Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, April 03, 2014

OTP April 2014: BurstNET Sued for Not Making Equipment Lease Payments

Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: April 03, 2014 at 01:59 PM | 4718 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: 7 million aca signees and counting, i-95 south, nc, politics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 47 of 48 pages ‹ First  < 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 > 
   4601. zenbitz Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:10 PM (#4699176)
C-sections are not reserved for high risk pregnancies. They're done every time unless the mother fights against them.


This is absolutely true IME-- because doctors have schedules.

EDIT: Well "Every" is probably too strong a word.
   4602. rr Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:12 PM (#4699177)
None of that makes any of us "revolting." The word doesn't fit these issues.


--

As you often do, you are presenting your intuition as truth. It doesn't "fit these issues" for you, personally. That's it. But your knowledge base on this seems to be pretty thin. Therefore, you might want to ratchet down the 100%-no-wiggle-room assertions on how other people should feel about it.

Also, put it in context. Ray seems to see this and my "unpleasant beliefs" comment (which, amusingly, he is grouping with the "revolting" thing) as a big ouchie for him, but he has not been materially harmed by it, any more than I have been materially harmed when Ray has mocked and ridiculed my intelligence, my work, my online personality, and my politics. If you hang out in here and go meta with people all day and bag on their beliefs and critical thinking ability, without knowing their situations, sensibilities, and backgrounds, then there are going to be times when you get some blowback that you might not like.
   4603. The Good Face Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:14 PM (#4699178)
I mean really? Allowing people to self identify, treating them as they want to be identified, and even helping fund (to the tune of how much? Maybe a few million) their surgical treatment will end civilization?


As we've already established, you're not content with that. You are insisting that society accept and enable such self-identifications. As I discussed a few pages ago, this is merely another front of the left's war on normality itself. And if you think a civilization can exist without norms, or by utterly overthrowing the norms it used to create and sustain itself and replacing them de novo with norms more to your liking, you're even more deluded than those sad creatures who, against all evidence, think themselves to be kangaroos.
   4604. Bitter Mouse Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:14 PM (#4699179)
Sure, but what I'm saying is that you have to be able to identify expert dissent in order to cite to the validity of expert opinion. Regulators may not be preselcted for their support of trans causes, like trans therapists are, but woe be to the regulator who stands astride the unanimity of the academic establishment - an establishment that uses an ideological litmus test to selects its members.

My view here is probably biased from my experience studying climate change, because I was told many times by my advisor and other faculty how important it was to them that they did NOT select students based upon fealty to the cause. I don't get the sense thats true for trans-studies, or queer studies, etc. I think it is inconceivable that someone who thought trans identity was, even in a significant minority of cases, a symptom of a mental disorder would ever be allowed to get a graduate degree from a top-tier institution. I think you know that, too.

I don't think an appeal to authority is valid when that authority is defined by group think. Then again, that's a huge issue with social science in general on both sides. (There are plenty of conservative areas of study that effectively require certain beliefs at the exclusion of others - what I'm describing is not unique to progressives.)


There is a certain amount of truth to this. Surgeons tend to be more in favor of surgical solutions that they probably should be. Car mechanics more eager to fix your car than it generally warrants. There are plenty of experts that over favor their area of expertise. Like they say, when you have a hammer every problem looks like a nail.

I don't think that is a valid reason to dismiss the gender experts out of hand though. There are many safe guards in the system*, and most of society slants strongly against gender reassignment. It is not fast, or easy, or free, or painless. Everyone in your life is telling you (and has told you all your life) that you are gender X, when in your mind you should be gender Y.

I don't think that just because the people who are interested in gender issues become gender experts is enough to refuse to acknowledge any of their experience and expertise. Unless you are also willing to throw out the opinions of experts in many other fields for the same reason. And all of the experts I have know are very aware that gender reassignment is not for everyone or to be taken lightly. They actively discourage doing it unless the person is totally sure.

* Some of the safeguards include needing multiple experts to sign off on various procedures, minimum amounts of time in therapy, and so on. It is not trivial.
   4605. Ray (RDP) Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:18 PM (#4699181)
any more than I have been materially harmed when Ray has mocked and ridiculed my intelligence, my work, my online personality, and my politics.


I think you're confusing me with someone else. I haven't been involved in the Great Education Debates to any material extent. It's not one of my pet issues. I've probably made a couple of comments on the periphery. I can't recall ever commenting on your intelligence or your work, let alone mocking and ridiculing those things. Perhaps I've made a snide comment or two about your work; who knows.

   4606. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:18 PM (#4699182)
"It's not personal bias. It's knowing which is more medically urgent and, thus, more medically necessary."

Why do we preference doctor X and his determination of medical necessity over doc Y? Mere personal bias. You think women surviving childbirth at unnatural rates is okay, but saving a few lives of sexual "deviants" is not. Mere personal bias.
   4607. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:19 PM (#4699184)
Much depends on the definition of "delusional." I've had conversations with people who assured me there were voices in their house at night telling them to hurt themselves, or that the government's conspiracy to flouridate water was giving them chronic backaches.
...or that Obamacare was a good idea.
We call these "delusions" because they're highly idiosyncratic, as well as objectively refutable.
Exactly.
   4608. CrosbyBird Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:20 PM (#4699185)
Asserted without evidence, and I would suggest extremely unlikely.

Not without evidence. Google David Reimer (the boy who was raised as a girl). His case in the not the only one like that (although the fact that he had a twin brother makes it particularly interesting).
   4609. Bitter Mouse Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:21 PM (#4699187)
As we've already established, you're not content with that. You are insisting that society accept and enable such self-identifications. As I discussed a few pages ago, this is merely another front of the left's war on normality itself. And if you think a civilization can exist without norms, or by utterly overthrowing the norms it used to create and sustain itself and replacing them de novo with norms more to your liking, you're even more deluded than those sad creatures who, against all evidence, think themselves to be kangaroos.


So when I said "Allowing people to self identify, treating them as they want to be identified" and fund it, you disagree that is what I am asking for by saying "You are insisting that society accept and enable such self-identifications.".

Are you nuts? I just said I want people to be allowed to self identify and be treated as they identify. Suggesting that is what I want to do as a gotcha ia silly. Yes that is what I want. There is no penalty if you chose to treat my ex as female. The gender police are not going to come get you. No one is "insisting" on anything. But i have stated my preference.

And yes it is part of the scary liberal agenda. People should be treated well. By the content of their character not their gender identification, skin color, sexual preference or anything else. And couching it as "overthrowing norms" or whatever is hysterics on your part. I get you find change scary. You think 1979 was the apex of the universe. But the rest of us are not afraid like you and because we are not afraid we can accept that things change. And we are confident society will not fall apart because my ex has transitioned into a male.
   4610. CrosbyBird Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:22 PM (#4699188)
And yes I realize I am cheating a bit because you never said nor implied anything about "pure meritocracy", I am just using your statement as a jumping off point.

Oh, I share your concerns, both in the "misplaced merit" sense and the potential consequences. If someone isn't "worth" as much, does that mean they get to starve to death?
   4611. The Good Face Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:22 PM (#4699189)
This is absolutely true IME-- because doctors have schedules.

EDIT: Well "Every" is probably too strong a word.


FFS, isn't this supposed to be the site for "thinking fans"? It's easy enough to look the numbers up; last I checked, the percentage of C-section births in the US was ~37%. That's an awful lot of women "fighting" to have vaginal births.
   4612. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:22 PM (#4699190)
I went to college with a guy who believed aliens sent him signals about the invasion. Which would start on the upper quad intramural soccer field of a small d 3 college in Atlanta. That guy was delusional.
   4613. Lassus Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:26 PM (#4699191)
What is hilarious is that I'm "revolting" and "unpleasant" for calling it a "disorder".... just like WebMD does, just like Psychology Today does

Actually, the wording that brought about that response was, I believe, "deep mental illness", was it not?

