DescentBB

Krom wrote:Slick, was it just "African" names, or was it "foreign" names that failed to get as many callbacks?

didn't hear that discussed, and I want to emphasize that I was paying attention to where I was driving and caught only half the show.
Still, it was discussed in the context of the psychological studies of latent racism or other negative stereotyping. Part of that process
of study is to also study ways to overcome the latent stereotyping. I wish I could have listened more closely, from the beginning to
end, as it was a fascinating discussion.

Spidey wrote:

Krom wrote:Slick, was it just "African" names, or was it "foreign" names that failed to get as many callbacks? For instance, did people with East Asian/Indian/Spanish/French names experience a similar reduction in callbacks? Maybe it has less to do with the color of their skin and more to do with the differing syllables in the language of their name, not that it isn't a problem anyway, but it is important to capture the entire scope of it and not just pin it on one subset in order to rile someone up.

Try getting a job at some of the local “ethnic” run businesses around here if you are white. (or any other ethnic group other than the owner)

precisely the same effect, although with visual clues to the applicant tossed in.

well, Foil, you tried........

I personally feel that…yes, we do need to keep offering examples of racism to counter examples of racism, as long as the victim and perpetrator status remains in effect.

Saying “everyone does it” seems to go right over people’s heads.

The debate MUST change.

Is it racism in that the boss sees a certain race as inferior so he won't hire the 'less than equal' applicant out of s hateful kind of motivation?

Or is it that the boss buys into the stereotype and determines the odds are greater that he will profit more and have a more manageable cohesive workplace by hiring a from within a group who's 'issues' are either more relatable to him thus easier to manage?

Part of that is a natural tendency of all races to see those that look like themselves as more likable and preferable. Mother nature is the 'racist' there.
And when cultural stereotypes reinforced daily by real world events make those preferences seem quite valid it becomes difficult to 'take a chance' with someone who isn't from the familiar, manageable group.

Some people would say it's "racist" either way, that is a distinction without a difference. They would be wrong. Either ignorant or opportunistic agitators but wrong either way.
The distinction is real and a very important one if you are actually trying to prevent the bosses of the world from making those kind of calculations based on that distinction.

There are plenty of people in positions to hire or otherwise affect the fate of the other types who DO NOT have a racist motive but they really don't want to hire a problem case. You won't get anywhere calling them racist for acting in a way they perceive as responsibly on behalf of their employer/livelihood.

Well, actually if you are a race baiting opportunist you will...but race baiting opportunists aren't solving the problem. They are cashing in on it.
So as you engage in the conversation decide which of those two camps you would like to encourage. The ones who will honestly examine the situation or the ones who will simply seek to play a race card as their only goal.

A good example is slick, who many times in his post referred to 'racism still being..x,y,z.'. When actually racism, or bigotry is WAY DOWN from where it was. To imply it is still going strong only perpetuates the problem.
To point out where we really are, and to highlight the difference between that bogeyman narrative slick alludes to and how far we have actually come with human nature and cultural roadblocks as our final obstacles seems like a much better approach to solving the issues. To get a quality dialogue going you have to be willing to acknowledge the natural instincts play a role and are not simply proof of the bogeyman's existence.

to continue what I learned this AM, the psychological findings seemed to indicate that merely thinking about positive examples from public life around
people from the group you have stereotyped negatively can lead to a gradual lowering of inherent, subconscious discrimination. The most effective method for dispelling such stereotyping is an increase in contact with persons from the group stereotyped, by which I mean true personal interaction, discussion, and such(not, I run into 'them' in stores or on the street).

Will Robinson wrote:Is it racism in that the boss sees a certain race as inferior so he won't hire the 'less than equal' applicant out of s hateful kind of motivation?

Or is it that the boss buys into the stereotype and determines the odds are greater that he will profit more and have a more manageable cohesive workplace by hiring a from within a group who's 'issues' are either more relatable to him thus easier to manage?

no difference whatsoever, as both are based on bogus stereotypes.

A good example is slick, who many times in his post referred to 'racism still being..x,y,z.'. When actually racism, or bigotry is WAY DOWN from where it was. To imply it is still going strong only perpetuates the problem.

actually, anyone with functional eyesight and the brains of a tulip tree could see where I frequently note that racism IS way down from my own childhood experience in Virginia. I merely note that we are FAR from where we need to be. That we aren't still drinking out of separate water fountains or using separate schools, bathrooms and seats on the bus, or that whites have to use a little discretion before lynching black men doesn't mean we're made it to the end of the race. To negate that fact, for any reason, to any extent is what perpetuates the problem.

callmeslick wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:A good example is slick, who many times in his post referred to 'racism still being..x,y,z.'. When actually racism, or bigotry is WAY DOWN from where it was. To imply it is still going strong only perpetuates the problem.

actually, anyone with functional eyesight and the brains of a tulip tree could see where I frequently note that racism IS way down. ....
That we aren't still drinking out of separate water fountains or using separate schools, bathrooms and seats on the bus, or that whites have to use a little discretion before lynching black men doesn't mean we're made it to the end of the race. To negate that fact, for any reason, to any extent is what perpetuates the problem.

