What would "equity" look like?

[OldWiseGuy]

Perhaps, but the issue is that there are inequalities in our society and how do you address those. If you look at the support systems that are in place for the homeless, the hungry, etc., political solutions have been a joke. The idea of throwing money at the problems just don't work. The more successful solutions that at least meet the immediate needs of these people are from churches, charities, and local people who have devoted their lives to these causes. These are the heroes in this effort and have been for centuries. Unfortunately, our current political environment makes it taboo to talk about the real causes of these issues, like drug use and dropping out of school. They would rather make this a race issue. I work as an engineer and in a long career have found that unless you attack the root cause of a problem, you will never really fix it.

I agree. However the real solution is proper education regarding the problems themselves, and, personal responsibility by those who are afflicted to address them. Most problems begin quite mundanely but because of lack of attention (a stitch in time...) often spiral out of control. It is a perplexing irony that those who can least afford to eat poorly...the poor...eat poorly, when they have the means to eat properly. Thus unnecessary poor health often is the basis of most of the rest of their problems, many of which are then blamed on such unrelated things such as racism.

 

[Larniavc]

We have already reached that.

In America? Not in the slightest. You must not be paying attention.

You may have that, but POC don’t.

 

[gaara4158]

In America? Not in the slightest. You must not be paying attention.

You may have that, but POC don’t.

This guy waxes nostalgic about the Jim Crow era. Best time of his life. I wouldn’t take any of his social views seriously.

 

[tz620q]

This guy waxes nostalgic about the Jim Crow era. Best time of his life. I wouldn’t take any of his social views seriously.

Yes, he must have been a Southern Democrat before. Or maybe you have another label you want to pin on someone you don't know.

 

[gaara4158]

Yes, he must have been a Southern Democrat before. Or maybe you have another label you want to pin on someone you don't know.

I’ve had enough interactions with said user to have a pretty good idea of the persona he projects here. I don’t remember labeling him, though.

 

[tz620q]

I’ve had enough interactions with said user to have a pretty good idea of the persona he projects here. I don’t remember labeling him, though.

Perhaps saying that he waxes nostalgic about the Jim Crow era is true; but to me it seemed to be calling him a Jim Crow. I might not agree with his opinions; but I think we would both defend his right to have them without being silenced. I might have misread your intent though and I am sorry if that is the case. It just seems that in our current state of discord in discourse in this country we have too much labeling going on to quell civil discourse.

 

[tz620q]

Well, sure. It’s possible to aim for more equitable practices and miss, but that’s not really a reason to embrace the Right’s disdain for the idea.

Within my lifetime I have personally been discriminated against by both Title IX and Affirmative Action. At the time, I was miffed about it; but looking back I am glad that it occurred.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

In America? Not in the slightest. You must not be paying attention.

You may have that, but POC don’t.

Perhaps they should expand their vision of opportunities. Many go unrecognized.

 

[gaara4158]

Within my lifetime I have personally been discriminated against by both Title IX and Affirmative Action. At the time, I was miffed about it; but looking back I am glad that it occurred.

Title IX is an anti-discrimination law. I’m curious as to how it’s possible to be targeted by it?

 

[tz620q]

Title IX is an anti-discrimination law. I’m curious as to how it’s possible to be targeted by it?

I was playing soccer for Kansas State University in the late 1970's when Title IX was starting to be enforced. The colleges could not really determine how the law would be enforced. It appeared at the time that they would be fined if they had a male team in a sport without having an equivalent female team. Our team was only given a very paltry funding, enough for jerseys, use of campus football fields to play, pay for referees, pay for gas to drive to away games, etc. So instead of risking being fined and not really knowing how to form a women's team out of thin air, the university cut funding for nearly all male sports, leaving only the football and basketball teams funded. So after that we had to do a lot out of our own pocket, which is very hard on someone trying to work their way through college and pay for it.
I do not want to end on that note though. The small sacrifice that we made is buried under the great success of our current female soccer teams. So I hope that most men that were asked to do this are now avid fans of female sports.

 

[gaara4158]

I was playing soccer for Kansas State University in the late 1970's when Title IX was starting to be enforced. The colleges could not really determine how the law would be enforced. It appeared at the time that they would be fined if they had a male team in a sport without having an equivalent female team. Our team was only given a very paltry funding, enough for jerseys, use of campus football fields to play, pay for referees, pay for gas to drive to away games, etc. So instead of risking being fined and not really knowing how to form a women's team out of thin air, the university cut funding for nearly all male sports, leaving only the football and basketball teams funded. So after that we had to do a lot out of our own pocket, which is very hard on someone trying to work their way through college and pay for it.
I do not want to end on that note though. The small sacrifice that we made is buried under the great success of our current female soccer teams. So I hope that most men that were asked to do this are now avid fans of female sports.

