Unitended racism

Hyroglyphx writes:

quote:

---

For if you promote or hire someone solely on the basis of their race

---

Ahem.What makes you think that what you've just described has anything to do with affirmative action?This is a famous conservative talking point but like most such points, has very little connection to reality.

quote:

---

how is that any better than denying a promotion or employment based on race?

---

What makes you think that the Ricci case had anything to do with what you just described?Question: Without looking anything up, what was the scenario of the Ricci case that brought it to court?Question: Did the decision of the Supreme Court actually overturn Title VII?Question: What, exactly, is Title VII?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Taz writes:

quote:

---

The you-should-be-hired-and-promoted-based-on-your-qualifications argument is pure bullshit.

---

This is precisely why symphony orchestras have moved to the blind audition process. If you looked at the orchestras, you would see that they were all white men. Oh, they all claimed that they weren't discriminating against women and those who weren't white, but it still was the case that the majority of the players were white men and what others they did have were usually somewhere in the lower parts rather than the leads.So certain symphonies moved to a blind audition process: You perform live in front of the judges, but you do so from behind a screen so they can't see you: They can only hear you playing.Suddenly, their membership had a much more diverse population with performers all through the ranks rather than a few token players in the thirds and fourths.Most other interactions cannot have such actions. Playing an instrument truly is all about your technique and your physical presence can be completely wiped away to concentrate on that performance. How many other jobs have such an ability? Personally, one thing that I would like to see is a more open process. Rather than keeping everything behind closed doors, the (anonymized) results should be available to affected parties.I think this is especially true with regard to salaries: Any employee should be able to go to HR and see the salary breakdown of the entire company in order to determine if there is a discriminatory pattern going on. This obsession we have about not talking about money is what helps keep the problem going on.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Taz writes:

quote:

---

They asked me if I could think of any movie made in the states with an asian hero who gets the girl at the end.

---

Well, knowing full well that one exception doesn't invalidate the concept (PBS had a wonderful documentary on the portrayal of Chinese people in cinema, "Hollywood Chinese," that goes into this very thing...the asexualization of Asian actors in general), but the first one that came to mind was Flower Drum Song. Of course, the entire cast is Asian so it's a forgone conclusion that the love story will have the Asian hero get the girl.

quote:

---

Is that racism our society has toward asian men? Most definitely! Can we nail it in court? Absolutely not! It's too damn subtle to be nailed down.

---

Not only that, it isn't really actionable: You don't have the right to demand someone make your movie. It sucks that the big studios have a hard time with portraying certain types of characters with certain types of actors, but that isn't something you can fix with laws.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

CosmicChimp writes:

quote:

---

What is the worthy purpose in making company staffing reflect the racial distribution in society at large?

---

You really have to ask?

quote:

---

According to affirmative action (AA) laws the company is legally bound to tote the burden of maintaining a certain staff profile even to the detriment of the share-holder dividends and overall efficiency of the profitability of the firm.

---

Incorrect. This is a common Republican talking point but like most Republican talking points, is completely divorced from reality. There is no legal mandate anywhere for such quotas and I defy you to show me such a law.You're the one making the claim. You're the one who needs to back it up.

quote:

---

In the aforementioned case it is even what the Supreme Court says.

---

Incorrect.Did you actually read the decision? Once again, a few questions:Without looking anything up, what were the circumstances that brought the Ricci case to court?Did the decision actually overturn Title VII?What, exactly, does Title VII say?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

CosmicChimp responds to me:

quote:

---

I am actually interested in having some of the reasoning spelled out for me.

---

There's that whole "all men are created equal" concept which if we're going to live up to our convictions of justice for all, would require that we actively look out for discrimination within our ranks and do something about it. It is not enough to simply expect those who are disadvantaged to come to you. You have to seek them out and encourage them.

quote:

---

No, I did not read it and probably won't have any time for that. But thanks for your clarification nonetheless.

---

So let me see if I understand:You didn't read the decision.
You aren't going to read the decision.
You don't know what the law says.
You aren't going to find out what the law says.
And yet, you feel justified in making claims about what the decision said about the law (re: Message 15)......and are upset that somebody called you on it.Has it occurred to you that perhaps you should do your homework before you enter into the discussion rather than forcing other people to do it for you?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Rahvin writes:

quote:

---

And what about the proven statistical trend that women make less money than men and earn fewer promotions despite equivalent education and experience?