EDIT: So it was. So what you MEANT to say was that WebMD and Psychology Today call it a "deep mental illness", just like you do, right?
   4614. Bitter Mouse Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:26 PM (#4699192)
FFS, isn't this supposed to be the site for "thinking fans"? It's easy enough to look the numbers up; last I checked, the percentage of C-section births in the US was ~37%. That's an awful lot of women "fighting" to have vaginal births.


You realize there is no way that 37% were actually medically necessary. A huge pile of those were elective. It happens. SOmetimes the woman's schedule, sometimes the doctors. And yes I know women that had to fight their doctor to have a normal birth. It varies by doctor and of course patient.
   4615. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:27 PM (#4699194)
Most of the 60% requested out of the c section.
   4616. Publius Publicola Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:28 PM (#4699197)
This is absolutely true IME-- because doctors have schedules.


I think a bigger factor is fear of a malpractice suit. If there's a procedure available that a doctor hasn't resorted to in a situation where something goes wrong, well, lawyers loooove a situation like that.
   4617. Ray (RDP) Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:31 PM (#4699199)
What is hilarious is that I'm "revolting" and "unpleasant" for calling it a "disorder".... just like WebMD does, just like Psychology Today does

Actually, the wording that brought about that response was, I believe, "mental illness", was it not?


It's the same issue. See for example this story on the DSM name change:

The newest edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM, will replace the diagnostic term “Gender Identity Disorder” with the term “Gender Dysphoria,” according to the Associated Press.

For years advocates have lobbied the American Psychiatric Association to change or remove categories labeling transgender people in a psychiatric manual, arguing that terms like “Gender Identity Disorder” characterize all trans people as mentally ill. Based on the standards to be set by the DSM-V, individuals will be diagnosed with Gender Dysphoria for displaying “a marked incongruence between one’s experienced/expressed gender and assigned gender.”


   4618. CrosbyBird Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:32 PM (#4699200)
Liberals pay lip service to admitting "progress" when it comes to race relations. But every other word and action from them belies that. Every comment from them on social issues or social policy has at its core that straight white males are still oppressing minorities.

Relatively few individual white males are consciously or deliberately oppressing minorities, and we generally do a pretty good job of social justice when it comes to that sort of behavior, especially in the Internet Age.

The way to think about it is that everyone is climbing up a mountain, and over the years, there's been a lot of kicking certain people down that mountain. In the meantime, people are still climbing. So it's 150 years past slavery, and 50 years past Jim Crow, but over those years the structure of society is to build the sort of handholds that are easier for white people to find than black people. Even if we said that today we could eradicate non-institutional/non-structural racism, and it truly were merely trait-based disadvantage that separated people, we would still have some obligation to offer a hand up to the people who ended up with those crappy traits at least in part because of generations of disadvantage.

I agree with the idea that affirmative action should be more class-based and less race-based. But race contributes to class, and for as long as it does, we do not have anything approaching equality.
   4619. CrosbyBird Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:33 PM (#4699202)
The institution of gender might've made sense in the past, but I think we as a society have grown beyond the need/use for it. I'd let it off at the next stop, if it were up to me.

There I think we completely agree. There's little good reason why men and women should be expected to do different things or behave differently in social settings.
   4620. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:34 PM (#4699204)
Why do we preference doctor X and his determination of medical necessity over doc Y? Mere personal bias. You think women surviving childbirth at unnatural rates is okay, but saving a few lives of sexual "deviants" is not. Mere personal bias.

Gunshot wound, cancer, gender identity problem — all the same, in terms of medical urgency.

When a person walks into the ER bleeding profusely and another walks in and mentions a gender identity problem, it's "mere personal bias" that sends the staff running toward the bleeding guy.
   4621. Ray (RDP) Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:35 PM (#4699206)
There I think we completely agree. There's little good reason why men and women should be expected to do different things or behave differently in social settings.


Right. Also, the new way to "perform" sex will be for the woman to insert her vagina into the man's penis.
   4622. Greg K Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:36 PM (#4699207)
As we've already established, you're not content with that. You are insisting that society accept and enable such self-identifications. As I discussed a few pages ago, this is merely another front of the left's war on normality itself. And if you think a civilization can exist without norms, or by utterly overthrowing the norms it used to create and sustain itself and replacing them de novo with norms more to your liking, you're even more deluded than those sad creatures who, against all evidence, think themselves to be kangaroos.

I think this over-states how static the norms on gender have been over the centuries. Early modern and medieval medical texts on the genders tend to a paint a very different picture than, say 19th century medical knowledge. Usually writers were heavily influenced by Galen and followed his "one-sex" theory, in which the male and female organs (and by extension the categories "male" and "female") were the inverse of each other. One consequence of this was that secondary gender markers (like length of hair, dress, or traits like courage or cowardice) could literally change one's gender. The cases these medical texts used as evidence usually involved a man living as a man (or woman as woman) until some traumatic event occurred, or the cumulative effect of doing a poor job of being their gender (by wearing the wrong clothes or exhibiting the wrong character traits) caught up with them and they "switched" and lived the rest of their lives as the other gender.

By the 18th century you start to have people basing their knowledge on observations of their own tinkering rather than what some old Greek or Roman guy said, and so this perspective was challenged, and you get a more...empirical? interpretation of gender.

It should be added that these early modern/medieval norms and definitions of gender were by no means monolithic in their own time either. Although the sources are less plentiful, folk medicine appears to have drawn finer distinctions between male and female and it's unclear how prevalent each model was.

Gender norms have not been static throughout history, and one set of norms supplanting another, or competing norms existing simultaneously within a society, are both pretty much far for the course. Of course this doesn't mean that "traditional" norms are always wrong (or right for that matter), but civilization has survived challenges to them before and will do so again.
   4623. Mefisto Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:38 PM (#4699208)
@4618: Well done again.
   4624. zenbitz Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:39 PM (#4699209)

All this blah de blah about gender identity that I have been skimming and mocking the interest level... but actually I think I have some insight now.

The crux of the issue -- is being transgendered a "mental" disorder.
First off - is it a DISORDER - as mentioned previously within the Gender Studies Cathedral this is a debated topic. If it's not a "disorder" -- then why do you need treatment for it?
The problem here is actually the negative connotation of "disorder" - particulary "mental disorder". There is a stigma with this - as anyone who has ever dealt with depression or the like knows.
In fact - not so long ago there was a stigma attached to being nearsighted! You were called names, picked last for sports, etc. Clearly myopia is a disorder, it's just NOT A BIG DEAL.

Let's call it a more neutral word. Instead of disorder, we'll call it a variance. Like, I dunno... height, or skin color, or hirsutitude. We acknowledge that these traits -- especially at the extremes -- have negative social, psychological and even physical repercussions. Take someone who is too short to drive, or someone who has a very outrageous pigmentation (say piebald).

So that should be agreeable to everyone -- gender dystopia is a human variance. In fact, I would venture to guess that (like for example, sexual preference) it's not binary but continuously distributed. Maybe some people with external male genitalia only feel like women 3 days/month -- so there is little serious psychological impact or distress.

But just because something is classified as a MENTAL disorder (or in our case, variance) doesn't it mean it has to have a psychiatric or psychological TREATMENT. If I am short I can take HGH or get heightening surgery or wear platform loafers or insist that all my employees work from trenches. If I wish I was a Kangaroo, maybe I am fine by just wearing a kangaroo suit at furry conventions.

SO in the case of transgendered folks - the treatment could be simply therapy or even pharamaceutricals. For others maybe they want surgery. For another group they can just buy some prosthetics and shop in a different section of Macy's.

But as stated by others -- it's kind of up to the medical professionals to decide who needs what level of treatment if any.

And all surgery -- even emergency surgery -- unless you are unconscious or otherwise deemed to be unable to make a decision for yourself (in which case someone else makes it for you) - is elective.
So treatments can be both "medically necessary" and "elective". In fact, many doctors offer a treatment and give you a choice. I chose not to take anti-depressants. They would have been paid for by insurance (psychotherapy was not).

