Miranda Devine: Reverse racism is now acceptable in Australia

[Ana the Ist]

Again depends. You can't take these things, slice them up, and analyse them in isolation.

For example, I might buy expensive jewellery and clothes, but use them as tools to further my career (well, not my career, obviously, but another hypothetical career).

Sure, I imagine there's a tiny number of careers that could justify these kinds of expenses...not most though.

What I see you doing is saying, "Well, these people spend money on worthless stuff, and then the outcome that they have worse outcomes is hardly surprising."

While what I see you saying is that vast numbers of people aren't responsible for personal decisions...nope...it must be something else...

Is that about right?

And I want to challenge that with all sorts of questions:

- what else is affecting financial outcomes (education, employment opportunity, etc)?

Probably lots of things. Where do you want to begin?

- what are they actually spending on?

Actually, the statistics I cited were also useful for that question too. Did you see the part about how on average....a dollar stays within the black community for only 6 hours? Only 6 hours...

So whether or not you believe it's going to expensive products...it's not being invested.

- what drives those spending habits? (For eg. if a black woman spends more money on how she appears, is it in part an attempt to compensate for poor treatment for being black, by - in effect - "buying" better treatment by at least being perceived as a more wealthy (and therefore "worthy") black person?)

Right...do blacks have an preoccupation with appearance (do they tend to look at issues based upon appearance? Do they seem to be overly concerned with image?). I think the important place to look is to those blacks which are successful in spite of such things...were they raised to believe that they would always be judged by their appearance? Or were they raised to believe that their character/ability/intelligence/etc were what matters?

And so on. It seems to me you just want to blame poor black people for being that way, instead of asking how and why they got there, and how that can change.

It seems to me you want to remove all personal responsibility from poor black people....

You need to realize that I actually live here...so I know there are millions of blacks in the U.S. making more money than I do. Do you see them all as exceptions to the "rule"?

 

[Paidiske]

I'm taking issue with the idea that "personal decisions" and "personal responsibility" can be enough to overcome whole social systems stacked against one.

Sure, making good decisions is better than making bad ones, and some people who are disadvantaged by social systems will even manage to get quite a long way.

But that doesn't automatically mean that someone experiencing poor outcomes made bad decisions or didn't take responsibility. And when whole groups experience poor outcomes, it does suggest that the social system needs some adjustment.

And being that this discussion started about a situation in Australia, it's bigger than just what happens in America.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I'm taking issue with the idea that "personal decisions" and "personal responsibility" can be enough to overcome whole social systems stacked against one.

Sure, making good decisions is better than making bad ones, and some people who are disadvantaged by social systems will even manage to get quite a long way.

How do those with who "overcame" entire "social systems" manage to do so? They couldn't do it on their own? They need the grace of a loving white person to lift them above the rancor?

But that doesn't automatically mean that someone experiencing poor outcomes made bad decisions or didn't take responsibility. And when whole groups experience poor outcomes, it does suggest that the social system needs some adjustment.

Well what's driving asian exceptionalism in the U.S.? Some kind of magical racism which benefits all of them? It's hard to genuinely believe anyone can have this view of "you'll only do well based upon how whites treat you" in the absence of any evidence.

And being that this discussion started about a situation in Australia, it's bigger than just what happens in America.

You're right, sorry. It's been awhile since this thread was posted on.

 

[Paidiske]

How do those with who "overcame" entire "social systems" manage to do so? They couldn't do it on their own? They need the grace of a loving white person to lift them above the rancor?

Here I reflect on my own experience as a member of a different disadvantaged group; women. And I note several things:

- All of us face discrimination and disadvantage at various points. Where some of us do well, it's often the absence of that discrimination at a particular point which has given us an opportunity. (Absence of discrimination from those in power is not what you're suggesting as some sort of benevolence, either; it should be the baseline of how everyone is treated, but fact is, it's not). Where you will or will not encounter that discrimination is incredibly difficult to predict.

