No, I go off my experience more than “data”. My trust is what I can see on a daily basis. “Data” can be so manipulated and adjusted that while I dont totally toss it out, its only to me a side reference.
“Mostly white management”? I’ve seen many places where the managers or owners are Asian, Hispanic, or otherwise. You see right there you are showing a bias.
Look all of us can look around and see how things happen in their place of work. Dont you trust that more than “data”?
Then can we assume that all requests from you for cites should be ignored from now on?
Is it possible that a subconscious bias leads people to read resumes more critically if they have a “black” name and be less likely to call them, but then be surprised that no applicants who made it to the interview stages ended up being black?
This, my friends, is exactly why scientific literacy is the most important skill we can teach our children. So they can build a better world than this guy.
This is the most ignorant post I’ve ever read on the Dope.
Vociferously agreed! I cringed at it. And I’m a liberal arts graduate and we thought “…data? We don’t need any stinkin’ data!” But we did know how to read and apply it and how to assess validity.
I was born in the early 60’s. Grew up barely in the middle class, high school was 40% black, had scholarships and worked my way thru college, went to Asia with a round trip plane ticket and $500. Having boot strapped my way up, I don’t think being white and male gave any advatages. I’ve always thought I’m not part of the black problem.
A lot of soul searching since George Floyd. At a minimum, I have benefited from less competition had women and minorities started from my playing field. And, if I’m not part of the solution, then I am by being neutral still perpetuating the problem. I am changing to be part of the solution. YMMV.
I dont ask for them often, well at least not as often as other people here who expect every post to be like some term paper but I if I would yes, I would read them.
Why is that? Data has alot of problems and can easily be manipulated. We hear stories all the time about people questioning surveys and research. What is wrong with showing some skepticism?
I dont know. From what I read most companies have their applications run thru computers who check for certain words. Do such computers with their searches look for “black” sounding names?
But your experience is Datum. It’s still data—but it’s just one single data point (or a small handful).
What about your own personal experience?
What’s so often misunderstood about “white privilege” is that it’s more about a lack of disadvantages than what we normally think of as privilege. It’s a lack of being view suspiciously. It’s a lack of being pulled over constantly. It’s a lack of being punished more harshly for the same mistake.
I guess “white lack of disadvantages” doesn’t roll off the tongue so easily.
It took me an embarrassingly long time to figure that out in my adult life.
It has been shown that computer algorithms can have unintentional bias, depending on how they were developed and programmed.
Also, computer selection can depend on key words - if you know the key words you can slant the odds of being selected in your favor. Those who know this and take advantage of it have a leg up. Who knows, how they learn about it, and how readily they can take advantage of it might well be affected by socio-economic factors like what dialect a person was educated in, their network, and so on.
If the black contingent have no obligation in the black community due to “individualism”, why does any other group?
Individuals make choices, when enough individuals in the same group make those same bad choices, there is a problem within that group that needs to be addressed, yes?
That’s why people bristle when they hear of “white privileged”, they think we are saying that it is something unearned that will be taken away.
What it really is is that we want everyone to have it.
I’m pretty sure that you posted in the wrong thread, as that doesn’t follow at all…
But, to answer your question, yes, the individual failings of anyone should be a concern for everyone. But I disagree that dividing our society’s problems into “groups” based on skin color, and having each arbitrarily defined group held responsible for the problems of all its members is at all productive.
When you say it needs to be addressed, by whom does it need to be addressed?
“As to the second half of your last sentence, since you analogized it back to the statement, that is exactly what anti-racism is. It is when you see someone wearing that shirt, and you tell them why and how it is problematic. It also and especially means that when you know someone is wearing that shirt specifically because they know that it hurts your co-worker, that you give them some shit over it.”
This was your statement. I would pose the very same thought process regarding the failings I see elsewhere. If you see women of color much more represented as unwed mothers, should we give them shit for it, or should the leaders in the black community work to make a difference? If we see educational importance lacking for people of color, should we give them shit for it or should we expect people in charge of those districts prioritize help. Should we be taking away kids of parents who can’t perform this basic parental skill? What about drugs, gangs, black on black killings?
It all needs to be addressed by the leaders of the black community first and foremost, then the leaders of those districts, all the way up to the House/Senate/Presidency as needed/wanted.
What has happened though is that all of these things are being excused under the excuse of “racism”
Not ALL problems, just the ones over-represented in that community.
I would be curious how you could create anything, that doesn’t have bias one way or the other? In a perfect world (and people being people), what is the solution to get rid of all bias?