This illustrates one flaw with health *insurance* in general.

   4625. rr Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:40 PM (#4699210)
4622 is a good post. High-five!
   4626. Publius Publicola Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:44 PM (#4699211)
But race contributes to class, and for as long as it does, we do not have anything approaching equality.


Vice versa is also true.

But the one color that truly defines class is green. That's the important one and until we do something about income disparities, we won't have anything approaching equality either.
   4627. BDC Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:44 PM (#4699212)
the left's war on normality itself

I drank wine at the Ballpark last week instead of Miller Lite like God intended. I will not stop my campaign until every fan is forced to pair jumbo hot dogs with an aromatic Viognier.
   4628. zenbitz Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:45 PM (#4699213)
IME = In My Experience. N=1. My wife went to the hospital after ca. 24 hours of labor with a midwife. The doctors spent 16 hours convincing her to have a c-section, which she eventually did.
It was almost certainly "necessary" as damn kid's head was too damn big. But since we didn't do a control experiment to see if either died, one can't say for 100%.
   4629. Publius Publicola Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:45 PM (#4699214)
Tax those #############! Tax those country cocksuckers!!
   4630. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:46 PM (#4699215)
Sam, Andy, Lassus and the rest don't care enough about the plight of white working and middle-class Americans. And on and on.

Translated from the Blank language: We believe in unions, minimum wage laws, class based affirmative action, and empowering the agencies that at least form some sort of a shield from the excesses of the "free market", but we don't try to make scapegoats out of illegal immigrants, so therefore we must not care enough about white working and middle class Americans.

Looks like you not only confuse the United States with Zimbabwe, but you mistake us for Robert Mugabe or the late Hugo Chavez.
   4631. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:50 PM (#4699216)
The way to think about it is that everyone is climbing up a mountain, and over the years, there's been a lot of kicking certain people down that mountain. In the meantime, people are still climbing. So it's 150 years past slavery, and 50 years past Jim Crow, but over those years the structure of society is to build the sort of handholds that are easier for white people to find than black people. Even if we said that today we could eradicate non-institutional/non-structural racism, and it truly were merely trait-based disadvantage that separated people, we would still have some obligation to offer a hand up to the people who ended up with those crappy traits at least in part because of generations of disadvantage.
The initial problem with this metaphor (as well as similar metaphors about running a race and starting behind the starting line and such) is that life is not a race, there's no winning and losing, no mountain summit or finish line. There's just a lot of people milling around. Maybe they're generally walking in the same direction, but they're not competing with each other. They can all keep walking, and there's no end point where one wins and the others lose.

To be sure, at some points in history some people have shoved other people down to the ground, and that was obviously wrong notwithstanding the above. And if A shoved B to the ground, sure, A owes B. But at various points in history, everyone has been shoved to the ground by someone else. To say that whoever happens to be "in front" has an obligation to the person behind him/her is not supported. Why? The fact that A is ahead of B doesn't mean that A shoved B to the ground. (Or that A's ancestor did it to B's ancestor.) Not individually, and not collectively.
   4632. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:51 PM (#4699217)
So it's 150 years past slavery, and 50 years past Jim Crow, but over those years the structure of society is to build the sort of handholds that are easier for white people to find than black people.

Unless you're arguing that some handholds have been built over the past 50 years that are easier for whites to find than blacks, it seems absurd to argue that today's white people owe a debt to people they haven't injured in any way.
   4633. GordonShumway Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:56 PM (#4699219)
I would be a lot more amenable to race-based Affirmative Action if, among other things, AA targeted those who are either 1.) economically disadvantaged or 2.) who ancestors suffered through slavery and Jim Crow.

At least in education, the overwhelming majority of AA beneficiaries among black people are from the middle-to-upper income brackets and trace their black ancestry to fairly recent immigrants who have minimal at best ties to the historical injustices of slavery or Jim Crow in the US.
   4634. Lassus Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:57 PM (#4699220)
It's the same issue. See for example this story on the DSM name change:

Your point was "oh, I'm being called names for using the same term as WebMD and Psychology Today". Are you saying that those sources are saying transgendered individuals have a "deep mental illness"? Because THAT is what brought out 'revolting' as a description.

And if they aren't saying that, if you and those sources aren't saying the same thing, then what on earth is your point in #4599?
   4635. Bitter Mouse Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:59 PM (#4699221)
I would be a lot more amenable to race-based Affirmative Action if, among other things, AA targeted those who are either 1.) economically disadvantaged or 2.) who ancestors suffered through slavery and Jim Crow.


This (and improvements to how minorities are treated in America) is why I now favor class based AA. I want those in need to have a chance to better themselves, no matter their race.
   4636. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 02, 2014 at 05:59 PM (#4699222)

Lassus, to what are you objecting? For purposes of this discussion, "disorder" and "mental illness" are essentially synonyms. Is this all because Ray used the adjective "deep" in the phrase "deep mental illness"?
   4637. Lassus Posted: May 02, 2014 at 06:19 PM (#4699229)
BTW, I'll worry about the middle class when you start worrying about Warren Buffett, the Koch brothers, and Dustin Pedroia, SBB.


Lassus, to what are you objecting?

I'm objecting to the fact that Ray - as per usual - made himself out to be a victim of judgment when he used the same term to describe transgendered as Psychology Today and WebMD. He most certainly did not. If he thinks he did, if you think you did, well, that's your own personal freedom of what you think words mean, I suppose.
   4638. Ray (RDP) Posted: May 02, 2014 at 06:23 PM (#4699231)
Your point was "oh, I'm being called names for using the same term as WebMD and Psychology Today". Are you saying that those sources are saying transgendered individuals have a "deep mental illness"? Because THAT is what brought out 'revolting' as a description.


I've lost the ability to tell what your quarrel is here. Is it with my use of:

deep mental illness?
mental illness?
disorder?

All of the above? One of the above? Two of the above?
   4639. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: May 02, 2014 at 06:24 PM (#4699233)

At least in education, the overwhelming majority of AA beneficiaries among black people are from the middle-to-upper income brackets and trace their black ancestry to fairly recent immigrants who have minimal at best ties to the historical injustices of slavery or Jim Crow in the US.


You're treating 'black middle class' and 'white middle class' as if they are synonymous. They aren't. Ta-Nehisi Coates talks about this in his latest column:

This graph is from Robert J. Sampson's essential 2011 profile of Chicago, Great American City. Sampson's data depicts incarceration rates in the early to mid-'90s in Chicago among black (black dots) and white neighborhoods (white dots.) Increasingly, sociologists like Sampson are showing us how our brute and strained vocabulary fails to articulate the problem of racism. Conservatives and liberals frequently wonder how it could be that unequal outcomes endure for blacks and whites, even after controlling for income or "class." That is because conservatives and liberals underestimate the achievements of white supremacy and still believe that comparisons between a "black middle class" and a "white middle class" have actual meaning. In fact, black and white people—of any class—live in wholly different worlds.

A phrase like "mass incarceration" obviates the fact that "mass incarceration" is mostly localized in black neighborhoods. In Chicago during the '90s, there was no overlap between the incarceration rates of black and white neighborhoods. The most incarcerated white neighborhoods in Chicago are still better off than the least incarcerated black neighborhoods. The most incarcerated black neighborhood in Chicago is 40 times worse than the most incarcerated white neighborhood.



Unless you're arguing that some handholds have been built over the past 50 years that are easier for whites to find than blacks, it seems absurd to argue that today's white people owe a debt to people they haven't injured in any way.


Blockbusting, blacklisting, segregated schools, segregated neighborhoods, racial disparities in incarceration -- these are obstacles that were not only in place 50 years ago, they are in place today.

Above and beyond that, I argue that it's society's moral duty to rectify, as far as possible, the persisting effects of past injustices. You seem focused on applying individual blame. I'd say our society, collectively, was and is to blame and it is our collective responsibility to do something about it.

