Black Lives Matter organiser is white yet took a scholarship only for Black Students - Polidicks

[QUOTE=NotMeh;48497103]how incredibly ironic apparently it's impossible for white people to be poor meh, just refer to my previous post[/QUOTE] You realize there are also income based scholarships too right.... Like, it's not just a race thing...

[QUOTE=Rofl my Waff;48497127]You realize there are also income based scholarships too right.... Like, it's not just a race thing...[/QUOTE] good that's how it should be, instead of looking at someone's ethnicity and making a bunch of assumptions

[QUOTE=wauterboi;48497123]Part of it also has to do with culture and diversity. White culture is dominant, and there's a lot of racial exclusion when you consider many fields of work and in many fields of education.[/QUOTE] Wait, whenever people talk about black culture they're mocked. What exactly is white culture?

[QUOTE=NotMeh;48497146]good that's how it should be, instead of looking at someone's ethnicity and making a bunch of assumptions[/QUOTE] Luckily that isn't how race scholarships work either so win win

[QUOTE=DOG-GY;48496916]Calling a black scholarship racist or a women's scholarship sexist is such ignorant backwards bullshit.[/QUOTE] It's racist and sexist by definition. It excludes based on race and biological sex.

[QUOTE=Antdawg;48496955]Equality of outcome. Not racist, not sexist.[/QUOTE] I honestly don't see the point of helping wealthy black people over poor whites or asians. I'd say that helping poor disadvantaged people is more important than having all of the races or colors have equal % representation on a graph. [QUOTE=Antdawg;48496863][img]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Opp3_e73ejg/U-UTPl5da1I/AAAAAAAAAS0/0JHzwPjpxqk/s1600/Equality+Doesn't+Mean+Justice+Baseball.jpg[/img] Don't tell me that minorities generally have the same opportunities as Anglos.[/QUOTE] In this context you seem to implying that black people are inferior or just less able. (shorter)

[QUOTE=wauterboi;48496895]I can agree to a very small degree, and I completely disagree with your solution. The "I'm going to prove everyone wrong!" mentality shouldn't be the normal means for women to break into a field, and it shouldn't be the measuring stick for whether or not women should exist in a field. [/QUOTE] I disagree with the solution as well, it shouldn't happen in the first place but no amount of legislation and incentives will change the fact that women gravitate to other careers outside STEM and often can't compete within those industries. [video=youtube;0uohO8Kli_Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uohO8Kli_Q[/video]

[QUOTE=Velocet;48497167]It's racist and sexist by definition. It excludes based on race and biological sex.[/QUOTE] This would be true if all scholarships were exclusionary but that's not the case. Your scope is too narrow.

if j-roc can be black, anyone can be

[QUOTE=DOG-GY;48497255]This would be true if all scholarships were exclusionary but that's not the case. Your scope is too narrow.[/QUOTE] There aren't exactly scholarships for white males other than scholarships that are available to everybody. However, there are scholarships for minorities and women exclusively. Hell, I just found a Jezebel article about a guy who wanted to start up a scholarship for white males exclusively calling it racist. [quote]Of course, you could argue that simply establishing a white-male-only scholarship in the first place is racist, or at the very least ill-thought-out. This is far from the first time someone has argued that affirmative action and related efforts disadvantage white dudes, when in fact the entire point of these efforts has been to attempt to grant other groups some of the advantages white men have always enjoyed. Bohannon is correct that "just because you're white and male doesn't mean you have a bunch of money lying around to pay for books and rent" — but since Texas, where the FMAE is a registered nonprofit, offers the same need-based financial aid to all ethnic groups, Bohannon's claim of being left out doesn't really hold water.[/quote] To be clear, it's racist and sexist when we do it, but when they do it, it's okay because we're privileged? I agree with this guy, just because you're white and male doesn't mean you have a bunch of money lying around to pay for books and rent.

Boy we sure do love splitting people up into groups don't we? Can't right racism until you get rid of the labels, until then we're just fooling ourselves into thinking we're combating racism. As soon as there are no white men, or black men, or red men, or yellow men, and there's just men (and women) left that's when we can honestly tell ourselves we've fought and beaten racism on a huge scale.

