4 ms·

To believe that, you'd need to start with evidence of at least one demographically blind system that resulted in significantly disparate outcomes amongst otherw

To believe that, you'd need to start with evidence of at least one demographically blind system that resulted in significantly disparate outcomes amongst otherwise equal classes. But such evidence would point to the system not being demographically blind.

Jensson 5y ago
The by far strongest factor for getting harsh sentences is being male. Not being black, it is being a man. Yet CRT still considers male a privileged attribute, so obviously we can conclude that men getting harsher sentences than women is fair according to them, which satisfies your condition that fair trials can result in disparage outcomes. If you disagree then you disagree with CRT, meaning we don't have to convince you that CRT is bad, you already agree with us.
- etchalon 5y ago
  There exists a disparity between men and women when it comes to sentencing. There exists a disparity between black men and white men when it comes to sentencing, and a disparity between black women and white women. So while yes, gender is a variable in outcomes, race is an additional variable, that's constant between genders. The "what about gender!?" argument against CRT is just what-aboutalism that addresses neither issue. But it's a funny one in that it acknowledges the core complaint of CRT (a facially neutral system can result in discrimination based on secondary characteristics evidenced by outcomes) while shifting the characteristic that is being discriminated against. If only there was some field of study or theory that considered the intersection of these characteristics and how they can overlap and impact outcomes.
  - Jensson 5y ago
    You asked about disparage outcomes in a fair system, I gave it to you. It is on topic. Both CRT advocates and opponents considers it fair that men gets harsher sentences.
    - etchalon 5y ago
      CRT does not claim that disparate outcomes based on gender are "fair". It explicitly acknowledges gender as an intersecting variable. The idea disparate outcomes between genders are "fair" isn't supported logically or evidentially, especially when we consider misdemeanor crimes without a component of violence.
      - Jensson 5y ago
        > The idea disparate outcomes between genders are "fair" isn't supported logically or evidentially Can you link to a prominent CRT advocate speaking up about white men getting harsher sentences than black women? Otherwise I don't believe you when you say they don't consider this fair. The times I have argued about this they always start bringing up culture or genes to explain the differences, never that men are less privileged under these circumstances.
        etchalon 5y ago
        Intersectionality is a core concept of CRT. You seem to want to discredit CRT based not on its actual academic discussion, but how it gets distorted within pop culture.
        Jensson 5y ago
        > Intersectionality is a core concept of CRT. So they say, them saying it doesn't mean it is actually true though. > You seem to want to discredit CRT based not on its actual academic discussion You were free to link an academic discussion where they pointed out these things, but you didn't. Nothing comes up when I try to google for it, hence I'll conclude it doesn't exist. Edit: The problem with these discussions is that you use the ideals for your own things and the actual implementations for others. Take meritocracy for example, meritocracy is inherently anti-racist but in practice it might be racist. So when you see someone argue pro meritocracy you see them as probably racists or at least not anti-racist. Similarly when I see someone argue for CRT I don't see all the things they say CRT to be, but what it is in practice. Ultimately you can't hide behind theoretical definitions, trying to practice meritocracy leads to some problems and we should acknowledge that, similarly the CRT we see in practice also has lots of problems we should acknowledge.
  - twofornone 5y ago
    >There exists a disparity between men and women when it comes to sentencing There exists a disparity between men and women when it comes to behavior, which is reflected in sentencing. This is the key component that people are unwilling to acknowledge because they have been conditioned to express a visceral reaction to anything remotely appearing to suggest differences in behavior/decisionmaking among demographics. Which, again, leads us to the invalid assertion that all differences in outcome are born of unequal treatment; invalid because the other half of the answer is socially taboo.
    - etchalon 5y ago
      Your argument is basically "outcomes are worse for black people because black people deserve it and no one wants to say that." Not sure where to start with that.
      - twofornone 5y ago
        No, my argument is that outcomes are worse for some subsets of black people because they are more likely to make decisions which put them in conflict with the legal system. Which is an objective, statistically supported fact, and even if you want to shift to poverty as a scapegoat, that still is primarily expressed through culture and ultimately up to the individual to change. "Deserve" is a loaded term, a moral judgement and has no actual bearing on this argument. And let's also acknowledge that not all blacks in the US have these problems, Nigerian immigrants are one of the most successful demographics in the country by all measures, despite the supposed abundance of racism holding all other African Americans back.
        etchalon 5y ago
        You can restate your argument however you'd like, but my summary holds. That the Nigerian Diaspora is relatively successful, especially when compared to the native population isn't shocking when we remember that most "legal" immigrant communities are more successful than the native population. That disparity generally disappears by the third or fourth generation. Turns out the process of immigration is a fairly good self-selection process [0]. But, the differences between immigrant groups has a racial component too. I've not done enough in depth reading on the disparity (mostly summaries from other people I vaguely remember), but I do often think about Gladwell's piece "Black like them" [1] when the topic comes up. Definitely something I need to read more about. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/28/upshot/immigration-america-rise-poor.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/28/upshot/immigration-americ... [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20110514033755/http://www.gladwell.com/1996/1996_04_29_a_black.htm https://web.archive.org/web/20110514033755/http://www.gladwe...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