If you found your water supply contaminated because somebody 100 years ago buried some chemicals nearby, you'd pay to clean it up, because you want clean water to drink, even though you didn't put it there. I'd hope you'd chip in if your neighbor was in the same situation, because but for the grace of God it could have been you. It's not fair, but it's just.

   4640. Ray (RDP) Posted: May 02, 2014 at 06:27 PM (#4699235)
I'm objecting to the fact that Ray - as per usual - made himself out to be a victim of judgment when he used the same term to describe transgendered as Psychology Today and WebMD. He most certainly did not. If he thinks he did, if you think you did, well, that's your use of language, I suppose.


I've used "disorder" and "mental illness" interchangeably, and it seems from the example I quoted above that "disorder" is the same as "mentally ill":

For years advocates have lobbied the American Psychiatric Association to change or remove categories labeling transgender people in a psychiatric manual, arguing that terms like “Gender Identity Disorder” characterize all trans people as mentally ill.


So I still don't know what you're complaining about.
   4641. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 02, 2014 at 06:35 PM (#4699240)
Blockbusting, blacklisting, segregated schools, segregated neighborhoods, racial disparities in incarceration -- these are obstacles that were not only in place 50 years ago, they are in place today.

I'm not sure to what you're referring with the first two. There aren't "segregated" schools or neighborhoods in the Jim Crow sense and there haven't been for decades. Barring government-imposed neighborhood diversity — Bitter Mouse's fear is palpable — there's not much that can be done about those. As for "racial disparities in incarceration," is this where we pretend that the crime rates are equal among whites and blacks, but blacks are singled out for prosecution? That's always fun.

Above and beyond that, I argue that it's society's moral duty to rectify, as far as possible, the persisting effects of past injustices. You seem focused on applying individual blame. I'd say our society, collectively, was and is to blame and it is our collective responsibility to do something about it.

If you found your water supply contaminated because somebody 100 years ago buried some chemicals nearby, you'd pay to clean it up, because you want clean water to drink, even though you didn't put it there. I'd hope you'd chip in if your neighbor was in the same situation, because but for the grace of God it could have been you. It's not fair, but it's just.

I'd be more inclined to buy into this if it was limited to ensuring equality of opportunity, but it's utter nonsense to claim that it's "just" to require Asians to score in the 98th percentile to get into a school while requiring blacks to score in the 80th percentile. That's just discrimination hidden behind a thin layer of feel-good marketing.
   4642. Lassus Posted: May 02, 2014 at 07:03 PM (#4699252)
So I still don't know what you're complaining about.

Where in WebMD and Psychology Today are transgendered people described as having a deep mental illness? This is the terminology you argued shouldn't get you labeled as revolting because they use the same terminology. "Some have lobbied against the use of 'disorder' by this other organization" is not "Psychology Today finds that transgendered individuals have a deep mental illness". If you think those are the same, I'd advise against that type of argument in court. (However, I'm not a lawyer, so maybe it would work. I hope not.)


I've lost the ability to tell what your quarrel is here.

Despite me repeating it over and over.
   4643. Ray (RDP) Posted: May 02, 2014 at 07:20 PM (#4699256)
Where in WebMD and Psychology Today are transgendered people described as having a deep mental illness? This is the terminology you argued shouldn't get you labeled as revolting because they use the same terminology. "Some have lobbied against the use of 'disorder' by this other organization" is not "Psychology Today finds that transgendered individuals have a deep mental illness". If you think those are the same, I'd advise against that type of argument in court. (However, I'm not a lawyer, so maybe it would work. I hope not.)


The article I quoted makes clear that the objection to the term "disorder" is that it characterizes people as having a "mental illness."

Both WebMD and Psychology Today classify this as a "disorder."

Since "disorder" and "mental illness" are the same in this context, then me using "disorder" or "mental illness" is consistent with how WebMD and Psychology Today classify it.

If you're really objecting to my off the cuff usage of the word "deep" then that's lame, but I'll stop using the word "deep."

Are we good now, or do you still object to me using "disorder" or "mental illness"?
   4644. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: May 02, 2014 at 07:31 PM (#4699261)
There I think we completely agree. There's little good reason why men and women should be expected to do different things or behave differently in social settings.

Except for those pesky fundamental physical and psychological differences. Men and women are not the same. They do not behave or want to behave the same way. Certainly there is a spectrum of behaviors and preferences for both sexes that overlap, but to pretend there are no differences, in the aggregate, is the height of putting ideology over logic, facts and common sense.

It is absurdly sexist to believe that the two sexes must converge in behavior, normally towards the male behavior pattern.
   4645. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: May 02, 2014 at 07:34 PM (#4699263)
Are we good now, or do you still object to me using "disorder" or "mental illness"?

I personally have a very hard time believing that someone who wished to amputate perfectly healthy body parts is not suffering from some mental disorder or illness.

I mean if there were a group of people wishing to cut off their legs because it better fit "their identity", would we allow this? or would we send them to therapy to change their perception?
   4646. GordonShumway Posted: May 02, 2014 at 07:39 PM (#4699267)
You're treating 'black middle class' and 'white middle class' as if they are synonymous. They aren't.


First, I never typed either 'black middle class' or 'white middle class' in any of my previous posts, so I'm not sure why you're putting quotation marks around those terms, and implying that I wrote such terms. I never mentioned anything about being white, let alone white v. black, or used the word class, either.

Second, for everything you wrote or quoted of how the 'black middle class' have it worse than the 'white middle class', lower-income black people have it worse than either group. If we are going to be reserving spots for various races with Affirmative Action programs, I would rather those spots go to people with greater obstacles and hardships in life, and I am pretty certain that black lower-income black people are more disadvantaged than middle and upper income black people.

On a similar point, I understand that there are many obstacles broadly shared by those who are black. However, if Affirmative Action is at least partly to collectively pay back for various inequalities that disadvantaged racial groups have faced, I would much prefer giving Affirmative Action to, among others, black people with a long family history suffering under slavery and Jim Crow, than to black people with very recent roots in the country who have typically suffered much less under direct, American society-sponsored oppression.
   4647. Ray (RDP) Posted: May 02, 2014 at 07:39 PM (#4699268)
Except for those pesky fundamental physical and psychological differences. Men and women are not the same. They do not behave or want to behave the same way. Certainly there is a spectrum of behaviors and preferences for both sexes that overlap, but to pretend there are no differences, in the aggregate, is the height of putting ideology over logic, facts and common sense.


Yes. The differences in sexes are, in my revolting view, to be celebrated, not wished away or pretended out of existence. They are fundamentally a part of nature.
   4648. The Yankee Clapper Posted: May 02, 2014 at 07:40 PM (#4699269)
There hasn't been much good news for Democrats lately, but this may be the worst news of all - from 538.com - The Blame Bush Era May Be At An End:
But over the past year, polling data has begun to suggest that Bush is no longer quite the liability he once was for the GOP, and that most Americans no longer see the current economy as something Obama inherited.

Since April, Bush’s favorable rating has averaged 49.3 percent. His unfavorable rating has averaged 46.3 percent. More Americans now like Bush than dislike him. Of course, 49.3 percent is far lower than Jimmy Carter’s 58 percent favorability rating, recorded in April 2013, but Bush has seen a moderate improvement over the past four years. In his last weeks in office, Bush’s favorable rating averaged just 37.3 percent; his unfavorable rating averaged 57.8 percent.

Moreover, the percentage who believe that Obama inherited the nation’s current economic conditions has dipped below 50 percent for the first time. According to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, it’s just 46 percent of Americans. Although that’s only one poll, it’s far beyond the prior low of 56 percent recorded by the NBC survey. And nearly 50 percent is not that low considering that Obama has been in the Oval Office for more than five years. The percentage who believe Obama is responsible is also at an all-time high: 39 percent in the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll.

