4 ms·

The person you're responded to stated: "There is no discussion on the Chinese Exclusion Act and Japanese concentration camps of WWII." You're making their point

The person you're responded to stated: "There is no discussion on the Chinese Exclusion Act and Japanese concentration camps of WWII." You're making their point by disregarding that bit.

PierceJoy 4y ago
I can’t speak to the CEA, but we do teach kids about Japanese internment. Let’s assume that we focus more on black and gay issues though. The parent answered his own question as to why we might focus more on black and gay issues > Because Asians are “overrepresented” It makes more sense focus on underrepresented groups than overrepresented groups when trying to address systemic issues. It’s more efficient.
- WhyOhWhyQ 4y ago
  Forgive me for continuing this thread, but the original poster does not seem to imply that overrepresentation is the reason we don't focus on Asians. They actually use scare quotes when using the word 'overrepresented'. You also disregarded the part of their answer which doesn't seem to include doubt. The full quote is: "Because Asians are "overrepresented" and serve as a counterexample to the narrative that systemic discrimination can't be overcome with hard work." And if their use of scare quotes is to express doubt that "overrepresentation" is a good justification for discrimination, then I agree. I also don't believe gay people are underrepresented in higher education, relative to their overall population in the United States, so I don't find that part of your argument compelling. I've found this quote with a brief Google search, "The three surveys of American adults consistently indicated that gay men are far more likely than straight men to have graduated from high school or college, with just over half of gay men having earned a college degree, compared with about 35 percent of straight men. Some 6 percent of gay men have a Ph.D., J.D. or M.D. — a rate 50 percent higher than that of straight men." From this article: https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/straight-men-face-educational-crisis-gay-men-excel-academically-study-rcna18018 https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/straight-men-face-e...
  - PierceJoy 4y ago
    > but the original poster does not seem to imply that overrepresentation is the reason we don't focus on Asians They literally wrote that though: > For example, no discussion is given to the fact that...Similarly no discussion is given to the fact that...There is no discussion on the...Why? Because Asians are "overrepresented" and serve as a counterexample to the narrative that systemic discrimination can't be overcome with hard work. > I also don't believe gay people are underrepresented in higher education, relative to their overall population in the United States, so I don't find that part of your argument compelling I didn't say they were overrepresented in higher education. This thread isn't specifically about the Harvard problem. It's about the parent thinking that "woke" people only care about discrimination against black, latino, and gay people. I'm saying that the focus is on those groups because they have typically been the most effected by discrimination. If Asian people are overrepresented in what society might call successful careers, then I think it absolutely makes sense to focus on groups that are underrepresented. It's also not at all true that Asian racism is ignored. There was huge outcries when Asians were being assaulted randomly.
    - WhyOhWhyQ 4y ago
      I want to point out that scare quotes connote doubt or disdain or sarcasm, so it seems like a mischaracterization to say they "literally wrote that", as if you two are in agreement. You're sort of subtly evolving your argument here, but earlier you reduced Asian discrimination to the Harvard problem, as you say, so for this reason I assumed higher education was the focus.
      - PierceJoy 4y ago
        > I want to point out that scare quotes connote doubt or disdain or sarcasm, so it seems like a mischaracterization to say they "literally wrote that", as if you two are in agreement. Quotes are not always scare quotes. In fact, they are most often not scare quotes. And if you read that one sentence in the context of the sentences that precede it, it is quite clear that the sentence means exactly what was written. > You're sort of subtly evolving your argument here I'm really not. > but earlier you reduced Asian discrimination to the Harvard problem, I did not. You'll notice that the parent brought up Harvard, not me. Higher education was one of their talking points I was responding to, however in no way was my argument limited to higher education. Maybe the part you missed is where I stated > It makes more sense focus on underrepresented groups than overrepresented groups when trying to address systemic issues. It’s more efficient. This is a general statement. It isn't limited to higher education.

The person you're responded to stated: "There is no discussion on the Chinese Exclusion Act and Japanese concentration camps of WWII." You're making their point by disregarding that bit.

PierceJoy 4y ago

I can’t speak to the CEA, but we do teach kids about Japanese internment. Let’s assume that we focus more on black and gay issues though. The parent answered his own question as to why we might focus more on black and gay issues > Because Asians are “overrepresented” It makes more sense focus on underrepresented groups than overrepresented groups when trying to address systemic issues. It’s more efficient.

WhyOhWhyQ 4y ago
Forgive me for continuing this thread, but the original poster does not seem to imply that overrepresentation is the reason we don't focus on Asians. They actually use scare quotes when using the word 'overrepresented'. You also disregarded the part of their answer which doesn't seem to include doubt. The full quote is: "Because Asians are "overrepresented" and serve as a counterexample to the narrative that systemic discrimination can't be overcome with hard work." And if their use of scare quotes is to express doubt that "overrepresentation" is a good justification for discrimination, then I agree. I also don't believe gay people are underrepresented in higher education, relative to their overall population in the United States, so I don't find that part of your argument compelling. I've found this quote with a brief Google search, "The three surveys of American adults consistently indicated that gay men are far more likely than straight men to have graduated from high school or college, with just over half of gay men having earned a college degree, compared with about 35 percent of straight men. Some 6 percent of gay men have a Ph.D., J.D. or M.D. — a rate 50 percent higher than that of straight men." From this article: https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/straight-men-face-educational-crisis-gay-men-excel-academically-study-rcna18018 https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/straight-men-face-e...
- PierceJoy 4y ago
  > but the original poster does not seem to imply that overrepresentation is the reason we don't focus on Asians They literally wrote that though: > For example, no discussion is given to the fact that...Similarly no discussion is given to the fact that...There is no discussion on the...Why? Because Asians are "overrepresented" and serve as a counterexample to the narrative that systemic discrimination can't be overcome with hard work. > I also don't believe gay people are underrepresented in higher education, relative to their overall population in the United States, so I don't find that part of your argument compelling I didn't say they were overrepresented in higher education. This thread isn't specifically about the Harvard problem. It's about the parent thinking that "woke" people only care about discrimination against black, latino, and gay people. I'm saying that the focus is on those groups because they have typically been the most effected by discrimination. If Asian people are overrepresented in what society might call successful careers, then I think it absolutely makes sense to focus on groups that are underrepresented. It's also not at all true that Asian racism is ignored. There was huge outcries when Asians were being assaulted randomly.
  - WhyOhWhyQ 4y ago
    I want to point out that scare quotes connote doubt or disdain or sarcasm, so it seems like a mischaracterization to say they "literally wrote that", as if you two are in agreement. You're sort of subtly evolving your argument here, but earlier you reduced Asian discrimination to the Harvard problem, as you say, so for this reason I assumed higher education was the focus.
    - PierceJoy 4y ago
      > I want to point out that scare quotes connote doubt or disdain or sarcasm, so it seems like a mischaracterization to say they "literally wrote that", as if you two are in agreement. Quotes are not always scare quotes. In fact, they are most often not scare quotes. And if you read that one sentence in the context of the sentences that precede it, it is quite clear that the sentence means exactly what was written. > You're sort of subtly evolving your argument here I'm really not. > but earlier you reduced Asian discrimination to the Harvard problem, I did not. You'll notice that the parent brought up Harvard, not me. Higher education was one of their talking points I was responding to, however in no way was my argument limited to higher education. Maybe the part you missed is where I stated > It makes more sense focus on underrepresented groups than overrepresented groups when trying to address systemic issues. It’s more efficient. This is a general statement. It isn't limited to higher education.