- Often, success - no matter who you are - depends on relationships; informal as well as formal. It's the lecturer who's willing to spend extra time with a student, the senior person in the workplace who is willing to mentor, and so forth. Our capacity to build those relationships depends on lots of things; race is only one factor.

- There is a social cost to acting outside the stereotypes. People will often "punish" you for it. Levels of personal resilience to this "punishment" vary, and not everyone is able to stand up to that constant animosity. This is not the fault of the individual, but points to a needed change in society.

Well what's driving asian exceptionalism in the U.S.? Some kind of magical racism which benefits all of them? It's hard to genuinely believe anyone can have this view of "you'll only do well based upon how whites treat you" in the absence of any evidence.

It's not "whites." It's people in power at key points in your life. And if - for example - your educators and employers are inclined to look on you as academically inclined, hard working and so forth (cultural stereotypes again), then those people in power are likely to favour you over someone for whom the cultural stereotypes are that they are lazy etc.

My guess - in line with research that's been done - would be that two identical resumes, one with a Chinese name and one with an African-American name, would be treated differently. Short of expecting the African-American person to change their name, how does that indicate a lack of "personal responsibility"?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Here I reflect on my own experience as a member of a different disadvantaged group; women. And I note several things:

Oh no...I'm so sorry...what's your disadvantage?

- All of us face discrimination and disadvantage at various points. Where some of us do well, it's often the absence of that discrimination at a particular point which has given us an opportunity. (Absence of discrimination from those in power is not what you're suggesting as some sort of benevolence, either; it should be the baseline of how everyone is treated, but fact is, it's not). Where you will or will not encounter that discrimination is incredibly difficult to predict.

At least it's nice to see you admit we all face discrimination of various kinds...

Still I fail to see how this can explain away all determinations of success.

- Often, success - no matter who you are - depends on relationships; informal as well as formal. It's the lecturer who's willing to spend extra time with a student, the senior person in the workplace who is willing to mentor, and so forth. Our capacity to build those relationships depends on lots of things; race is only one factor.

It can be...

- There is a social cost to acting outside the stereotypes. People will often "punish" you for it. Levels of personal resilience to this "punishment" vary, and not everyone is able to stand up to that constant animosity. This is not the fault of the individual, but points to a needed change in society.

I disagree...toughen up. If you think society will change to accommodate your lack of "resilience" to anything...you're sadly mistaken.

It's not "whites." It's people in power at key points in your life. And if - for example - your educators and employers are inclined to look on you as academically inclined, hard working and so forth (cultural stereotypes again), then those people in power are likely to favour you over someone for whom the cultural stereotypes are that they are lazy etc.

I disagree...while cultural "stereotypes" may be one of many small factors...they in no way could explain something as complex as success.

My guess - in line with research that's been done - would be that two identical resumes, one with a Chinese name

You've seen research on "Chinese names"?

and one with an African-American name, would be treated differently. Short of expecting the African-American person to change their name, how does that indicate a lack of "personal responsibility"?

I'm afraid I'd need at least an article on this research you're talking about to respond.

 

[Paidiske]

Please don't patronise me by pretending women aren't disadvantaged in our society.

I've seen research showing that resumes are treated differently depending on the ethnicity of the names on resumes. Google will be your friend on this if you wish to learn more.

You say social structures don't explain success, but you admit that they contribute to outcomes, so... it seems to me that we're each basically arguing for the lens to understand that that bolsters our preferred way of tackling it. You'd like to put it down to "personal responsibility" so that there's no responsibility for society; I'd like to say that there is social and communal responsibility for our shared structures, and we need to take responsibility for shaping those as best we can for good outcomes across the breadth of our society.

What I can't understand is why some people want to deny any social responsibility. Are you afraid that it will somehow leave you worse off?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Please don't patronise me by pretending women aren't disadvantaged in our society.

Ever look into the "women are wonderful" effect?

"Women are wonderful" effect - Wikipedia

It's a rather massive bias that favors you all the time...by virtue of only your vagina.