[QUOTE=Velocet;48497242]I disagree with the solution as well, it shouldn't happen in the first place but no amount of legislation and incentives will change the fact that women gravitate to other careers outside STEM and often can't compete within those industries. [video=youtube;0uohO8Kli_Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uohO8Kli_Q[/video][/QUOTE] Idk what the purpose of that video is but I looked into the findings of various articles on chess performance of men and women and all the conclusions distinctly led to societal factors rather than intellectual. The dude is full of shit [editline]19th August 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Velocet;48497337]There aren't exactly scholarships for white males other than scholarships that are available to everybody. However, there are scholarships for minorities and women exclusively. Hell, I just found a Jezebel article about a guy who wanted to start up a scholarship for white males exclusively calling it racist. To be clear, it's racist and sexist when we do it, but when they do it, it's okay because we're privileged? I agree with this guy, just because you're white and male doesn't mean you have a bunch of money lying around to pay for books and rent.[/QUOTE] please watch this and maybe you'll start to form an understanding of why white targeted scholarships are dumb [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItiXR5m1yAY[/media]

[QUOTE=BANNED USER;48497343]Boy we sure do love splitting people up into groups don't we? Can't right racism until you get rid of the labels, until then we're just fooling ourselves into thinking we're combating racism. As soon as there are no white men, or black men, or red men, or yellow men, and there's just men (and women) left that's when we can honestly tell ourselves we've fought and beaten racism on a huge scale.[/QUOTE] You know, a lot of minorities find the idea of 'racial coalescence' to be downright Huxleyan. I myself find the mixture of all races to be downright detrimental to humanity, as a Mexican. You don't want incompatible bone marrows, in this day and age.

[QUOTE=Antdawg;48496942]They are both equality. Left is equality of opportunity and right is equality of outcome. However the point is that you can't just inherit an inequitable system, take away any affirmative action designed to create equal outcomes and expect the system to naturally correct itself towards equal outcomes. African Americans on average are from poorer backgrounds with fewer opportunities, especially regarding upwards economic mobility.[/QUOTE] Equality of opportunity is important, equality of outcome is not.

In my experiences, I've learned that generally people, myself included, don't hate purely based on skin color. They hate based on cultural stereotypes attributed to skin colors. I don't hate Hispanic folks, I work with acres of them and they're mostly good folks. I hate the stupid fucking Hispanic people that drink in front of the liquor store every day and piss all over the sidewalk, making me jack them up for it, every. single. day. I'd also hate them for doing the same think if they were pink and green with stripes, though, so. I honestly think the former example of that group is the majority.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;48497241]In this context you seem to implying that black people are inferior or just less able. (shorter)[/QUOTE] But they are less able, that's the point of me posting that picture. African Americans are less likely to finish schooling, have a lower life expectancy, are more-likely to be in poverty, are less-likely to own their own home, have a median household income almost $30,000 lower than median Anglo households income, and have a median wealth twelve times lower than Anglos. I like how you're trying to play against me and make me out as the racist for believing black people are 'inferior', which I've neither said nor implied. Rather, the real racist is someone who believes everyone is already equal (in either sense of the world, but neither are true) and failing to acknowledge that there are still severe racial inequity problems in the western world as a result of the ongoing effects of institutionalised racism still making an impact today.

wow, this thread was derailed from the first post. anyways, it's about time shaun king is in negative spot light. he still has to address the allegations of using the recent police shooting victims' crowdfunding to his own benefit. i know it's washington post but still: [url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/05/05/online-activists-raised-60k-for-tamir-rices-family-so-where-did-all-that-money-go/[/url]