---

Actually, that isn't true. With regard to affirmative action, women have been the primary beneficiary.When education, experience, job history, etc. are taken into account, women earn about 95% of what men earn, 98-100% when starting salary is taken into account.The reason why women as a group, not taking such things into account but simply aggregating the whole, earn about 75% of what men earn has to do with the way women work. As a group, women tend to work fewer hours (more women work only 35 hours a week while more men work 50...both are considered "full time," but those who work more hours will tend to earn more). Women are more likely to have breaks in their job history, which depress their overall earnings.Even when we look at similar job categories, we find women tend to go into professions that pay less: When men and women go into medicine, women are more likely to go into specialties that don't pay as much such as pediatrics or psychology compared to specialities that pay more such as cardiology and neurology.Note, I am hardly saying that there isn't discrimination in the workplace. I'm saying that the blatant sexism has mostly gone away and been replaced by more subtle patterns.For example, about half of the Bachelor's degrees in Mathematics go to women, but that rate plummets as you go higher up the degree scale. If I recall correctly, it's something like less than 10% of the Ph.D.'s in Math go to women.Something is happening. It most likely isn't blatant discrimination at the graduate school level, though I am certain that there are many professors in academia who make their female students' lives unpleasant (to say the least) such that they don't wish to continue. However, a lot of it is the specific choices women, as a group, make with regard to their career.So long as society (and women are part of that society) thinks that women are the ones who stay home and take care of the children, there will always be a discrepancy between what women earn and what men earn.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Phat writes:

quote:

---

Critics would suggest that affirmative action causes a boss to consciously overlook a candidate because of their skin color or ethnicity.

---

And they would be vastly mischaracterizing how affirmative action works. This is a Republican talking point and like most such points, is completely divorced from reality.

quote:

---

I have no problem with other people getting a chance as long as I don't have to step aside in order for them to get it.

---

And what makes you think you have? Did someone tell you that you did?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hyroglyphx writes:

quote:

---

However, I see AA as being worse than that.

---

Ahem. Is the problem affirmative action or is it simply what people think affirmative action is?Again, I ask for any evidence of "quotas" that so many Republican talking points insist exist.In the Ricci case, for example, I have a very simple question:Was anybody denied a promotion?That's a very simple question, but it directly illustrates my point that there is what actually happened and then there is what people think happened.Was anybody denied a promotion?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Legend writes:

quote:

---

'Affirmative Action' or 'Positive Discrimination' as it's called here in the UK is just that: discrimination based on race, colour or sex.

---

Ahem, here in the United States, what makes you think that affirmative action is "discrimination based on race, color, or sex"?Be specific. Can you cite the law in Title VII that does this?If not, have you considered the possibility that there is what affirmative action really is and then there is what you merely think affirmative action is?For example, in the Ricci case, was anybody actually denied a promotion? A lot of people think that the white (and one Hispanic) firefighters didn't get promoted, but is that really what happened?

quote:

---

Hyroglyphx hit the nail on the head when he said that combating racism with more racism simply negates the premise.

---

And what makes you think that that is what affirmative action is?Be specific.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hyroglyphx writes:

quote:

---

And so your solution is compulsory hiring of minorities? I don't get it.

---

Indeed, you don't.What on earth makes you think that affirmative action is "compulsory hiring of minorities"? How many times do I have to ask you for specifics before you come up with some?Lots of Republicans want you to believe that affirmative action is discrimination against white males but like most Republican talking points, it has no connection to reality.In the Ricci case, was anybody denied a promotion?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

CosmicChimp responds to me:

quote:

---

"Justice for all," is promoted by fulfilling AA quotas?

---

Huh? There's no such thing as an "AA quota." Oh, Republicans certainly want you to think that there are but like most Republican talking points, it is completely divorced from reality. It is nothing more than a way for them to espouse their racist bigotry while pretending to be "patriotic" and "for equality."Was anybody denied a promotion in the Ricci case?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Legend writes:

quote:

---

In other words, in certain situations they'll be treated differently because of their race or colour. Also known as.......

---

Something other than affirmative action.Just what on earth do you think affirmative action is?Was anybody denied a promotion in the Ricci case?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hyroglyphx writes:

quote:

---

If you work for a boss who has it out for you and you get passed up for a promotion again and again, what is there to do?

---

You go to HR. You document a discrimination claim and take it to court if you have to. You seem to think that there are no employment regulations outside of affirmative action.

quote:

---

Affirmative Action IS racism

---

Really? Why?Be specific. Do not confuse what you think affirmative action is with what it actually is.Was anybody denied a promotion in the Ricci case?

quote:

---

There are so many things wrong with it, and apparently the Supreme Court agrees.