A trend likely to continue as we get even deeper into Obama's second term.
   4649. BDC Posted: May 02, 2014 at 07:46 PM (#4699274)
I grew up in the 1960s learning that men and women were innately different in every possible way. I grew up further in the 1970s unlearning that stuff and learning that sex differences beyond the bare primary facts were all the result of nurture and conditioning. Both schools of thought now seem absurdly black-and-white: or maybe they were full of nuances that I missed because kids tend to learn in black and white.

My current understanding would be that there do seem to be traits that sort themselves biologically by sex, whether genetic or developmental in origin. Violence would be one: men are just more prone to snapping and breaking things and one another, especially when young. That seems to be true statistically and I doubt it can be ascribed for the most part to childrearing (though childrearing can reinforce it).

Yet as snapper says, there's a spectrum and an overlap, and there are huge areas of life that don't seem to sort by sex with anywhere near the predictability we were taught in the '60s: affinity for childcare, for instance, which was pretty much anathema for my father and grandfathers because men didn't do that, but which I did a lot of myself and see younger men do with great aptitude and delight.

And to assume that the sexes must or do fall into stereotypical preferences and roles is the definition of prejudice.

Though come to think of it, ex-BDC will probably tell you I let the kid cry in his diaper while I pounded Shiner Bock and watched Rangers games. Take that with a grain of salt :)
   4650. Lassus Posted: May 02, 2014 at 09:09 PM (#4699305)
The article I quoted makes clear that the objection to the term "disorder" is that it characterizes people as having a "mental illness." Both WebMD and Psychology Today classify this as a "disorder." Since "disorder" and "mental illness" are the same in this context, then me using "disorder" or "mental illness" is consistent with how WebMD and Psychology Today classify it. If you're really objecting to my off the cuff usage of the word "deep" then that's lame, but I'll stop using the word "deep." Are we good now, or do you still object to me using "disorder" or "mental illness"?

The only thing I objected to was you doing a verbal dance to portray yourself as a victim. The more you do it, though, the smaller you sound, so I withdraw my objection because that outcome works for me.
   4651. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: May 02, 2014 at 09:23 PM (#4699318)
Except for those pesky fundamental physical and psychological differences. Men and women are not the same.


Of course, gender dysphoria recognizes the differences between male and female psychology and acknowledges that sometimes a feminine psyche gets displaced into "male plumbing parts."
   4652. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: May 02, 2014 at 09:25 PM (#4699320)
Gunshot wound, cancer, gender identity problem — all the same, in terms of medical urgency.


This is why you're a terrible debater. No one is discussing emergency treatments.
   4653. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: May 02, 2014 at 09:28 PM (#4699324)
It is absurdly sexist to believe that the two sexes must converge in behavior, normally towards the male behavior pattern.


I think you're misreading the point. It's not that all behavior should converge toward a masculine baseline, it's that every individual should be free to behave as they see fit. If they are bio-male and behave male, fine. If they're bio-male and behave female, fine. Same for women. The point is not to collapse everything into a single one-size-fits-all onesie, but to allow the individual to "perform" as they wish without social stigma for not "being right" based on archaic, outmoded "normality" just to make throwbacks like TGF feel comfy. (By the way, that "nomality" that is being pined for is just another way of saying "privilege.")
   4654. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 02, 2014 at 11:54 PM (#4699380)
This is why you're a terrible debater. No one is discussing emergency treatments.

You're the one who brought up C-sections, which are regularly performed on an emergency basis.
   4655. The Yankee Clapper Posted: May 02, 2014 at 11:57 PM (#4699381)
Former Washington, DC Mayor & current City Councilman Marion Barry has had some tough competition from Canadian upstart Rob Ford in the Bad Behavior By A Municipal Official Category, but Barry isn't going down without a fight - Barry Accuses Reporters Of Profiting From His Life Story:
D.C. Council member Marion Barry is making more waves on social media, using his Twitter account on Friday to launch a tirade against HBO and local news reporters consulting on the cable network’s slow-moving biography of the “Mayor for Life.”

Barry’s beef? White men, he says, are trying to profit off his life story. Driving Barry’s urgency, he says, is the planned release of his autobiography next month: “Mayor for Life.” “It’s really sad that @HBO solicits two white men to write a story about my life, profit therefrom, and has not talked to me once,” Barry said in a tweet.
. . .
In an interview with The Washington Post on Friday, Barry said he was willing to take his campaign against HBO “national” for its unauthorized biography project. . . . “What it is you have are two white men trying to exploit a black man, and I’m not going to stand for it,” Barry said. “I’m going to get the civil rights groups, the Urban League. I may even have to fly out to Los Angeles to get the NAACP out there on board.”

That last sentence is quite telling.
   4656. Lassus Posted: May 03, 2014 at 12:00 AM (#4699383)
Marion Barry? Slow news day, YC?
   4657. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 03, 2014 at 12:01 AM (#4699385)

Marion Barry is the poster boy for getting rid of democracy. D.C. voters must be dumber than dirt.
   4658. The Yankee Clapper Posted: May 03, 2014 at 12:12 AM (#4699390)
Marion Barry? Slow news day, YC?

Posted for entertainment purposes, although it does have more political content than most of what has been posted here lately.
   4659. GregD Posted: May 03, 2014 at 12:26 AM (#4699397)
All reasonable people can agree surely that non democratic systems have never produced a monster so vile as Marion berry. No system of government has ever thrown up a more damaging ruler.
   4660. Dr. Vaux Posted: May 03, 2014 at 04:15 AM (#4699450)
Someone objects to a person objecting to a television network making a biography of him without consulting him? It might be legal, but that wouldn't make him out of line for objecting to it.
   4661. Bitter Mouse Posted: May 03, 2014 at 08:39 AM (#4699479)
You're the one who brought up C-sections, which are regularly performed on an emergency basis.


And regularly performed as non-emergency procedures.
   4662. Publius Publicola Posted: May 03, 2014 at 08:41 AM (#4699480)
Marion Barry? Slow news day, YC?


Yeah, he had to scan hard in pages 16-19 of the entertainment section after the job reports shown on the front page showed the economy is gaining momentum.

Not a good day to scan for polls favoring the GOP.
   4663. Howie Menckel Posted: May 03, 2014 at 09:58 AM (#4699525)

Condoleezza Rice bows out of Rutgers commencement address due to protests by students and faculty

http://www.nj.com/education/2014/05/condoleezza_rice_pulls_out_of_giving_rutgers_commencement_speech.html#incart_river_default

   4664. Publius Publicola Posted: May 03, 2014 at 10:05 AM (#4699526)
So, she just "surrendered" then?
   4665. Publius Publicola Posted: May 03, 2014 at 10:10 AM (#4699527)
There hasn't been much good news for Democrats lately, but this may be the worst news of all - from 538.com - The Blame Bush Era May Be At An End:


Well, perhaps you would like to try this one on for size then, YC:

Poll: Hillary Clinton bests Jeb Bush in Florida

By JONATHAN TOPAZ | 5/1/14 6:34 AM EDT

Jeb Bush has a strong lead in Florida among potential 2016 Republican presidential contenders — but Hillary Clinton’s got them all beat, a new poll Thursday found.

According to the Quinnipiac University poll, 27 percent would back Bush for the White House, earning him a sizable lead over the rest of the GOP field.

...

The poll showed Hillary Clinton doing well in Florida, as well. She topped all potential GOP challengers in a head-to-head race. In a potential faceoff between her and Bush, she received 49 percent support compared to 41 percent support for the former governor.

The Quinnipiac University poll was conducted April 23-28 with 1,413 registered voters. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.6 percentage points.


I mean, if your best candidate is getting pole-axed in his own state, that doesn't bode too well for GOP chances.

You know, keeping both of YC's feet on the ground is becoming a fulltime job.
   4666. BDC Posted: May 03, 2014 at 10:20 AM (#4699531)
I'm sure W will eventually be rehabilitated – if Nixon can become a respected elder statesman, it can happen to anybody.

