8 ms·

Well, first, this talk is mostly about gender, which is completely different than race. If you think about what race really is, it's not what it seems (unlike

by proc0 11y ago

Well, first, this talk is mostly about gender, which is completely different than race. If you think about what race really is, it's not what it seems (unlike sex and gender, which have not only a more consistent historical difference, and a stronger biological one as well). Race is more cultural than anything else. Sure it starts with physical traits, but whether or not you're black, white, or asian, does not depend on your biology. You're actually not born that way (even if the labels make it seem like you belong to a certain geographical location, they're just labels), and the proof is people who are of mixed race. People who are half black, half white, from my experience, they choose which culture to belong to, and we all confuse it with their race. Obama is a great example. People saying he's our "black" president. What? What does that really mean? He's clearly half white, half black, so why is he a "black president"? That statement is inaccurate, and people should always say, he's our first "half black, half white, president". So what's going on there? People just categorize themselves, and it's just a matter of the stories and memes they adopt from a set of some kind of cultural background. In other words, it's all made up. Half-white, half-black people often choose to be black because they think black is cool. They adopt that culture and roll with it. So in short, if people keep categorizing themselves, there's no way out of this. Categorization will lead to division among people. "Black" people are just Americans with a different sub-culture, that's it. "Black" people are just as racially diverse among themselves as they are in comparison to "white" people. There are "blacks" from east Africa, west Africa, and Saudi Arabia. Every "black" group is culturally and ethnically different. Why group them? I'll recognize there is a history to be dealt with here. And that is that we've inherited inequality that is for the most part based on skin color (because that's how our ignorant ancestors decided to categorize people), so that division of inequality still lingers. But there is a case for both repairing the damage, while at the same time getting everyone to forget there is any kind of racial categorization. There is only sub-cultures within American culture.

EvanPlaice 11y ago
And if somebody self identifies as trans-racial. All jokes aside, some white people grow up dirt poor in predominantly black neighborhoods and identify more with black Anerican culture then their own skin color. Do they get better access to schools, scholarships, government jobs, funding for small businesses? Etc... What about the black kid who grew up in the suburbs with a stable family and all whote friends. Should their access to the same programs be cut because they're less likely to need it. Categorization will never go away as long as people are incentivized to promote their identity as a 'protected class'. It has gotten to the point where everybody except white males falls under one or more protected classes. I'm not claiming inequality is an issue that should continue to be addressed. I'm creating government mandated classes of people based on their race/ethnicity and throwing money at the problem isn't the solution. It replaces implicit descriminatiom with explicit descrimination.
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  A problem to be sure. But I'm not convinced of the ubiquitousness of the problem - that folks really suffer much from 'reverse discrimination'. Or that folks do much to promote their identity as a protected class. Most of us just muddle on. And I'm not ready to resist every attempt to re-level the playing field as 'explicit dicrimination'. Is the alternative to do nothing, and hope it all works out?
  - EvanPlaice 11y ago
    First, there is no such thing as 'reverse descrimination'. Descrimination is descrimination, no matter who it is aimed at. Assuming that only specific classes of people can be subjected to negative prejudice based on superficial characteristics such as race/gender/creed is dismissive and a clear sign of ignorance. Second, I'm all for leveling the playing field when it comes to education and building community. By which I mean, multicultural communities not 'stick with your own, fuck the other guys' communities. I went to school at one such community and it deeply saddened me when I left because the same degree of diversity can't be found anywhere else. Ironically, the military (ie USMC) is probably the closest I've found to a true, 'not just for the photo op', diverse community that doesn't explicitly try hard to be. The difference there is, everybody is American first and individuals have the courage to stand up for each other in the face of injustice.
- argonaut 11y ago
  The problem is that white kid could dress up in a suit and tie, go into an interview, and be totally free of racial judgment (also dropping any obvious mannerisms). A black man can do that, including dropping any mannerisms, but they will still be black.
  - EvanPlaice 11y ago
    Under most circumstances you're right and that's sad. So what's the alternative? Systematically killing off all the old white guys who still cling to their anachronistic perceptions? Their children are still going to inherit their wealth and the 1% will continue to be the 1%. Hand the power over to militant feminists who happen to be as -- if not more -- biased based on race and/or gender? IMHO, that's just trading one class of terrible people for another. Tech is a the perfect place to foster a diverse working environment. I wish there were more people from varied backgrounds rather then 50/50 white/asian males in development and mostly white women and men in design. But I don't know how to rewind the clock 10-15 years and teach inner city kids that all of their idols are frauds and that being a computer is the path to being a real success in life. The kids I knew from the inner city who were into computers and tech didn't start in college. They got deeply involved in tech in their teens partly to stay out of trouble and fell in love with learning and creating things. My own path wasn't much different except I grew up in thr suburbs and had more resources. I had my own bad influences to get away from and I didn't need to go to school to be taught what I was happy to learn on my own.