There’s a really disconcerting illusion that happens sometimes when you’re at a stoplight, and the cars on either side of you start moving at the same time while you’re sitting still. It feels for a moment like you’re actually moving backwards, and it makes you panic until you realize what’s happening. I think the same phenomenon applies when you’ve been privileged over another group for a time, and suddenly the playing field begins to level out. It feels like you’re being discriminated against, but really you’re just feeling the effects of someone else not being discriminated against.
I think you’ve grown to understand that this is what happened, but I thought I’d share the analogy because I find it useful in the equity discourse.

 

[tz620q]

There’s a really disconcerting illusion that happens sometimes when you’re at a stoplight, and the cars on either side of you start moving at the same time while you’re sitting still. It feels for a moment like you’re actually moving backwards, and it makes you panic until you realize what’s happening. I think the same phenomenon applies when you’ve been privileged over another group for a time, and suddenly the playing field begins to level out. It feels like you’re being discriminated against, but really you’re just feeling the effects of someone else not being discriminated against.
I think you’ve grown to understand that this is what happened, but I thought I’d share the analogy because I find it useful in the equity discourse.

Let's start with our points of agreement (I think, please correct me if I am wrong). I think we both acknowledge that there is a societal good that occurs when all are advantaged to meet their best potential. I think we both acknowledge that no society meets this ideal perfectly. So the society as a whole can hopefully look at itself dispassionately and try to rebalance to achieve this aim. I think where we disagree is in this thought that anti-discrimination laws somehow work without reverse discrimination. In your analogy, the righting of long term disadvantage occurs (the movement of other cars) without any disadvantage being inflicted on the previously advantaged group. In my experience, I have not seen this occur without some form of reverse discrimination. What has to be weighed is several things. First, we cannot assume that because one group appears to have something that another group does not have that discrimination is the cause of this. Second, we cannot assume that the behavior of one group that appears to have an advantage is discriminatory just because of some outside perception that a group is segregated in some way. Finally and I think you would agree here, reverse discrimination if applied and controlled to advantage a previously disadvantaged group can cause societal change to a better condition; but it most be done with a transparent motivation and unbiased application to allow all to agree that this is for the better good. If this does not occur, the newly disadvantaged group will see it as discrimination against them, rather than an attempt to balance a situation.

How this is pertinent to my story at college playing soccer in the late 1970's is that there were no scholarships given to soccer players. There were few youth leagues in Kansas for soccer at that time. A lot of our players were foreign students. Because there were no scholarships, the varsity players could play in the rec leagues. That is how I met them and finally joined the soccer team. The rec leagues had teams that were organized by dorm floor, which in the 1970's were mostly segregated by male and female. So a team would normally be predominantly male, not because they were actively discriminating; but because that was the way the rec leagues were set up. There was no prohibition on a female floor setting up a soccer team and playing in the same league. There were just not enough interested females to form a team. Because of this, some soccer playing females would join male teams in the rec league. As far as I know, our varsity team never had a female playing for it; but I don't think we would have stopped one from playing if she was sufficiently talented. So in our case, I don't see that females were being discriminated against because there was not a female only soccer team. In fact at this time at KSU there is still no male intercollegiate soccer team, though now there is a varsity female intercollegiate team. I am using intercollegiate to apply here to teams that are registered with the NCAA to be eligible to play sports at that level and be allowed to have scholarships and college funding of that sport. The KSU mens team is listed as a club team, which is not allowed to have scholarships or get significant funding from the university. Most of the funds to have the team come from club dues paid by the players. I hope this long winded story is perhaps illustrative of the long term effects of discrimination and reverse discrimination. There is hardly any way to advantage one group without disadvantaging another.

 

[gaara4158]

In your analogy, the righting of long term disadvantage occurs (the movement of other cars) without any disadvantage being inflicted on the previously advantaged group.

I wouldn’t say that the disadvantage isn’t transferred to the previously advantaged group. What I would say is that it’s more helpful to recontextualize the transferred disadvantage as a correction to a previously-held unfair advantage. Yes, you’re losing ground, but it’s ground you shouldn’t have had anyway. It’s not an issue.

 

[Robban]

Without regard to the vague definition of equity as applied to the various disparities between blacks and whites, what would it look like in the practical sense?

I have no idea, but a guess maybe,

Probably nothing to do with what you are talking about though.

But it made someones day that's for sure.