I'm not sure what that bodes for Democrats. The steady rise to statesmanship of Jimmy Carter over the past 35 years has had ####-all impact on elections. I like 41 much better now than when he was President, too, but that didn't make me likelier to vote for Mitt Romney.
   4667. Morty Causa Posted: May 03, 2014 at 10:36 AM (#4699535)
Nixon's debacle had little to do with his professional capabilities, so in a way there wasn't anything to rehabilitate there. That didn't make him any less the unsavory character, and most people qualify any admiration for Milhous along those lines.
   4668. GregD Posted: May 03, 2014 at 10:50 AM (#4699539)
I can't imagine any Democrat thought they could run for president in 2016 on a Blame Bush ticket. That never works. Of course there are all kinds of arguments about the impact of Bush's choices in war and economics on the present day, but that's a different issue than what can work as a campaign motto. Do any Democrats even mention Bush's name?

If Republicans run crazy candidates, and as Bush ages gracefully (as he gives every sign of doing), he will become a figure of mild affection. I don't think anyone doubts that. Not a "global wise man" like Nixon, but also not someone who is hated by much of the population. Cheney, though, that's a different matter.
   4669. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: May 03, 2014 at 11:02 AM (#4699545)
I'll believe Bush has been reembraced when he can show his face at a Republican convention. 0-for-2 so far.
   4670. GregD Posted: May 03, 2014 at 11:41 AM (#4699567)
I'll believe Bush has been reembraced when he can show his face at a Republican convention. 0-for-2 so far.
Doesn't this say more about the Republican Party? He doesn't go because he'd be booed not for being a bad president but for being a squishy moderate, right?
   4671. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: May 03, 2014 at 12:17 PM (#4699585)
I'll believe Bush has been reembraced when he can show his face at a Republican convention. 0-for-2 so far.


Doesn't this say more about the Republican Party? He doesn't go because he'd be booed not for being a bad president but for being a squishy moderate, right?

I don't think that even the Tea Party wingnuts would be so crazy as to expose themselves to that sort of instant self-revelation. Bush doesn't show up for the same reason that Carter was never invited to speak at Democratic conventions until he'd been out of office for 31 years: He just brings back too many memories that his party would like the country to forget. Out of sight, out of mind and all that.
   4672. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: May 03, 2014 at 12:55 PM (#4699601)
Of course, gender dysphoria recognizes the differences between male and female psychology and acknowledges that sometimes a feminine psyche gets displaced into "male plumbing parts."

No doubt. I'm not arguing that the condition exists, and I'm not saying the condition itself is "bad" in any moral sense.

All I'm saying is that the amputation of perfectly healthy body parts, major reconstructive surgery, and massive hormone treatments seems to me a very odd "treatment" for a psychological condition. In fact, it is unique to this condition.

   4673. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: May 03, 2014 at 01:01 PM (#4699603)
I think you're misreading the point. It's not that all behavior should converge toward a masculine baseline, it's that every individual should be free to behave as they see fit. If they are bio-male and behave male, fine. If they're bio-male and behave female, fine. Same for women. The point is not to collapse everything into a single one-size-fits-all onesie, but to allow the individual to "perform" as they wish without social stigma for not "being right" based on archaic, outmoded "normality" just to make throwbacks like TGF feel comfy. (By the way, that "nomality" that is being pined for is just another way of saying "privilege.")

But typically the forces of "progress" urge women to follow the male lead, and reach a condition of uniformoty. e.g. Women are criticized for not caring enough about their careers ("lean in"), for prioritizing family life over making money. The popular culture none-too-subtly urges women (and men too) to be as promiscuous as the biggest players among men.

In the family sphere it is assumed the correct solution is for men and women to share housework equally, childcare equally, and work equally. The default assumption is that if anything is not distributed equally, something's wrong.
   4674. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: May 03, 2014 at 01:12 PM (#4699605)
I'll believe Bush has been reembraced when he can show his face at a Republican convention.

By today's standards, I'm not sure W is still classified as a Republican. That Medicare Part D extension is pretty much treason in conservative circles now.
   4675. bobm Posted: May 03, 2014 at 01:28 PM (#4699610)
[4639] Coates is an interesting writer.

Black Pathology and the Closing of the Progressive Mind
Ta-Nehisi Coates Mar 21 2014, 4:52 PM ET [...]

Obama-era progressives view white supremacy as something awful that happened in the past and the historical vestiges of which still afflict black people today. They believe we need policies—though not race-specific policies—that address the affliction. I view white supremacy as one of the central organizing forces in American life, whose vestiges and practices afflicted black people in the past, continue to afflict black people today, and will likely afflict black people until this country passes into the dust.

There is no evidence that black people are less responsible, less moral, or less upstanding in their dealings with America nor with themselves. But there is overwhelming evidence that America is irresponsible, immoral, and unconscionable in its dealings with black people and with itself. Urging African-Americans to become superhuman is great advice if you are concerned with creating extraordinary individuals. It is terrible advice if you are concerned with creating an equitable society. The black freedom struggle is not about raising a race of hyper-moral super-humans. It is about all people garnering the right to live like the normal humans they are.
   4676. The Yankee Clapper Posted: May 03, 2014 at 02:04 PM (#4699617)
Little early to put much stock in 2016 polls. Seems like the ones here touting 2016 polls spent a lot of time in last 6-9 months proclaiming that it was way too early to pay attention to 2014 polls. Might be a little inconsistent.

Equally important, there are a couple of things to keep in mind about Hilary Clinton's current poll numbers. While serving as Secretary of State and in her relatively low profile activities since leaving that office, she's benefited from being "above the fray" of day-to-day political events. Remember how well Colin Powell did when he was similarly above the fray? That advantage may fade quickly once one becomes a candidate. The other factor that may be benefiting Clinton is simply name recognition, which produces a polling advantage that usually fades by general election time.
   4677. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: May 03, 2014 at 02:04 PM (#4699618)
There is no evidence that black people are less responsible, less moral, or less upstanding in their dealings with America nor with themselves. But there is overwhelming evidence that America is irresponsible, immoral, and unconscionable in its dealings with black people and with itself.

This is a huge assumption, with no supporting evidence.

Why isn't it possible that there are parts of black culture that are not well suited to modern American life, and this leads to poorer outcomes than other groups?

It doesn't mean that blacks as individuals are less responsible, moral or upstanding, but it could be that blacks as a group place less emphasis on education, full-time male employment, and stable nuclear families, and this disadvantages them vs. other groups.

Now some of these cultural features may have evolved in response to white racism, though a lot of these feature were less pronounced when white racism was worse by orders of magnitude.
   4678. Publius Publicola Posted: May 03, 2014 at 02:37 PM (#4699622)
YC, Hillary was already a candidate and did better a.gainst the eventual winner than either GOP candidate.

Funny you should disclaimthe significance of a premature poll when you post and tout them on a daily basis. Curious that. Wouldn 't have anything to do with blind partisanship of course.
   4679. The Yankee Clapper Posted: May 03, 2014 at 02:43 PM (#4699624)
Funny you should disclaimthe significance of a premature poll when you post and tout them on a daily basis. Curious that. Wouldn 't have anything to do with blind partisanship of course.

Kevin 2.0 thinks the 2014 polls are premature but the 2016 polls aren't, and I'm the "blind partisan". Typical.
   4680. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 03, 2014 at 02:53 PM (#4699629)
This is a huge assumption, with no supporting evidence.

Who needs evidence once an accusation of racism or "white supremacy" has been made? Only a racist would make such a demand!

***
I view white supremacy as one of the central organizing forces in American life, whose vestiges and practices afflicted black people in the past, continue to afflict black people today, and will likely afflict black people until this country passes into the dust.

The above was written by a black guy who flunked English — twice — at the third-tier college from which he flunked out or dropped out, who was, nonetheless, quickly snapped up as a professional writer by major media outlets such as Time magazine and The New York Times Magazine. Coates is even worse at self-awareness than he was at college-level English (or high school-level English, which he also flunked).