Why did you think you're disadvantaged?

I've seen research showing that resumes are treated differently depending on the ethnicity of the names on resumes. Google will be your friend on this if you wish to learn more.

I've only seen one such paper and it's rather limited in scope.

You say social structures don't explain success, but you admit that they contribute to outcomes, so... it seems to me that we're each basically arguing for the lens to understand that that bolsters our preferred way of tackling it. You'd like to put it down to "personal responsibility" so that there's no responsibility for society; I'd like to say that there is social and communal responsibility for our shared structures, and we need to take responsibility for shaping those as best we can for good outcomes across the breadth of our society.

What I can't understand is why some people want to deny any social responsibility. Are you afraid that it will somehow leave you worse off?

I'm not saying it's all personal responsibility...I simply think that personal responsibility plays a larger role than say...discrimination.

 

[Paidiske]

I didn't say I, personally, was disadvantaged (right at this moment, anyway), but that women as a group are. Although, now that I think about it, I got shunted into the part-time role I'm in, rather than a full time role, specifically because I'm a woman (and yes, I was actually told that to my face).

And I said it because I've seen it; I've seen the lecturers who refuse to help female students. I've seen women denied jobs or bullied out of workplaces for being women. I've lived the pay gap. (Hello, I'm in ministry, there are still a bunch of places where I couldn't work in my own denomination, purely because I'm a woman). Women might be "wonderful" in terms of how people assess our character, but it doesn't translate into wonderful outcomes.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I didn't say I, personally, was disadvantaged (right at this moment, anyway), but that women as a group are. Although, now that I think about it, I got shunted into the part-time role I'm in, rather than a full time role, specifically because I'm a woman (and yes, I was actually told that to my face).

And I said it because I've seen it; I've seen the lecturers who refuse to help female students. I've seen women denied jobs or bullied out of workplaces for being women. I've lived the pay gap. (Hello, I'm in ministry, there are still a bunch of places where I couldn't work in my own denomination, purely because I'm a woman). Women might be "wonderful" in terms of how people assess our character, but it doesn't translate into wonderful outcomes.

Oh...come now Paid...did you read the article? It most certainly does affect outcomes. You're automatically more trusted, liked, believed, etc...on so many levels than your male equivalents! The fact is that you could do the exact same amount of work as your male counterpart and you'll be viewed as a harder worker, get more credit, etc...

This is backed up by decades of hard research and it never fails. I know it doesn't "feel" that way...but I'll get to that in a minute. What I'm curious about now is how it feels if we were to look at your entire life through the lens of this one singular cognitive bias...would it accurately reflect reality? Or does it seem "unfair" to chalk up all your achievements and hard work to just having a vagina?

 

[Paidiske]

Oh...come now Paid...did you read the article? It most certainly does affect outcomes. You're automatically more trusted, liked, believed, etc...on so many levels than your male equivalents! The fact is that you could do the exact same amount of work as your male counterpart and you'll be viewed as a harder worker, get more credit, etc...

This is backed up by decades of hard research and it never fails. I know it doesn't "feel" that way...but I'll get to that in a minute. What I'm curious about now is how it feels if we were to look at your entire life through the lens of this one singular cognitive bias...would it accurately reflect reality? Or does it seem "unfair" to chalk up all your achievements and hard work to just having a vagina?

More trusted and liked, doesn't necessarily translate to more employment or pay, though. We still get screwed over there regularly.

I'm willing to concede that my successes have been the result of a combination of things, some of them within my control, and some of them not. What I find frustrating is people dismissing the obstacles as apparently not real.

 

[Ana the Ist]

More trusted and liked, doesn't necessarily translate to more employment or pay, though. We still get screwed over there regularly.

I'm willing to concede that my successes have been the result of a combination of things, some of them within my control, and some of them not. What I find frustrating is people dismissing the obstacles as apparently not real.

You're missing the point entirely....

