Miranda Devine: Reverse racism is now acceptable in Australia

[Ana the Ist]

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

In-group bias....

If it makes you feel better though, there's a slightly older much more in depth study on such names that shows they have no bearing whatsoever on individual success.

 

[Paidiske]

Isn't in-group bias basically the same thing? I want people like me, which just so happens (most of the time) not to be people in this socially more disadvantaged group...

 

[Ana the Ist]

Isn't in-group bias basically the same thing? I want people like me, which just so happens (most of the time) not to be people in this socially more disadvantaged group...

No...it isn't the same thing...because it would have nothing to do with skin color and everything to do with familiarity. If it's an in-group bias, then unfamiliar "white" names would fair the same.

 

[Paidiske]

Agreed that unfamiliar white names would fare the same for in-group bias. But in either case, the person is (subconsciously) assessing the name to work out "Is this person like me?" and, when the assessing person is white, the black person is still losing out... so the outcome is the same.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Agreed that unfamiliar white names would fare the same for in-group bias. But in either case, the person is (subconsciously) assessing the name to work out "Is this person like me?" and, when the assessing person is white, the black person is still losing out... so the outcome is the same.

Point being?

 

[Paidiske]

The point being that the black person who loses out, for whatever reason, is being treated unfairly; and that this is something we can address in our society; and that we should do so.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The point being that the black person who loses out, for whatever reason, is being treated unfairly; and that this is something we can address in our society; and that we should do so.

Life is unfair...

Would it be fair to tell employers who they can or cannot hire?

 

[Paidiske]

Based on race? It would be very fair.

It's about correcting a power imbalance. Employers have more power than employees, and should be required to use that power justly.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Based on race? It would be very fair.

Wow...that's rather astonishing ...how would that be fair?

Imagine that you started a business all by your lonesome...and you built it up till you could hire 50 employees. It's yours, you own it, but now the government steps in and tells you who you have to hire or you'll be shut down/fined/whatever you have in mind? In what conceivable reality is that fair?

It's about correcting a power imbalance. Employers have more power than employees, and should be required to use that power justly.

Why is there a power imbalance?

 

[Paidiske]

I'm not saying the government says who you have to hire; I'm saying it's good for the government to say I may not make hiring decisions based on race.

This is for the protection of those who have less power in the employment process, and the government is their shield and advocate.

Of course there's a power imbalance. Without government protection, employers hold power over their employees or potential employees. This is why things like anti-discrimination laws are a good thing; they prevent the abuse of that power.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I'm not saying the government says who you have to hire; I'm saying it's good for the government to say I may not make hiring decisions based on race.

We already do that! Those studies you're speaking happened after those laws were put into place.

This is for the protection of those who have less power in the employment process, and the government is their shield and advocate.

Of course there's a power imbalance. Without government protection, employers hold power over their employees or potential employees. This is why things like anti-discrimination laws are a good thing; they prevent the abuse of that power.

....and yet we still see less call backs on "black sounding" names...

 

[Paidiske]

Then the laws obviously aren't enough in themselves, are they? So how could we improve?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Then the laws obviously aren't enough in themselves, are they? So how could we improve?

I don't see any feasible solution. I think people need to grow up and accept reality. Everyone acts in their own self interest...and it's completely fair.

 

[Paidiske]

I would rather be held to a higher standard.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Then the laws obviously aren't enough in themselves, are they? So how could we improve?

If a man is stronger than me...should he seek to become weaker so that the imbalance of power between is resolved?

If a man is smarter than me should he seek to become dumber to resolve the iniquity between us?

 

[Paidiske]

Of course not; but he should be prevented from using his strength or his intelligence to exploit your weakness.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Of course not; but he should be prevented from using his strength or his intelligence to exploit your weakness.

He need not exploit me at all for an imbalance of power to occur. He needs only to act in self interest.

 

[Paidiske]

It depends what situation we're talking about, doesn't it? If you and he are, for example, both students at university doing your best, there's nothing wrong with him out-excelling you.

On the other hand, if he mugs you in a park, using his strength (or the threat of it) to take your wallet, clearly that's wrong. And if he's your employer and uses his smarts to draw up an unfair employment contract, it might be self-interest, but it's also exploitation.

So it's not the strength that's the problem, it's how it is or can be used.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It depends what situation we're talking about, doesn't it? If you and he are, for example, both students at university doing your best, there's nothing wrong with him out-excelling you.

On the other hand, if he mugs you in a park, using his strength (or the threat of it) to take your wallet, clearly that's wrong. And if he's your employer and uses his smarts to draw up an unfair employment contract, it might be self-interest, but it's also exploitation.

So it's not the strength that's the problem, it's how it is or can be used.

We aren't talking about those situations though, are we? We're talking about the tendency of those with black sounding names to get called back slightly less than others.

We are equal under the law...but not equals.

 

[Paidiske]

We aren't talking about those situations though, are we? We're talking about the tendency of those with black sounding names to get called back slightly less than others.

Well, then, that has nothing to do with any disparity of strength or intelligence, so I don't know why you brought it up.