White Privilege

[The Barbarian]

They will value education and women and personal responsibility. They will not blame any other group or race for any shortcoming they may develop.

That's true of almost all the black people I know.

But here's the rub; even if your kids aren't troublemakers, they will sometimes be perceived by police that way, just because of the way they look.

 

[genuineoriginal]

And any normal American would be able to identify such names.

You think there is such a thing as a normal American?
:rotfl:

The resumes were identical. So it was merely the name of the person. It had everything to do with skin color, not education.

Was the skin color listed on the resume?
No.
Therefore, it had nothing to do with skin color. :duh:

The name indicated that the person was born into a low education culture, it did not indicate the color of the person's skin.
If the culture of the business is middle class, then a person that does not appear to be from the middle class would have more problems fitting into the culture of the business and it would cause problems to hire that person.

That being said, if I was black, knowing that racism continues to be a significant problem in America, I'd name my kids Keith or Susan.

That's mighty white of you. :chuckle:

 

[genuineoriginal]

You might be on to something.
Perhaps subconsciously, some names emit a sense of stability (no surprises) over others.
I might even venture to say that even if the ethnicity were on the application, a business might be more likely to choose a black named Sam over a white named Moonbeam.

I think it has something to do with the perceived culture of the applicant and the culture of the business.
If the perceived culture of the applicant is not a match for the culture of the business, the applicant's resume will receive less consideration than other resumes.

 

[genuineoriginal]

That's true of almost all the black people I know.

But here's the rub; even if your kids aren't troublemakers, they will sometimes be perceived by police that way, just because of the way they look.

Here is why:

Do black Americans commit more crime?
The analysis

It’s true that around 13 per cent of Americans are black, according to the latest estimates from the US Census Bureau.

And yes, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, black offenders committed 52 per cent of homicides recorded in the data between 1980 and 2008. Only 45 per cent of the offenders were white. Homicide is a broader category than “murder” but let’s not split hairs.

Blacks were disproportionately likely to commit homicide and to be the victims. In 2008 the offending rate for blacks was seven times higher than for whites and the victimisation rate was six times higher.

As we found yesterday, 93 per cent of black victims were killed by blacks and 84 per cent of white victims were killed by whites.​

I suppose they [white people] were superior in violence, mass murder, and genocide.

From the statistics shown, it appears that white superiority does not include violence, mass murder, and genocide.
Maybe you should look at the Renaissance to see where white privilege (superiority) comes from.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
And any normal American would be able to identify such names.

You think there is such a thing as a normal American?
:rotfl:

Of course. There is no such thing as a population without a norm. The point is, that any normal American would know the difference.

Barbarian observes:
The resumes were identical. So it was merely the name of the person. It had everything to do with skin color, not education.

Was the skin color listed on the resume?

The name was a very good indicator, which as you know, any normal American would understand that "Jamal" was likely to have darker skin.

No.

C'mon. You know better.

The name indicated that the person was born into a low education culture,

No. It's a common name for Muslims, and as you might know, Muslim-Americans tend to have more education than other Americans, and almost all of them are middle-class. But it's a pretty good indicator of darker skin color.

If the culture of the business is middle class, then a person that does not appear to be from the middle class would have more problems fitting into the culture of the business

"Those blacks are all alike; not our kind." I get that. So do you, but you don't want to admit it.

 

[The Barbarian]

From the statistics shown, it appears that white superiority does not include violence, mass murder, and genocide.

Because Stalin, Hitler, Milosovich, et al were all black, not white? Do you really believe that?

Maybe you should look at the Renaissance to see where white privilege (superiority) comes from.

The Renaissance was the rebirth of learning in Europe after the dark ages when learning and progress was centered in Africa, Turkey, and Moorish Spain. This is why we use the Arabic term "algebra", and why so much of astronomy and medicine comes from Islamic science and why we moved from Latin numerals to the "Arabic numbers" (actually Indian, but transmitted to us from the Arabs).

"White superiority" turns out to be an illusion in the sweep of history. This was our turn to be dominant; it was not always so, nor should we expect it to be always so in the future.

 

[patrick jane]

"White superiority" turns out to be an illusion in the sweep of history. This was our turn to be dominant; it was not always so, nor should we expect it to be always so in the future.

Just enjoy it while we can?

 

[Angel4Truth]

I never said that.

Which is why i have that member on permanent ignore, he lies way too much for useful discussion.

 

[SUTG]

"White privilege" is deliberately vague so it can be anything that the speaker wants it to be.
"White superiority" is more specific than "white privilege", so there is no need to make it any more specific.

Your Venn diagram will be a single circle because "A" (white privilege) equals "B" (white superiority)

Your post contains a contradiction (at least). If A=B, then how can B be "more specific" than A?

Also, I don't think a Venn Diagram is the right tool for your purposes.

 

[Gary K]

Economists Marianne Bertrand and Sendhil Mullainathan wanted to explore racial bias in the job market.

They responded to help-wanted ads for a variety of positions in the fields of sales, administrative support, clerical services and customer services posted in The Boston Globe and Chicago Tribune with fake resumes. The researchers plugged in made-up names on the resumes that are associated with African-Americans (they used Lakisha Washington and Jamal Jones as examples) or whites (Emily Walsh and Greg Baker) based on naming data for babies born between 1974-79 in Massachusetts. The name on each resume was randomly assigned, so the same resume in some cases had a black name and in others had a white name.

Then they counted the callbacks.

The resumes with white-sounding names spurred 50 percent more callbacks than the ones with black-sounding names.

After responding to 1,300 ads with more than 5,000 resumes, the researchers found that the job applicants with white names needed to send 10 resumes to get one callback, but the black candidate needed to send 15 for one.