Jensson 5y ago

The by far strongest factor for getting harsh sentences is being male. Not being black, it is being a man. Yet CRT still considers male a privileged attribute, so obviously we can conclude that men getting harsher sentences than women is fair according to them, which satisfies your condition that fair trials can result in disparage outcomes. If you disagree then you disagree with CRT, meaning we don't have to convince you that CRT is bad, you already agree with us.

etchalon 5y ago
There exists a disparity between men and women when it comes to sentencing. There exists a disparity between black men and white men when it comes to sentencing, and a disparity between black women and white women. So while yes, gender is a variable in outcomes, race is an additional variable, that's constant between genders. The "what about gender!?" argument against CRT is just what-aboutalism that addresses neither issue. But it's a funny one in that it acknowledges the core complaint of CRT (a facially neutral system can result in discrimination based on secondary characteristics evidenced by outcomes) while shifting the characteristic that is being discriminated against. If only there was some field of study or theory that considered the intersection of these characteristics and how they can overlap and impact outcomes.
- Jensson 5y ago
  You asked about disparage outcomes in a fair system, I gave it to you. It is on topic. Both CRT advocates and opponents considers it fair that men gets harsher sentences.
  - etchalon 5y ago
    CRT does not claim that disparate outcomes based on gender are "fair". It explicitly acknowledges gender as an intersecting variable. The idea disparate outcomes between genders are "fair" isn't supported logically or evidentially, especially when we consider misdemeanor crimes without a component of violence.
    - Jensson 5y ago
      > The idea disparate outcomes between genders are "fair" isn't supported logically or evidentially Can you link to a prominent CRT advocate speaking up about white men getting harsher sentences than black women? Otherwise I don't believe you when you say they don't consider this fair. The times I have argued about this they always start bringing up culture or genes to explain the differences, never that men are less privileged under these circumstances.
      - etchalon 5y ago
        Intersectionality is a core concept of CRT. You seem to want to discredit CRT based not on its actual academic discussion, but how it gets distorted within pop culture.
        Jensson 5y ago
        > Intersectionality is a core concept of CRT. So they say, them saying it doesn't mean it is actually true though. > You seem to want to discredit CRT based not on its actual academic discussion You were free to link an academic discussion where they pointed out these things, but you didn't. Nothing comes up when I try to google for it, hence I'll conclude it doesn't exist. Edit: The problem with these discussions is that you use the ideals for your own things and the actual implementations for others. Take meritocracy for example, meritocracy is inherently anti-racist but in practice it might be racist. So when you see someone argue pro meritocracy you see them as probably racists or at least not anti-racist. Similarly when I see someone argue for CRT I don't see all the things they say CRT to be, but what it is in practice. Ultimately you can't hide behind theoretical definitions, trying to practice meritocracy leads to some problems and we should acknowledge that, similarly the CRT we see in practice also has lots of problems we should acknowledge.
- twofornone 5y ago
  >There exists a disparity between men and women when it comes to sentencing There exists a disparity between men and women when it comes to behavior, which is reflected in sentencing. This is the key component that people are unwilling to acknowledge because they have been conditioned to express a visceral reaction to anything remotely appearing to suggest differences in behavior/decisionmaking among demographics. Which, again, leads us to the invalid assertion that all differences in outcome are born of unequal treatment; invalid because the other half of the answer is socially taboo.
  - etchalon 5y ago
    Your argument is basically "outcomes are worse for black people because black people deserve it and no one wants to say that." Not sure where to start with that.
    - twofornone 5y ago
      No, my argument is that outcomes are worse for some subsets of black people because they are more likely to make decisions which put them in conflict with the legal system. Which is an objective, statistically supported fact, and even if you want to shift to poverty as a scapegoat, that still is primarily expressed through culture and ultimately up to the individual to change. "Deserve" is a loaded term, a moral judgement and has no actual bearing on this argument. And let's also acknowledge that not all blacks in the US have these problems, Nigerian immigrants are one of the most successful demographics in the country by all measures, despite the supposed abundance of racism holding all other African Americans back.
      - etchalon 5y ago
        You can restate your argument however you'd like, but my summary holds. That the Nigerian Diaspora is relatively successful, especially when compared to the native population isn't shocking when we remember that most "legal" immigrant communities are more successful than the native population. That disparity generally disappears by the third or fourth generation. Turns out the process of immigration is a fairly good self-selection process [0]. But, the differences between immigrant groups has a racial component too. I've not done enough in depth reading on the disparity (mostly summaries from other people I vaguely remember), but I do often think about Gladwell's piece "Black like them" [1] when the topic comes up. Definitely something I need to read more about. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/28/upshot/immigration-america-rise-poor.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/28/upshot/immigration-americ... [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20110514033755/http://www.gladwell.com/1996/1996_04_29_a_black.htm https://web.archive.org/web/20110514033755/http://www.gladwe...

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]