And why does Obama get to be a black man? After all, he is half white?
If I remember correctly (and I may not), I believe there was a group (no idea how large) that was knocking Obama for not being "black enough" during his campaign. Yet another version of racism: Racism against one's own race for not being "pure enough" (people damning interracial relations, basically... Nazis, etc). If it all weren't so sad and scary, it would actually be an interesting study of society...
__________________
"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it."
Well, I think that's a bit of a different situation. However, yes, I believe I would be opposed to that as well.
That said, I'm not sure I'd be against financial discrimination (advantages to the poor, namely), but that's not the same thing as giving an advantage based on the color of someone's skin. That's a whole 'nother can of worms, though!
Here's the thing- bringing together a diverse class for a college is a good thing. Part of college is learning from professors, but part of it is learning from your peers, in and out of the classroom.
"Color of Skin" used to be a reasonably good shorthand way to determine whether or not two people had similar or dissimilar life experiences. It's never been perfect, and I believe it's becoming a less useful indicator (I also think this is good).
But diversity is still good.
If we're thinking in terms of a "point" system, I don't think that we should take away the racial factor, and the potential points once can receive-- I just think the ways one can get those points should be broadened. There are a lot of kinds of diversity- geographical, religious, economic class, etc, and plenty of other ways to be interesting. I think that having had an unusual life experience *should* boost you a little in the eyes of admissions offices, but that it should only be a little (getting admitted to a school is only a good thing for a person if they can get succeed at that school), and that it's actual diversity that's being targeted.
__________________
Visit my non-fencing blog, mostly about food, at Coset The Table!
If I remember correctly (and I may not), I believe there was a group (no idea how large) that was knocking Obama for not being "black enough" during his campaign. Yet another version of racism: Racism against one's own race for not being "pure enough" (people damning interracial relations, basically... Nazis, etc). If it all weren't so sad and scary, it would actually be an interesting study of society...
This reminds me of a class I took where racism in Brazil was a main topic for a couple weeks (it was a jewelry class, wtf). Racism in Brazil is super complicated, but gives a lot of insight into the arguments about who is really "black" when it becomes an argument among black people. Essentially, your race isn't just how dark or light your skin is or even what your parents are. It's a complicated mix of your skin tone, facial features, socioeconomic status, who you're with, and what you're doing. They also have a lot more racial terms for varying levels of "blackness" than the States' black, white, or mixed. Think Aryan, brunette, tan, mocha, coffee, brown, blue-black, and so on.
While race in Brazil is one of the few topics in which I'm not an expert, I imagine Obama would be seen as very white. Michelle, probably less.
This reminds me of a class I took where racism in Brazil was a main topic for a couple weeks (it was a jewelry class, wtf). Racism in Brazil is super complicated, but gives a lot of insight into the arguments about who is really "black" when it becomes an argument among black people. Essentially, your race isn't just how dark or light your skin is or even what your parents are. It's a complicated mix of your skin tone, facial features, socioeconomic status, who you're with, and what you're doing. They also have a lot more racial terms for varying levels of "blackness" than the States' black, white, or mixed. Think Aryan, brunette, tan, mocha, coffee, brown, blue-black, and so on.
While race in Brazil is one of the few topics in which I'm not an expert, I imagine Obama would be seen as very white. Michelle, probably less.
I've actually studied this particular phenomenon and spent some time in Brazil. Part of what makes Brazil very different from the US is that they had a much larger slave population when they had slavery, and miscegenation was very common, so racial mixing was much more widespread. The racial terms issue was really interesting when they had people self-identify race on the census (1980's ish IIRC), and they had something like over a hundred different unique responses.
Brazilians generally believe that they don't have a race problem, and that it's entirely socio-economic. What one finds, of course, is that the skin-color to wealth index sorts in such a way as in general the darker you are, the more likely you are to be poor. And poor in Brazil is really freakin' poor. It actually made me change my own opinions WRT race vs socio-economic status as likely indicators of opportunity for advancement in the US. Of course I grew up in lovely Madison, where most of the black people I knew were the children of grad students from Africa, and whose families were well educated and probably fairly well off economically.
__________________
Does it sound logical that I would talk about the mother of a big white guy with a gun?
OT: There was a recent article (The Economist, IIRC) where Brazil is finally waking up to the realization that they do have a race problem. Well, that's going to take a while to sort out there, too.
Back to the USA: interesting things to Google:
- "brown paper bag test"
- "one drop of blood"
__________________
"In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different."
Here's the thing- bringing together a diverse class for a college is a good thing. Part of college is learning from professors, but part of it is learning from your peers, in and out of the classroom.
I agree.
Quote:
"Color of Skin" used to be a reasonably good shorthand way to determine whether or not two people had similar or dissimilar life experiences. It's never been perfect, and I believe it's becoming a less useful indicator (I also think this is good).