It didn’t matter whether the employer was a federal contractor or was described as an "equal opportunity employer," as those also discriminated like the others.
http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...name-resume-50-percent-less-likely-get-respo/

...realitically accepting an ugly fact of American life. White privilege is a fact of life, that non-whites have to face almost daily.

Notice that in the example given both areas in which the applications were sent out are overwhelmingly liberal/socialist_leaning populations. So, who is being exposed as the racists? The political left.

 

[SUTG]

I have no one in my friends who is a member of the " black" culture. My wife is African...the black skinned kind. She is not and never will be part of this " black" culture you reference. Africans and American blacks who walk around with a grievance mentality are fundamentally different.

My two African kids will never be a part of this " black " culture you feel is so redeeming. It's a culture of violence and sex and grievance and racism. It will never improve as long as people like you make excuses for it. My kids will stay seperate from that culture no matter what names get thrown at them. They will value education and women and personal responsibility. They will not blame any other group or race for any shortcoming they may develop.

I think in most cases it's not really helpful to speak of "black culture" and "white culture" as monolithic wholes, because there are so many subcultures within (and across) these racial groups. Sure, there is a "gangster rap culture" that can be referenced, but that is not identical to black culture by any stretch. There are plenty of black individuals who want nothing to do with it, as well as being many individuals of other races who are entuisiastically engaged in it.

 

[Gary K]

Because Stalin, Hitler, Milosovich, et al were all black, not white? Do you really believe that?



The Renaissance was the rebirth of learning in Europe after the dark ages when learning and progress was centered in Africa, Turkey, and Moorish Spain. This is why we use the Arabic term "algebra", and why so much of astronomy and medicine comes from Islamic science and why we moved from Latin numerals to the "Arabic numbers" (actually Indian, but transmitted to us from the Arabs).

"White superiority" turns out to be an illusion in the sweep of history. This was our turn to be dominant; it was not always so, nor should we expect it to be always so in the future.

Notice that all three examples given of extremely violent leaders are all from the political left. They were socialists one and all. Stalin was a socialist. Hitler was a socialist until he saw that pure socialism wouldn't work economically, and then moved to facism, which by the way is virtually indistinguisable from socialism in it's main premise: Government is the answer to all of society's ill, so government enforced everything is the answer. Milosovich was also a socialist. He headed the socialist party of Serbia.

 

[Gary K]

And any normal American would be able to identify such names.



Say, like scientist and mathematician Jamal Hammoud, an expert in data packaging, or Jamal Islam, a former researcher at Cal Tech. You've sort of exposed yourself, here, g.o.



No. The resumes were identical. So it was merely the name of the person. It had everything to do with skin color, not education.

That being said, if I was black, knowing that racism continues to be a significant problem in America, I'd name my kids Keith or Susan.

I will disagree with your conclusions. Now the two names in your example bring up two different images in my mind. Images that have nothing to do with racial bias. They have everything to do with cultural differences. The name Jamal Islam brings up an image of radicalism, and it was deliberately chosen to do so. Then the dishonest conclusion is reached that this is something to do with a purely racial bias. It's a large leap to make, and a dishonest one at that.

 

[The Barbarian]

Notice that in the example given both areas in which the applications were sent out are overwhelmingly liberal/socialist_leaning populations.

You think businessmen are "overwhelmingly liberal/socialist?" Seriously? You actually think that the effect would be less noticeable in Alabama or Kentucky? If you do, we've found the problem.

So, who is being exposed as the racists?

Overt racists? Maybe no one. These resumes likely show unconscious bias than the sort of thing we see from racists on message boards.

 

[Gary K]

You think businessmen are "overwhelmingly liberal/socialist?" Seriously? You actually think that the effect would be less noticeable in Alabama or Kentucky? If you do, we've found the problem.



Overt racists? Maybe no one. These resumes likely show unconscious bias than the sort of thing we see from racists on message boards.

Just pointing out that the political left always accusing the right of bias and all other kinds of nasty things, and here you posted something points to areas that are massively left wing politically, so the odds are that most of those businesses were owned by liberals. If you're really trying to say that Boston and Chicago aren't dominated politically by Democrats you're going to have an extremely hard time proving it. And to be dominated by Democrats means to have a large majority of the voters, the population, being Democrats.

You've just exposed the bias of your own side is all.

 

[genuineoriginal]

"Those blacks are all alike; not our kind." I get that. So do you, but you don't want to admit it.

You are obviously racist.
Stop trying to project your racism onto me.

 

[genuineoriginal]

"White superiority" turns out to be an illusion in the sweep of history. This was our turn to be dominant; it was not always so, nor should we expect it to be always so in the future.

Exactly right.
That is also why there is no such thing as "white privilege".

 

[genuineoriginal]

Your post contains a contradiction (at least). If A=B, then how can B be "more specific" than A?

"white privilege" is a vague term for "white superiority".
"white superiority" is a more specific term for "white privilege".
It is the language that is more specific, but the two terms are both referring to the exact same thing.

There is no contradiction.

 

[genuineoriginal]

These resumes likely show unconscious bias than the sort of thing we see from racists on message boards.

You are assuming that the unconscious bias has to do with skin color when there is nothing in the resume to show what color skin the applicant has.
It is more reasonable to assume a cultural bias than a racial bias.

 

[The Barbarian]

You are assuming that the unconscious bias has to do with skin color when there is nothing in the resume to show what color skin the applicant has.

Other than a name that sounds black.

It is more reasonable to assume a cultural bias than a racial bias.

Racism is a cultural bias. And that's the cultural bias at work here, as you know. Why not just admit it?