by proc0 11y ago

EvanPlaice 11y ago

And if somebody self identifies as trans-racial. All jokes aside, some white people grow up dirt poor in predominantly black neighborhoods and identify more with black Anerican culture then their own skin color. Do they get better access to schools, scholarships, government jobs, funding for small businesses? Etc... What about the black kid who grew up in the suburbs with a stable family and all whote friends. Should their access to the same programs be cut because they're less likely to need it. Categorization will never go away as long as people are incentivized to promote their identity as a 'protected class'. It has gotten to the point where everybody except white males falls under one or more protected classes. I'm not claiming inequality is an issue that should continue to be addressed. I'm creating government mandated classes of people based on their race/ethnicity and throwing money at the problem isn't the solution. It replaces implicit descriminatiom with explicit descrimination.

JoeAltmaier 11y ago
A problem to be sure. But I'm not convinced of the ubiquitousness of the problem - that folks really suffer much from 'reverse discrimination'. Or that folks do much to promote their identity as a protected class. Most of us just muddle on. And I'm not ready to resist every attempt to re-level the playing field as 'explicit dicrimination'. Is the alternative to do nothing, and hope it all works out?
- EvanPlaice 11y ago
  First, there is no such thing as 'reverse descrimination'. Descrimination is descrimination, no matter who it is aimed at. Assuming that only specific classes of people can be subjected to negative prejudice based on superficial characteristics such as race/gender/creed is dismissive and a clear sign of ignorance. Second, I'm all for leveling the playing field when it comes to education and building community. By which I mean, multicultural communities not 'stick with your own, fuck the other guys' communities. I went to school at one such community and it deeply saddened me when I left because the same degree of diversity can't be found anywhere else. Ironically, the military (ie USMC) is probably the closest I've found to a true, 'not just for the photo op', diverse community that doesn't explicitly try hard to be. The difference there is, everybody is American first and individuals have the courage to stand up for each other in the face of injustice.
argonaut 11y ago
The problem is that white kid could dress up in a suit and tie, go into an interview, and be totally free of racial judgment (also dropping any obvious mannerisms). A black man can do that, including dropping any mannerisms, but they will still be black.
- EvanPlaice 11y ago
  Under most circumstances you're right and that's sad. So what's the alternative? Systematically killing off all the old white guys who still cling to their anachronistic perceptions? Their children are still going to inherit their wealth and the 1% will continue to be the 1%. Hand the power over to militant feminists who happen to be as -- if not more -- biased based on race and/or gender? IMHO, that's just trading one class of terrible people for another. Tech is a the perfect place to foster a diverse working environment. I wish there were more people from varied backgrounds rather then 50/50 white/asian males in development and mostly white women and men in design. But I don't know how to rewind the clock 10-15 years and teach inner city kids that all of their idols are frauds and that being a computer is the path to being a real success in life. The kids I knew from the inner city who were into computers and tech didn't start in college. They got deeply involved in tech in their teens partly to stay out of trouble and fell in love with learning and creating things. My own path wasn't much different except I grew up in thr suburbs and had more resources. I had my own bad influences to get away from and I didn't need to go to school to be taught what I was happy to learn on my own.