Now that you know women get this rather massive advantage...where does this put a black woman of roughly equal socioeconomic background to a white man like me? She loses a couple points for being black maybe...but she gains them back for being a woman, right? Is this view of reality starting to seem a little bit....dumb?

 

[Paidiske]

I still reckon - if we're talking employment - she loses both for being black and being a woman.

It's not dumb to recognise systemic disadvantage. What you're talking about here are the issues of intersectionality - that things like race, gender, class, sexuality, ability/disability, religious identity and so forth, all play into how we encounter the world in complex ways - and that's a good thing to recognise.

 

[Ana the Ist]

More trusted and liked, doesn't necessarily translate to more employment or pay, though. We still get screwed over there regularly.

I'm willing to concede that my successes have been the result of a combination of things, some of them within my control, and some of them not. What I find frustrating is people dismissing the obstacles as apparently not real.

Let's try this...

A black girl and white boy are in school together. They each turn in an essay of equal value. Who gets the better grade? Is it the white boy because his teacher expects him to do better? Or is it the black girl because her teacher expects her to do worse?

Is that clear line you had in your mind starting to get blurry yet? I mean surely, if we expect less of a black girl...and she does just as well...it's more impressive, right? Who has the advantage?

 

[Paidiske]

Ideally, the teacher is blind-marking, to prevent any personal biases from coming into play.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Ideally, the teacher is blind-marking, to prevent any personal biases from coming into play.

Ideally...but you see my point, yes??

Even someone who is unfairly facing lower expectations due to a cultural bias isn't necessarily disadvantaged. Possibly anyway, I don't know how this works out in research...

 

[Ana the Ist]

I still reckon - if we're talking employment - she loses both for being black and being a woman.

It's not dumb to recognise systemic disadvantage. What you're talking about here are the issues of intersectionality - that things like race, gender, class, sexuality, ability/disability, religious identity and so forth, all play into how we encounter the world in complex ways - and that's a good thing to recognise.

If you recognize it...you should also realize that it's not changeable. That even if we could remove a bias...it would be unfair unless we removed every kind of bias ever.

 

[Ana the Ist]

And just to drive the point home...

Research finds implicit bias training is ineffective

This article details the results of a massive study done by Harvard and multiple universities over the course of years...basically the same researchers who are the foundation for all this "implicit bias" stuff...


“They discovered two things: One is that the correlation between implicit bias and discriminatory behavior appears weaker than previously thought,” Bartlett summarizes. “They also conclude that there is very little evidence that changes in implicit bias have anything to do with changes in a person’s behavior.”

In other words, the report argues that since implicit biases do not correlate with outward behavior, attempts to change implicit or unconscious biases will not correlate with changes in behavior."

So even if we can show that people have some unconscious cognitive bias that favors whites....it doesn't appear as if that bias results in very much, if any, outward behavior.

So these so called discriminatory mindsets would need to at least be very conscious and deliberate behaviors in order for them to explain the societal differences that you're talking about. Do you really think that's the case?

 

[Paidiske]

If you recognize it...you should also realize that it's not changeable. That even if we could remove a bias...it would be unfair unless we removed every kind of bias ever.

So we should give up and not even try? I think it's more changeable than you think. I think we should strive to better our society(-ies) as much as we can. Why would that be a bad thing?

So these so called discriminatory mindsets would need to at least be very conscious and deliberate behaviors in order for them to explain the societal differences that you're talking about. Do you really think that's the case?

Yes, I do.

 

[Ana the Ist]

So we should give up and not even try? I think it's more changeable than you think. I think we should strive to better our society(-ies) as much as we can. Why would that be a bad thing?



Yes, I do.

So if a study shows that blacks with certain names have a 33% less chance of being called back...it's because 33% of employers are deliberately thinking "hey that's a black person, not gonna hire them."?

 

[Paidiske]

So if a study shows that blacks with certain names have a 33% less chance of being called back...it's because 33% of employers are deliberately thinking "hey that's a black person, not gonna hire them."?

Subconsciously, probably. But what other explanation is there for discrimination on the basis of name alone?