Then I think the question becomes "Should we be fostering diversity at the cost of treating someone unequally based on the color of their skin?"
Don't get me wrong, I totally understand where this argument comes from, and I understand the good that comes from it. But, in this case, the ends do not justify what are, IMO, unjust means. Because in the end, if two people of different races (say, white and black) applied at the same college with the same scores and similar credentials, the black person would likely have a better chance at getting accepted, and that's hard to ignore. There is just something fundamentally not right about this to me, that I can't overlook for the sake of diversity.
Truthfully, if I received an advantage due to the color of my skin, I'd be a little offended.
But I again, I do understand where you're coming from. I just disagree.
__________________
"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it."
Last edited by I_luv_saber; 09-17-2009 at 10:16 PM..
Reason: Double-paragraph
My goodness...what a rabble rouser: "I wish that we all again would curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made, with the understanding that some of the ears this is falling on are not as balanced as the person making the statement might assume," Pelosi said.
She stressed again that people are free to speak out. "But I also think they have to take responsibility for any incitement they may cause," she said.
I guess if she'd thrown in a "pull the plug on granma" and mentioned "muslims moving in to take over" our country, she'd have closed the loop.
__________________
"Fraud is the creation of trust. And then: its betrayal."
William Black, Ph.D.
My goodness...what a rabble rouser: "I wish that we all again would curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made, with the understanding that some of the ears this is falling on are not as balanced as the person making the statement might assume," Pelosi said.
She stressed again that people are free to speak out. "But I also think they have to take responsibility for any incitement they may cause," she said.
I guess if she'd thrown in a "pull the plug on granma" and mentioned "muslims moving in to take over" our country, she'd have closed the loop.
You do realize that she's a major contributor to the ratcheted up rhetoric?
What's stopping you? When you're filling out forms for employers, schools, etc in which race is a question, is it ever defined for you? Does it say you have to have had a certain number of grandparents who identified as something before you can check off a box?
Granted, if you look super White, you might get some strange looks and some judgment. If you fail to seem to have any idea of the cultural heritage of a particular racial group, you also might run into some stumbling blocks. You might have to get some plastic surgery. Depending on the direction you want to go, different eye shape, probably a nose job, perhaps spending a whole bunch of time in a tanning salon... you can even be read as at least "mixed" pretty easily, and if you're read as "mixed", you usually get the benefit of the doubt on these things....
But let's assume you're not as committed to that statement as a little plastic surgery allows, and give you another example:
I do appear more on the "white" side of the spectrum, but I am often assumed to be part or all Asian. I can probably either check off the "White" box, the "Asian" box, or the "Mixed" box without significant challenge. I've never met most of my mother's family, and both her parents were dead before I was born. I majored in math and cook with mostly Asian influence. Surgery could make my eyes appear more or less Asian, and isn't too major. A nose job could put me more in either direction, although it's unlikely I (personally) would elect to have one. Dying my hair is a super easy and reversible way to make myself appear more or less Asian.
I do, for most intents and purposes, have a choice. Even if I choose not to change myself in any way with surgery or hair dye, I can easily claim "White", "Asian" or "Mixed". Which should I choose? Is it ethical to choose something I know to be false, or is it just claiming the official privileges of something others assume me to be already? Is changing my appearance for this purpose ethical?
I tried with the person taking the census and I was told it was against the law. On some things I wouldn't think it mattered but on job or loan applications, it would be fraud.
__________________
Obamacare: If at first you don't succeed, lie, lie, lie again!
And why does Obama get to be a black man? After all, he is half white?
Because that is how this country sees him and you know it. He's never denied or tried to hide his white mother or white grandparents. WHen he speaks about them he talks about them with such affection so please stop being dishonest.
__________________
Ahmadinejad's wife to Ahmadinejad: Why are you always smiling? Nobody likes you. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjwyQnEdATA- Set Adrift on Memory Bliss by my loves BSB
Because that is how this country sees him and you know it. He's never denied or tried to hide his white mother or white grandparents. WHen he speaks about them he talks about them with such affection so please stop being dishonest.
Yes. "Typical white person" is kinda heart warming, isnt it.
Yes. "Typical white person" is kinda heart warming, isnt it.
Hunh? Not quite sure what you're saying, or what this means.
__________________
Ahmadinejad's wife to Ahmadinejad: Why are you always smiling? Nobody likes you. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjwyQnEdATA- Set Adrift on Memory Bliss by my loves BSB
Then I think the question becomes "Should we be fostering diversity at the cost of treating someone unequally based on the color of their skin?"