If "white supremacy" is indeed "one of the central organizing forces in American life" that "continue[s] to afflict black people today," Coates is living proof that the (alleged) masses of white supremacists are doing it wrong.
   4681. tshipman Posted: May 03, 2014 at 03:00 PM (#4699631)
If "white supremacy" is indeed "one of the central organizing forces in American life" and "continue[s] to afflict black people today," Coates is living proof that the (alleged) masses of white supremacists are doing it wrong.


Joe, that really doesn't follow, given the large geographic area of the country. If African Americans are given multiple opportunities in large media companies, it does not mean that they aren't systematically targeted by police, especially in the south.

This is a huge assumption, with no supporting evidence.

Why isn't it possible that there are parts of black culture that are not well suited to modern American life, and this leads to poorer outcomes than other groups?


Snapper, you really don't think that there's not a vast amount of supporting evidence for America being irresponsible, immoral or unconscionable in their dealings with African Americans?

Slavery, Jim Crow, the KKK, Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy," countless studies showing structural bias, all of that doesn't amount to any evidence?

People who voted for Jim Crow laws are *still alive today*. The voter ID push is happening TODAY. The death penalty bias is present TODAY. Driving while Black happens TODAY.
   4682. JuanGone..except1game Posted: May 03, 2014 at 03:03 PM (#4699636)
If "white supremacy" is indeed "one of the central organizing forces in American life" that "continue[s] to afflict black people today," Coates is living proof that the (alleged) masses of white supremacists are doing it wrong.

Yes. The multi-generational effects of Slavery, Jim Crow, Busing, Housing Discrimination, Unequal Criminal enforcement et al, have all faded into the background because Coates got a good job. I think we've found our proof for the end of racism.
   4683. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 03, 2014 at 03:15 PM (#4699643)
Joe, that really doesn't follow, given the large geographic area of the country. If African Americans are given multiple opportunities in large media companies, it does not mean that they aren't systematically targeted by police, especially in the south.

Yes, it does. Coates claims that "white supremacy" is "one of the central organizing forces in American life." He didn't say pockets of white supremacy exist in one region, or that white supremacy exists in a few specific areas, such as policing.

In the present-day U.S., there simply aren't masses of white people who roll out of bed every morning looking for ways to stick it to black people.

Snapper, you really don't think that there's not a vast amount of supporting evidence for America being irresponsible, immoral or unconscionable in their dealings with African Americans?

Slavery, Jim Crow, the KKK, Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy," countless studies showing structural bias, all of that doesn't amount to any evidence?

Past tense, sure. Present tense? Absurd, in almost all cases.

People who voted for Jim Crow laws are *still alive today*. The voter ID push is happening TODAY. The death penalty bias is present TODAY. Driving while Black happens TODAY.

If there was half as much anti-black racism in America today as lefties seem to believe, the media wouldn't have to go looking for "white Latinos" like George Zimmerman to vilify.
   4684. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: May 03, 2014 at 03:20 PM (#4699646)
IOW, white supremacy will be here until the country turns to dirt because reasons.

Coates's piece was a perfect demonstration of the modern liberal doubling down on the shrill and the crazy as the real world hasn't acted as they'd hoped.
   4685. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: May 03, 2014 at 03:28 PM (#4699652)
The death penalty bias is present TODAY. Driving while Black happens TODAY.

Both of these are irrelevant to relative educational underachievement, and educational underachievement is the primary source of the sociological discrepancies we still see. These discrepancies persist in states that haven't executed a prisoner for a century and a half.

Until modern liberals cease and desist with the excuses and the bigotry of lower expectations the discrepancies will continue to persist.
   4686. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: May 03, 2014 at 03:30 PM (#4699654)
Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy,"

DRINK!!!
   4687. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: May 03, 2014 at 03:35 PM (#4699657)
Ronald Reagan gave a speech in Mississippi in 1980, which led directly to a black kid in suburban Boston not studying hard enough in 2014. Yes, the causation is perfectly obvious and perfectly direct -- how could anyone miss it????
   4688. tshipman Posted: May 03, 2014 at 03:48 PM (#4699659)
In the present-day U.S., there simply aren't masses of white people who roll out of bed every morning looking for ways to stick it to black people.


I think Coates would agree with that, by and large. The remaining issues are not active prejudice, but unconscious bias.

Past tense, sure. Present tense? Absurd, in almost all cases.

Both of these are irrelevant to relative educational underachievement, and educational underachievement is the primary source of the sociological discrepancies we still see. These discrepancies persist in states that haven't executed a prisoner for a century and a half.


Slavery and Jim Crow has had a direct effect on American blacks to this day. It's a lot harder to reach the middle class if your parents and grandparents were poor and uneducated as a matter of public policy.
   4689. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: May 03, 2014 at 03:51 PM (#4699663)
Yes. The multi-generational effects of Slavery, Jim Crow, Busing, Housing Discrimination, Unequal Criminal enforcement et al, have all faded into the background because Coates got a good job. I think we've found our proof for the end of racism.

And don't forget that we elected a black president whom half the Republican Party "isn't sure" was born in the United States.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy,"


DRINK!!!

Christ, if we set up drinks for every time you've farted out "modern liberal", everyone here would be serving time for drunk and disorderly. You just delivered two rounds of stout within eight ####### minutes in 4884 and 4685.
   4690. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 03, 2014 at 03:55 PM (#4699665)
I think Coates would agree with that, by and large. The remaining issues are not active prejudice, but unconscious bias.

I don't. How could, as Coates claims, "white supremacy" be "one of the central organizing forces in American life" if such supremacy is "unconscious"?

Slavery and Jim Crow has had a direct effect on American blacks to this day. It's a lot harder to reach the middle class if your parents and grandparents were poor and uneducated as a matter of public policy.

I doubt there's a single black kid in school today whose parents were "poor and uneducated as a matter of public policy."

In 2014, blaming educational underachievement and the breakdown of the family among blacks on Jim Crow is like the 2060 Democratic candidate for president blaming George Bush for all of the country's ills.
   4691. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: May 03, 2014 at 03:55 PM (#4699666)
Slavery and Jim Crow has had a direct effect on American blacks to this day. It's a lot harder to reach the middle class if your parents and grandparents were poor and uneducated as a matter of public policy.

There's no relationship between slavery/Jim Crow and the educational achievement of middle/upper-middle suburban black kids. Relative educational underachievement persists even among the offspring of well-off parents.

These are just vapid excuses.

If two guys with 140 OPS+ potential are competing for the third-base job, and one of them needs to be a 90 to win it, while the other guy needs to be a 120, the 90 isn't going to work as hard for the job. Simple as that. And that's the society modern liberals have set up. It's the people who think some people need to be given the 30 handicap that are the true "white supremacists."
   4692. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: May 03, 2014 at 03:56 PM (#4699668)
Snapper, you really don't think that there's not a vast amount of supporting evidence for America being irresponsible, immoral or unconscionable in their dealings with African Americans?

Slavery, Jim Crow, the KKK, Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy," countless studies showing structural bias, all of that doesn't amount to any evidence?


In the past, sure. And I admit those things may have lingering effects on blacks today. I don't think today, in 2014, there is much evidence at all the America is "irresponsible, immoral or unconscionable in their dealings with African Americans".

But, I think that if blacks, took education as seriously as whites or Asians or Hispanics, and married and stayed married at the same rates as whites or Asians or Hispanics, and black males participated in the labor force at the same rates as whites or Asians or Hispanics, that would do far more to better the circumstances of blacks in America than eliminating every last vestige of racism.
   4693. Tripon Posted: May 03, 2014 at 03:57 PM (#4699670)
http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/newsstand/discussion/ot_otp_may_house_stadium_funding_package_advances_with_cuban_baseball_playe/

Here's the May thread for you Political guys.
   4694. JuanGone..except1game Posted: May 03, 2014 at 04:03 PM (#4699675)
Past tense, sure. Present tense? Absurd, in almost all cases.