---

Showing you clearly didn't read the decision.Let's try a test:Without looking anything up, what was the decision of the Ricci case?Do you even know if anybody was denied a promotion?

quote:

---

In what way can I get you to understand that it is wrong, unfair, racist itself, and demeaning to minorities?

---

Well, the first thing would be to show that it is actually "unfair" or "racist." So far, all you've done is parrot Republican talking points and as we all should have learned by now, that's a pretty good sign that the opposite is true.Do you have any evidence that Title VII does anything you claim?Was anybody denied a promotion in the Ricci case?

quote:

---

And in the case in the OP positions were slated for minorities, minorities that never showed up.

---

No, it didn't. You don't know anything about the Ricci case, do you?Again, let's do a little test:Without looking anything up, what exactly happened in the Ricci case?Was anybody denied a promotion?If you don't even know what happened, what on earth makes you think you are in any position to say that what happened was "racist" or "unfair"? Consider the possibility that you do not know what affirmative action is or what the most recent case actually said.

quote:

---

Meanwhile, good workers aren't getting promotions on the basis of what??? On the basis of race.

---

Was anybody denied a promotion in the Ricci case?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hyroglyphx writes:

quote:

---

My idea of fairness might be a lot different than the socialist way of handling things. I don't think that it's fair to take away from someone else who rightfully earns something to give it to someone else who doesn't. That's not my idea of fairness.

---

And that isn't socialism, either.You need to stop watching Fox.Question: Is the police department "taking away from someone else who rightfully earns something to give it to someone who doesn't"? After all, the police are paid for by your taxes, those who earn more paying more, and yet those police protect everybody. That's "socialism."What about the fire department? Would you rather we got rid of the "socialist" fire department and go back to the privatized system we used to have where you had to pay a company for fire protection services and put a shield on your door to let everyone know who was allowed to put out a fire.And Chicago burned because of it.What about the "socialist" military? Should we privatize that, too? Blackwater did such a bang-up job in Iraq, right?I dare say, you don't know what socialism is.

quote:

---

Nobody is entitled to a job that doesn't earn it.

---

And if you had any evidence to show that affirmative action was connected this "doesn't earn it" fantasy of yours, you might have a point. But so far, you haven't actually justified your claim. You've simply repeated it over and over again.Was anybody denied a promotion in the Ricci case?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Legend responds to me:

quote:

---

we're not talking about specific laws

---

Huh? We're talking about the Ricci case which was a lawsuit regarding the application of Title VII. How is that not talking about specific laws?

quote:

---

we're talking about the policy

---

How is policy not dictated by law? Do you have any evidence of any policy anywhere that enacts "discrimination based on race, color, or sex"? Be specific.There are plenty of people who want you to THINK that such is the case, but they have a long track record of lying to you. Do you have any actual evidence?

quote:

---

and culture of affirmative action

---

Same problem. Where is the evidence? You have a lot of people saying that it's so, but where is the proof? Given that conservatives are well known for lying about it, why would you trust them now?

quote:

---

aka positive action aka positive discrimination.

---

Again, I can't speak for the UK, but it is not called such here nor does it function anywhere close to what is implied by those phrases.Where is your evidence?

quote:

---

contains provisions which enable an employer or service provider or other organisation to take positive action to overcome or minimise a disadvantage arising from people possessing particular protected characteristics.

---

How is that "discrimination"? If I go out of my way to make sure that minority sources know about an opening, how is that "discrimination"? It is a positive action, but how is it discriminatory?

quote:

---

In other words, this policy allows and encourages employers to make employment decisions based on their employees' race, gender and ethnicity.

---

Incorrect. Where in that definition do you see anything about "employment decisions"? It's talking about "overcoming disadvantages." That doesn't mean you make your decision based upon their decision. It means you take positive action to find those who are qualified but have been disadvantaged.Let me see if I can give a personal example:You're casting a show. You can pre-cast it, pulling from the list of actors you happen to know, no auditions, no ability for anybody outside of your personal list to have a chance, or you can hold auditions.If you hold auditions, there are various ways to announce it and run it. You can let only members of the union known through trade publications. You can go to certain agents so that only their actors are submitted. You can go to certain publications. Or you might do a big campaign to announce the openings far and wide. You might even go recruiting certain sources of actors who might not think they're up to it but who you want to see anyway.That's "affirmative action."How is it discriminatory and how on earth is the "employment decision" made?

quote:

---

do you disagree with that?

---

I don't disagree with it at all. However, you seem to think that the word "opportunity" is a synonym for "decision."

quote:

---

what do you think AA is?

---

I think AA is as Title VII regulates it.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.