Don't get me wrong, I totally understand where this argument comes from, and I understand the good that comes from it. But, in this case, the ends do not justify what are, IMO, unjust means. Because in the end, if two people of different races (say, white and black) applied at the same college with the same scores and similar credentials, the black person would likely have a better chance at getting accepted, and that's hard to ignore. There is just something fundamentally not right about this to me, that I can't overlook for the sake of diversity.
Truthfully, if I received an advantage due to the color of my skin, I'd be a little offended.
But I again, I do understand where you're coming from. I just disagree.
Affirmative Action is a sticky program but in the end its a necessary evil. If universities and businesses weren't held accountable for their population diversity invariably there would be a reversion(in some places) to an unfair advantage for white people. You may disagree with me but white privilege is so prevalent that you wouldn't even notice it in your day to day life. I'm not saying the majority of white people are racist, not even a significant population, but the power system is set up in such a way that you could easily take advantage of the color of your skin without even thinking about it.
Affirmative Action is a sticky program but in the end its a necessary evil.
I disagree. I think that there could be other methods put in place to indirectly encourage people of a particular "target", be it race or what have you, while not directly discriminating. Such as programs to encourage college prep through community organizations.
Quote:
If universities and businesses weren't held accountable for their population diversity invariably there would be a reversion(in some places) to an unfair advantage for white people.
I must question the morality behind "Well, we have to practice discrimination against white people so that it doesn't happen to a greater extent to other races". It's a double-standard, and very hypocritical. Is this truly a move away from race discrimination in our society? Seems to me it does nothing but foster it.
You can pretty it up however you want, but the root is the same: Active discrimination against one race in the hopes that it will fight against racism against another race. The goal is a noble one, I agree... but the ends do not justify the means. Racial discrimination is ugly, regardless of which way it goes. Two wrongs do not make a right.
It reminds me of a protest sign: "Bombing for peace is like screwing for virginity (paraphrased )
EDIT: Again, don't misunderstand me. I do see the good that is trying to be accomplished, and indeed the good that is done. But I cannot accept it as morally right. I think there could be other efforts to bolster attendance of one group while not directly providing advantages based on the color of ones skin.
Quote:
You may disagree with me but white privilege is so prevalent that you wouldn't even notice it in your day to day life.
I think this is heavily dependent on where you live. Certain areas of the country have far, far less racism (institutionalized or otherwise) than some others. I think it's a false assertion to say that it is extremely prevalent everywhere. I do agree that it is a very widespread problem in some areas, though.
Quote:
I'm not saying the majority of white people are racist, not even a significant population, but the power system is set up in such a way that you could easily take advantage of the color of your skin without even thinking about it.
And as I've pointed out, there are ways people of other races can take advantage of the system. We've already discussed AA. Accusations of racism can easily ruin a career, especially in the corporate world where they are so anal about lawsuits. We have the saying "playing the race card" for a reason. Now, as you say, I'm not saying the majority of black people do this, but it does happen. It's a two-way street.
__________________
"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it."
Last edited by I_luv_saber; 09-18-2009 at 01:54 PM..
It puzzles me how people get so worked up over perceptions that affirmative action re: college admissions is apparently so awful, but they don't seem to have any similar problem with legacy admissions. It should be obvious that, given that most colleges are majority white and have historically been majority white, legacy admissions are thus weighted towards admitting white students and maintaining the cultural advantage historically held by white folks. Given this, why are legacy based admissions ok but affirmative action isn't? Is it just because race plays a more subtle role there and people don't bother to look deeply enough to see it?
It puzzles me how people get so worked up over perceptions that affirmative action re: college admissions is apparently so awful, but they don't seem to have any similar problem with legacy admissions.
As I've said, I oppose that as well. However in answer to your puzzlement, race is a hot issue that gets people worked up.
Quote:
Given this, why are legacy based admissions ok but affirmative action isn't? Is it just because race plays a more subtle role there and people don't bother to look deeply enough to see it?
They both are not OK. They both favor ones association with a group, as opposed to individual equality, by directly granting an unfair advantage.
__________________
"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it."
Last edited by I_luv_saber; 09-18-2009 at 02:13 PM..
Reason: Punctuation
I disagree. I think that there could be other methods put in place to indirectly encourage people of a particular "target", be it race or what have you, while not directly discriminating. Such as programs to encourage college prep through community organizations.
Encouragement? I'm not sure I like what this suggests. No one needed to encourage me or my friends to want to go to college. Some students do need to be encouraged but this does not appear to be what DA is talking about. Also programs like this do exist. In Philadelphia they exist in the form of Upward Bound, College Access Centers and various prep programs in a number of high schools to encourage students to apply to college. So I think it's less about encouragement and more about access.
As per the "morality" issue with affirmative action. I just not going there.
__________________
Ahmadinejad's wife to Ahmadinejad: Why are you always smiling? Nobody likes you. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjwyQnEdATA- Set Adrift on Memory Bliss by my loves BSB
)
Linear Mode