Wow. I'm going to resist the opportunity to be shrill. But if you don't think that the opportunities/decisions/happenings that came upon your great-grandparents, grandparents or parents have anything to do with your present circumstances then I'm not sure what to tell you. Instead of Super-Republican Joe Kohesie, there's a chance you might be a socialist, cow farmer in Belguim for all we know or a 3/4 African soccer player plying your trade in the Brazilian league. This pithy statement may have sounded intelligent in your head, but significant actions in the "past tense" has everything to do with "present tense". Acting as though its "absurd" to think that all of the "significant" institutions that I just mentioned haven't any carry over to present day is "absurd".
   4695. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: May 03, 2014 at 04:07 PM (#4699677)
This pithy statement may have sounded intelligent in your head, but significant actions in the "past tense" has everything to do with "present tense". Acting as though its "absurd" to think that all of the "significant" institutions that I just mentioned haven't any carry over to present day is "absurd".

Not really. Both my grandfathers were nobodies.(*) Security guard/farmer/janitor. Paternal great-grandfather was a nobody in Denmark -- naturally, since if he'd been a somebody he wouldn't have bothered coming here. Meaningless today.

(*) Socially and economically, of course. They did stay with their families and garner the respect of their wives and children, and they must have passed at least something along in the gene pool.
   4696. JuanGone..except1game Posted: May 03, 2014 at 04:13 PM (#4699679)
In the past, sure. And I admit those things may have lingering effects on blacks today. I don't think today, in 2014, there is much evidence at all the America is "irresponsible, immoral or unconscionable in their dealings with African Americans".

I don't read that as a note just on this exact present moment, but the totality of our the experience. The African-American experience happens to be more bad than good in this country, and I'm not sure how you argue that any other way. And even in present day, there is still a system, though many want to ignore it, of people like Donald Sterling who have used their influence to make life worse off for the average African American. I'm not sure that any of you have looked at the evidence in his housing discrimination EEOC claim, but its abhorrent and specifically targeted at African Americans and other minorities. Closing your eyes to the fact that there is a power base where there are billionaires with the associated power who still have his type of "white supremacy" mind set should tell you something. What should be even more illuminating is that if you read his new tapes, he actually indictes his friends (I'm guessing wealthy like him) as being more racist than himself. That should tell you more.
   4697. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: May 03, 2014 at 04:20 PM (#4699680)
I can fully support the notion that the black lower classes have been racist'd upon, and the effects of that persist today. No question about it. There's a big class animus in this country and it's aimed even more sharply at minorities.

But you'll note that affirmative action isn't really aimed at those black lower classes, nor are they its beneficiaries other than very rarely.
   4698. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 03, 2014 at 04:21 PM (#4699681)
Wow. I'm going to resist the opportunity to be shrill. But if you don't think that the opportunities/decisions/happenings that came upon your great-grandparents, grandparents or parents have anything to do with your present circumstances then I'm not sure what to tell you. Instead of Super-Republican Joe Kohesie, there's a chance you might be a socialist, cow farmer in Belguim for all we know or a 3/4 African soccer player plying your trade in the Brazilian league. This pithy statement may have sounded intelligent in your head, but significant actions in the "past tense" has everything to do with "present tense". Acting as though its "absurd" to think that all of the "significant" institutions that I just mentioned haven't any carry over to present day is "absurd".

To the limited extent I can decipher your point in the above word soup, it seems to be a disjointed one.

Blacks in 2014 have much greater opportunities than blacks did in 1950 or 1975, yet several key metrics have been trending in the wrong direction in the black community for three generations. "A much lower percentage of blacks have jobs in 2014 than in 1960 because ... Jim Crow!" is just a downright silly claim. The doors to much better schools and much better jobs swung open to American blacks over 50 years ago, yet far too many blacks are choosing not to walk through them.

Also, my earliest American ancestors came over about a hundred years ago and went right into Pennsylvania's coal mines. No one handed them anything — except, perhaps, a shovel.

Lastly, regarding your point that I "might be a 3/4 African soccer player," sure, that's true, but it doesn't mean much. That's true of anyone, anywhere. But to play along, how many American blacks do you believe wish they had been born in Uganda or Nigeria instead of the U.S.? I doubt the number reaches three digits.
   4699. tshipman Posted: May 03, 2014 at 04:21 PM (#4699682)
Not really. Both my grandfathers were nobodies.(*) Security guard/farmer/janitor. Paternal great-grandfather was a nobody in Denmark -- naturally, since if he'd been a somebody he wouldn't have bothered coming here. Meaningless today.

(*) Socially and economically, of course. They did stay with their families and garner the respect of their wives and children, and they must have passed at least something along in the gene pool.


Didn't you mention in another thread that you had inherited approximately 30K? Don't you think that makes a big difference?

I don't. How could, as Coates claims, "white supremacy" be "one of the central organizing forces in American life" if such supremacy is "unconscious"?


It's a huge part of American life precisely because it's unconscious. Joe, I don't think you have a consciously racist bone in your body. I doubt anyone on the board does. But the fact remains that it's much harder for someone with a black name to get a call back for a job. The Black unemployment rate is 5% higher than the white unemployment rate. The fact of them matter is that by simply looking the part, it's easier for you and me to get a job and remain employed.

That is absolutely one of the central organizing forces in American life.

One of the reasons why liberals talk about race is that there's good evidence that considering unconscious bias allows you to help eliminate it. Famously, a study was done on NBA players, and black NBA players were more likely to be whistled for a foul than white players. The pattern was consistent and durable. However, after the study was published, the effect disappeared in the three years following.
   4700. The Yankee Clapper Posted: May 03, 2014 at 04:25 PM (#4699683)
I'm not sure that any of you have looked at the evidence in his housing discrimination EEOC claim . . .

Just in case anyone is using BBTF for legal guidance, at the federal level HUD enforces the housing discrimination statutes, EEOC does employment discrimination.
Page 47 of 48 pages ‹ First  < 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
BarrysLazyBoy
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogBoston Red Sox prospect Deven Marrero enjoying turnaround in Arizona Fall League | MiLB.com
(13 - 7:00pm, Oct 25)
Last: Bug Selig

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 4 OMNICHATTER
(19 - 6:57pm, Oct 25)
Last: AT-AT at bat@AT&T

NewsblogGambling Bochy creature of habit when it comes to pitchers | CSN Bay Area
(5 - 6:56pm, Oct 25)
Last: Bug Selig

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3794 - 6:51pm, Oct 25)
Last: GregD

NewsblogYost's managerial decisions make for extra-entertaining World Series | FOX Sports
(13 - 6:43pm, Oct 25)
Last: The District Attorney

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1959 Ballot
(8 - 6:29pm, Oct 25)
Last: Chris Fluit

NewsblogMLB - Royals' Ned Yost keeps managing to win - ESPN
(12 - 6:15pm, Oct 25)
Last: Cat8

NewsblogOT:  October 2014 - College Football thread
(454 - 6:11pm, Oct 25)
Last: stanmvp48

NewsblogDave Dombrowski: Injury worse than expected, Miguel Cabrera 'is as tough as you can possibly be' | MLive.com
(24 - 6:10pm, Oct 25)
Last: Random Transaction Generator

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(872 - 6:02pm, Oct 25)
Last: Greg K

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(395 - 5:49pm, Oct 25)
Last: NJ in DC (Now with Wife!)

NewsblogBuster Olney on Twitter: "Sources: Manager Joe Maddon has exercised an opt-out clause in his contract and is leaving the Tampa Bay Rays immediately."
(87 - 5:12pm, Oct 25)
Last: PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth)

NewsblogJohn McGrath: The Giants have become the Yankees — obnoxious | The News Tribune
(20 - 4:40pm, Oct 25)
Last: Baldrick

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(936 - 4:29pm, Oct 25)
Last: Howling John Shade

NewsblogPhils' philospophy beginning to evolve | phillies.com
(12 - 4:08pm, Oct 25)
Last: Textbook Editor

Page rendered in 0.7324 seconds
52 querie(s) executed