3 ms·
Here's what I make of it: I have a big problem with equating blacks to poor people, mostly because it makes blacks monolithic, as if all blacks are poor. This
by jfc 14y ago
Here's what I make of it:
I have a big problem with equating blacks to poor people, mostly because it makes blacks monolithic, as if all blacks are poor. This isn't the case, even if you limit your analysis to the SF area.
Consider how ridiculous it is to equate an entire ethnic group with poverty, or wealth for that matter--there are wealthy and poor people across all demographics. Far better for the NYT to have said poorer residents, or some such like.
It does seem the mayor specifically mentioned blacks (could be a political calculus or real concern), but the reporters also referenced them separately, vaguely. Either way, the characterization of blacks in this article was done poorly.
You asked if this is racism; probably something like implicit bias - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aversive_racism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aversive_racism.
Also: it seems you thought that the contributor's name (Malia) somehow indicates that she is black. A google search shows otherwise.
- rdl 14y agoIn San Francisco city itself, black and poor are highly correlated, for a variety of historical reasons. Most of the long term middle and upper middle class black residents in the Bay Area are in the East Bay. There are fairly concentrated areas of SF which are low income, low development, and primarily black (HP, Bayview) and some areas which became more developed (Fillmore). Mid market and tenderloin have gotten a bit more developed and more diverse (mainly in that poor Arabs and SE Asians moved in 10-15y ago). Economics and race in SF is really complex.