No, what you did right above there is perpetuating it AND proving my point. Took you all of four frikkin minutes to deliver. Good doggy.

sorry, Will, it is still happening in America. Not at the levels of, say, 1910 or 1955, but it is. Denying that, especially living in the South as you do, is pure
fantasy.

Foil wrote:Responding to accusations of racism with counter-accusations of racism is pointless. Comparisons and arguments that one's side/race/culture/etc. is less racist (or that the other side is more racist) only perpetuates the divide.

Can we simply agree that racism exists on all sides, it's evil, and move on to discussion of solutions without the schoolyard "no, you are!" arguments...

...or am I hoping for too much?

In this animal house? yes. yes you are unfortunately. :/

and we're about to see another one.

Foil wrote:Responding to accusations of racism with counter-accusations of racism is pointless. Comparisons and arguments that one's side/race/culture/etc. is less racist (or that the other side is more racist) only perpetuates the divide.

Can we simply agree that racism exists on all sides, it's evil, and move on to discussion of solutions without the schoolyard "no, you are!" arguments...

...or am I hoping for too much?

Yeah, I'm done. It's all so pointless anyway. You can't win against bullies. They will always make you the victim and you will always lose trying to fight them, because as Spidey brought up in the other thread, hatred or anger is always counterproductive to solving the problem, a problem that needs to be thought out clearly in order to solve. But heck, sometimes it just feels good to let er rip. Since we humans are emotional creatures, unfortunately, that happens a lot more often than we'd like.

Will Robinson wrote:Is it racism in that the boss sees a certain race as inferior so he won't hire the 'less than equal' applicant out of s hateful kind of motivation?

Or is it [alternate explanations]?

In the case I mentioned, it was a couple of things:

The guy had grown up with some screwed-up beliefs about black people (he told me once that the Bible called them "beasts").

He felt that most, if not all, black employees were lazy, and thus not worth consideration.

Spidey wrote:Didn't you just say we weren't supposed to do that?

(offer racism as a counter to racism)

Ah, yep, you're right.

Heh, shows how difficult it can be to break out of that kind of "you are" / "no, you are" discussion, because everyone (including me) was trying to counter the perceived imbalance on the other side.

Foil wrote:Ah, yep, you're right.

Heh, shows how difficult it can be to break out of that kind of "you are" / "no, you are" discussion, because everyone (including me) was trying to counter the perceived imbalance on the other side.

and that is why this nation has lingering racial problems. what is "perceived" and not reality (not pointed at anyone)

Wearing blinders pretty much does the same thing. Couldn't resist one last dig.

tunnelcat wrote:Wearing blinders pretty much does the same thing. Couldn't resist one last dig.

But as blinders are designed to do, they allow you to focus on whats actually in front of you. not all the peripheral bull★■◆● that draws away your attention.

That's the problem, everything nasty hides in the shadows.

and when the light is shined upon it, the response is always *HSSSSSSS*

That's when you say: "Go ahead, make my day." Then you proceed to permanantly ruin their day.

CUDA wrote:

Foil wrote:Ah, yep, you're right.

Heh, shows how difficult it can be to break out of that kind of "you are" / "no, you are" discussion, because everyone (including me) was trying to counter the perceived imbalance on the other side.

and that is why this nation has lingering racial problems. what is "perceived" and not reality (not pointed at anyone)

more than a germ of truth there, CUDA.

callmeslick wrote:

CUDA wrote:.....and that is why this nation has lingering racial problems. what is "perceived" and not reality (not pointed at anyone)

more than a germ of truth there, CUDA.

And there is more than one way to cultivate a perception within a group of people to make things seem worse or to make a scapegoat seem like a real threat.

We ghave some very invested people who's position of power depends greatly on that cultivation, pandering to a base human tendency.

(fixed it for slick)

Will. There is an 'edit' button, which appears under any post you make. Perhaps, you should utilize that when you go into 'foam-at-the-mouth'
mode. The sentence above, if one can charitably call it that, makes NO SENSE.