Where are we right now?

[email protected]

What the current situation is has absolutely zero effect on whether or not it is racism. Being turned away for being a white male is not only racist but sexist and exclusive, plain and simple. There is no other rational argument.

Again, I think this is a good thing. It's also racist. And the fight to redefine the word when it's convenient does not serve the cause.

[email protected]

That’s an entirely different conversation, and a strawman to boot. You clearly aren’t interested in actually discussing this. I can show you study after study proving that a bias exists against equally skilled applicants with an “ethnic sounding” name, but why bother, you’re not serious and I’m done engaging with you.

[email protected]

This is still diving down a rabbit hole of bad definitions, and devalues both what racism is and how it's affected people in their lives.

Racism systemically prefers one race over another; not just on an individual occasion like one hiring session. I guarantee you, if an organization's entire senior leadership of 10+ people were all black men, any diversity consulting would highlight that as being an issue as well. The fact of the matter is, just about every organization currently hires plenty of white men, so that ends up being many levels removed from reality.

If you're trying to pinpoint statistics around who gets turned away from one particular position, the problem is that companies get so many dozens or hundreds of applicants, you'd be flagging that statistic on enormous groups. Asians over blacks? Women over men? You really can't make a concrete determination there, and when your source cases are singular anecdotes, it fails the critical definition of being "systemic".

You're also disacknowledging the negative reinforcement that accompanies racism, where people are treated negatively a certain way based on no known information of them other than their race. If you're attacked on the street anonymously, specifically for being white, and the attacker calls you a "fucking cracker!" then I would have no problems labeling that racism. As it stands, even in 2024, other races deal with that situation far more often from police or other hate groups. I would absolutely call much of the "DEI" labeling racism, given that the people making these declarations have not been given valid assessments of their target's performance on their job.

[email protected]

That’s an entirely different conversation

It is a different conversation from the one you want to have. It is the conversation I was having before you showed up and tried to derail it with a strawman.

I can show you study after study proving that a bias exists

I agree and acknowledge that that bias exists. That bias has no bearing on whether or not discrimination based on race (regardless of what race) is racism.

[email protected]

Racism systemically prefers one race over another; not just on an individual occasion

Incorrect. What you're referring to is called "systemic racism", but "racism" alone has an entirely different, very simple definition: discrimination based on race, which is what this is. And it can absolutely be applied to individuals and to policies.

if an organization's entire senior leadership of 10+ people were all black men, any diversity consulting would highlight that as being an issue as well.

Really? Do you really think that's true? Do you think anyone would "highlight", say, a professional basketball or football team that's 90+% black as "problematic"?

You're also disacknowledging the negative reinforcement that accompanies racism, where people are treated negatively a certain way based on no known information of them other than their race.

Wrong again, I explicitly acknowledged this already.

the people making these declarations have not been given valid assessments of their target's performance on their job.

You don't need to assess performance. The only thing you need to assess is the policies themselves.

[email protected]

I suspect the rise of mental illness has much to do with economy. The more uncertain you are about the future, the easier it becomes to be steeped in resentment.

It is the other end of the wealth horseshoe: The wealthy are free of consequence, and consequence no longer holds meaning among the poor. After all, you don't have friends, a job, or a future. The only way anyone will remember you is if you leave a mark upon them. You may die, but the living are left with the suffering you have left behind.

...that is my guess about the mindset.

[email protected]

Can you link me to the specific comment where you've acknowledged negative reinforcement? I checked over each of your comments in this thread and don't see it.

Basketball teams hire white men frequently. So I'm still not sure what point you're making; DEI does not mandate a perfectly smooth ratio. And as far as I've seen, people are not assessing the policies themselves, but making assertions around them directly to individual long-term hires - based on, you guessed it, race. White people, so far as I've seen, have not had to defend their presence under these policies.

[email protected]

Matthew 24:12

It might be the end times, but many believed this in prior ages as well. Over the last 2000 years, a bunch of humans probably thought, “This is it.”

I do feel like the Christian message, especially the one by Christ for how his followers should act, has been lost to some degree. This is likely the least religious time in history, which isn’t necessarily a good or bad thing.

But post-COVID, people are still rebounding when it comes to socially hanging out offline. We all leaned into echo chambers more during that time. A lot of Americans don’t know their neighbors: I didn’t until 2-3 years ago.

[email protected]

Can you link me to the specific comment where you've acknowledged negative reinforcement?

I'll go ahead and do it again, just for you: Racial and sexual bias is present in our systems. In politics, in employment, and in every other industry. They've been dealt a shit hand via generational poverty, which extends from all the way back in the days of slavery. Marginalized people deserve an upper hand.

DEI attempts to bring balance to that inequality, using racism and discrimination. DEI is a net positive. Discrimination is not inherently negative.

Basketball teams hire white men frequently. So I'm still not sure what point you're making

The point I'm making is the frequency. Unless you want to claim that companies just never hire black men, at which point I expect to see statistics indicating that all black men are unemployed.

Black basketball players comprise ~70% of the NBA, despite making up ~13% of the US population. That's a >500% over-representation. Are you planning to file a complaint?

And as far as I've seen, people are not assessing the policies themselves

What are you talking about? It's called DEI. The policy is in the name.

but making assertions around them directly to individual long-term hires

I don't even know what this means?

White people, so far as I've seen, have not had to defend their presence under these policies.

You just did, in your first reply to me:

I'm white, straight, and male...Every agent that I've tried to contact, especially ones that match the type of book I'm writing, has been vocal that their focus is on BIPOC, LGBT, and other diverse candidates. I've been turned away at every one.

[email protected]

It goes back even further than that. Pretty much immediately after the New Deal "they" set about to undo it. It’s a long listen but worth checking out How Conservatism Won by Robert Evans. He lays out in a clear concise way “how a consortium of rich failsons got together to fund a network of right wing think tanks and shift American culture in a fun new direction. (note: it was not actually fun at all).”

it's worth remembering that one of the primary ghouls/traitors responsible for the attempted overthrow of our government on J6 was Roger Stone, the same traitorous ratfucker who began his career working for Nixon and has a fucking Nixon tattoo on his back. It's really impossible to overstate just how fuckin' bad these people are and they're winning.

tl;dr the shadowy cabals the rightwing says are behind everything is classic projection again, they're controlled by shadowy cabals of rich people

[email protected]

Buddy, I've tried to be more patient with you than other commenters, but that truly crosses a line. Taking someone else's experiences, and selectively quoting them to suit your own agenda, so it fits your definition of discrimination, is disgraceful.

If you'd read on in my comment, I described how literary agents are inundated with thousands of requests. It is literally an industry anyone with Word or OpenOffice can try to enter into. There are probably hundreds of minority authors also getting turned away just like me. This is not an instance of "defending one's presence" the way that minorities need to in their workplaces, the way the current administration is scrutinizing them in Federal offices. This is just me trying to be the one in a thousand shot to publicize a book - which is a rare accomplishment. So, NO. You don't get to "own" and weaponize someone else's hardship in that way. Not ever.

Shame on you.

[email protected]

selectively quoting them to suit your own agenda

I didn't "selectively" quote anything...

so it fits your definition of discrimination

...are you under the impression that I invented the word? I'm not quite that old...

If you'd read on in my comment, I described how literary agents are inundated with thousands of requests

...and that should mean something to me?

There are probably hundreds of minority authors also getting turned away just like me.

Okay but you explicitly said you were rejected because of your skin color...

So, NO. You don't get to "own" and weaponize someone else's hardship in that way. Not ever.

That...didn't happen. Don't blame me because you argued against yourself...

agnos.is Forums

Where are we right now?