5 ms·

> So what if someone is giving special opportunities to someone based on their skin color, or their gender? Because it’s racist.

hnhg 6y ago
Say there was a disease that predominantly affected a given race. Would you then object to a health system producing a tailored response to that group based on group characteristics? e.g. https://www.gaucherdisease.org/blog/5-common-ashkenazi-genetic-diseases/ https://www.gaucherdisease.org/blog/5-common-ashkenazi-genet...
- Thorentis 6y ago
  Of course not, if race was proven to be the actual underlying factor. The point in the OP was that the underlying cause is not race, but other group traits (low socio-economic status, poor family background) - which people of all races can and do possess.
  - hnhg 6y ago
    I'm not replying to that.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 6y ago
  These diseases are based on genetic differences, and the tailored treatments are based on genetic differences. Are you really implying that there are genetic differences between the races that cause differences? I find that pretty racist.
  - hnhg 6y ago
    That's my point. To talk about differences isn't racist. It's how they are used to keep power structures in place that is. Your definition is IMO not helpful in any way. If racism were so simple to define then as people we wouldn't have had any problems eradicating it, would we?
baddox 6y ago
No. Racism in its broadest, widely-accepted usage, refers to the treatment of people based on the belief that one race is superior to another. This program, as far as I can tell, makes no claims about any race being superior to another race.
- nostromo 6y ago
  Here’s a thought experiment: A black man and an Asian man rob a bank together. They are caught, charged, and found guilty of the same crime. The black man is set free because his race is over-represented at the local jail, but the Asian man serves 8 years in prison. Because nobody is saying someone is superior to another person here, the above example is not racist and totally fine, in your definition of racism. Even though it is obviously deeply unethical and unfair.
  - baddox 6y ago
    That thought experiment does not reflect any realities of the real world that we are discussing, so I don’t find it particularly interesting. The analogous situation would be if judges systematically sentence Black men to twice the jail time for that crime as Asian men, and someone proposed correcting that disparity by cutting the Black man’s sentence in half (so that it would match the Asian man’s sentence). I would support that.

hnhg 6y ago

Say there was a disease that predominantly affected a given race. Would you then object to a health system producing a tailored response to that group based on group characteristics? e.g. https://www.gaucherdisease.org/blog/5-common-ashkenazi-genetic-diseases/ https://www.gaucherdisease.org/blog/5-common-ashkenazi-genet...

Thorentis 6y ago
Of course not, if race was proven to be the actual underlying factor. The point in the OP was that the underlying cause is not race, but other group traits (low socio-economic status, poor family background) - which people of all races can and do possess.
- hnhg 6y ago
  I'm not replying to that.
RcouF1uZ4gsC 6y ago
These diseases are based on genetic differences, and the tailored treatments are based on genetic differences. Are you really implying that there are genetic differences between the races that cause differences? I find that pretty racist.
- hnhg 6y ago
  That's my point. To talk about differences isn't racist. It's how they are used to keep power structures in place that is. Your definition is IMO not helpful in any way. If racism were so simple to define then as people we wouldn't have had any problems eradicating it, would we?

baddox 6y ago

No. Racism in its broadest, widely-accepted usage, refers to the treatment of people based on the belief that one race is superior to another. This program, as far as I can tell, makes no claims about any race being superior to another race.

nostromo 6y ago
Here’s a thought experiment: A black man and an Asian man rob a bank together. They are caught, charged, and found guilty of the same crime. The black man is set free because his race is over-represented at the local jail, but the Asian man serves 8 years in prison. Because nobody is saying someone is superior to another person here, the above example is not racist and totally fine, in your definition of racism. Even though it is obviously deeply unethical and unfair.
- baddox 6y ago
  That thought experiment does not reflect any realities of the real world that we are discussing, so I don’t find it particularly interesting. The analogous situation would be if judges systematically sentence Black men to twice the jail time for that crime as Asian men, and someone proposed correcting that disparity by cutting the Black man’s sentence in half (so that it would match the Asian man’s sentence). I would support that.