you've engaged in racial profiling: most blacks are poor and uneducated, therefore it is fair to assume all are and base policies on this. Do you support racial profiling in this manner? Why not base it on individual characteristics?
" Blacks are more broken down than poor whites"
So a poor white guy living in the trailer park with no education has more in common with Ted Kennedy then one of his country club buddies who also grew up a multimillionaire but who happens to be black?
"Blacks have a higher infant mortality rate, higher poverty rate, and b/w the ages of One in three black males in America between the ages of 20 and 29 are either in jail, on parole or probation. "
In terms of affirmative action poverty is the only thing that matters from that list. So why wouldn't giving a slight advantage to the poor work out the same if most blacks are poor?
" However, if Blacks make it to school, they're more likely to be backtracked into remedial and special education courses based on skin color instead of performance."
Or perhaps because they were put in colleges where they don't belong based on affirmative action programs that gave them a leg up? You put any kid that barely graduated highschool and is only semi-literate in Yale and he's going to be pushed in to certain classes. Well, those kids that were given advantages based on their race were the ones who couldn't make it based on skill alone.
" 88% of Whites over 25 have graduated with a degree from college"
That's not true. If whites make up 75% of the population and (according to official government statistics) just under 17 million college grads are white it comes to less than 15% of whites having graduated from college. Big difference between 15 and 88. Blacks are considerably less, but I'll wager that if you compare whites of similiar economic status the level of college education is the same.
"But even if a Black person gets into college, and gets a degree, it's still hard to find a job. "
Blacks with a college education earn about the same as whites. In fact, blacks women actually earn slightly more than white women with similar educations.
“So why not base it on actual discrepencies of power, such as the very poor, rather than assumed ones?”
Are you saying that the majority of Whites DON’T control the major institutions of power? If Whites control the major institutions of power, it might be easier for a poor White man/woman to climb up the social ladder easier than a poor Black man/woman.
“So a poor white guy living in the trailer park with no education has more in common with Ted Kennedy then one of his country club buddies who also grew up a multimillionaire but who happens to be black?”
If we’re comparing POOR Blacks and POOR Whites, then chances are poor Blacks are still worse off.
“So why wouldn't giving a slight advantage to the poor work out the same if most blacks are poor?”
Race has, for the longest time, been the basis for oppression, and plays such a large role in one's opportunity to excel. If Blacks have been denied opportunity b/c of their race, then affirmative action is a way to remedy that. And race is also associated with class in the United States and it still matters, (alibet) indirectly. And, according to Census Data, The poverty rate for Whites in 8.3 percent in 2005. 24.9 percent for Blacks, 21.8 percent for Hispanic residents and 11.1 percent for Asian residents. However, even though Asians have higher income levels and higher education levels than Whites, they still have higher poverty rates. But Asians don’t have the same historical disadvantages in the States that Blacks have had.
“In fact, blacks women actually earn slightly more than white women with similar educations.”
Can I see statistics on that? And what percentage of Black women compared to White women?
“Blacks with a college education earn about the same as whites.”
Yes, perhaps, but there are far fewer of them with college degrees. I was wrong with those 88% stats, it’s 30% compared to just 17%of Black adults.
by aya on Tue Feb 13, 07 9:43am
[+]
However, none of this means that I'm 100% sure of affirmative action
by aya on Tue Feb 13, 07 9:47am
[+]
|
|