[QUOTE=DOG-GY;48497360]Idk what the purpose of that video is but I looked into the findings of various articles on chess performance of men and women and all the conclusions distinctly led to societal factors rather than intellectual. The dude is full of shit [editline]19th August 2015[/editline] please watch this and maybe you'll start to form an understanding of why white targeted scholarships are dumb[/QUOTE] I don't need to watch a documentary about white privilege. Just because I am white and male doesn't mean I have $100,000 to spend on a degree and since my parents make around $3,000 a month, I'm in the same situation as every middle class woman/minority where we're "too rich" to get help and too poor to actually afford it. However, those women and minorities have organizations that provide scholarships exclusively for them, meaning the competition is cut in half in the case of gender and racial-based scholarships are cut down significantly more. Not to mention that quotas have been set putting white men at a severe disadvantage where it doesn't matter if you're the greatest applicant or not, if there's too many white guys in your school, take the black woman with a 3.0GPA Also I'm looking at the subject of men and women's chess and all I see are editorials calling men out for being sexist. Why is it so controversial to admit that women and men are biologically different to the point of brain structure and activity?

[QUOTE=sgman91;48497152]Wait, whenever people talk about black culture they're mocked. What exactly is white culture?[/QUOTE] Who mocks the notion of black culture? I've taken African American Dance, and there's a ton of other cultural classes at the college I go to. I don't see what's wrong with looking at ethnic/racial norms because it's useful in sociology, anthropology, psychology, statistics... as long as you're not being bigoted I don't see the problem. There's genuine cultural history with black people and to feel afraid of referring to that is something [I]I'd[/I] feel offended about. To talk about what "white culture" is you'd have to look at what it means to be white. "White" can be used to refer to a lot of Europeans and from that, a lot of European ideas are borrowed, including Christianity and Catholicism. They're not exclusive to white people, but they're generally the norm. English is part of white culture and is pretty much the main language spoken by most Americans. Then you've got food: cheeses, mashed potatoes, hamburgers, buffalo wings... These are simple things. Sure, these are attributes that can apply to different sections of the United States, or different communities without extreme dependence on race, but I'm speaking generally for a culture that's hard to describe because it's something I live in. I can tell you what we aren't because it's what I personally try to pay attention to: The historical introduction of polyrhythms and erratic dancing in dancing and in music from black people versus stuff like ballet. The better accepted response of saying absolutely nothing versus making a big scene in Japan. The different views on sex from all over the world especially in Europe after World War II in comparison to the reserved sexual nature of America. Or how about the amount of generations in a family that live under one roof in most of Southern America? Don't even get me started on food. All of these ideas, however, contribute to a culture of thought. [I]What do I think of my family? What do I think of my work? What do I think of my community? What do I think of my free time? What are my priorities?[/I] The answer for Japan isn't the same for someone in Egypt, and for Egypt it's probably not the same as America. There's religious cultures too, and religious stigma as well. I'd totally be down for Muslim scholarships and any place that tries to encourage Muslim inclusion, because the more they're included as normal people, the more certain aspects of their culture become accepted and the more people find it in themselves to be involved with them. I know a lot of people that still think of Muslims as tower-topplers and extremist war machines and I hear about it on the news all the time. That problem isn't going to be fixed until people push for a new definition of societal normalcy. Part of that includes education, which contributes to employment and a voice. That's probably the most important aspect - giving races a voice. The BLM movement might seem awful to some, but it's spawn is simply because no one listened. No one takes their incarceration rates seriously. No one takes their income disparity seriously. No one takes the fact that they're generally predisposed to living in awful housing and in awful communities with awful schools seriously. No one considers that while institutional racism is over, the remnants are pervasive in all black-related issues. Sure, yes, there's other members of poverty but chances are they're getting the short-end of the stick for other stigmatized reasons, like mental health which is never taken seriously either. And if you address the problems that push people into poverty, you get closer to equality of opportunity, which should be the goal. Being upset that there are racial favors doesn't mean you tear the entire thing down, because you tear equality of opportunity down and contribute to the cyclical nastiness that puts minorities in a bad spot.

[QUOTE=AlexConnor;48497412]Equality of opportunity is important, equality of outcome is not.[/QUOTE] It depends really. Like in economics it's necessary that inequality of outcomes exists, that's why the market economy is the most effective and efficient economic system. However when we're talking about race, equality of opportunity does not necessarily go far enough; it is not guaranteed that outcomes will correlate proportionally with other ethnic groups.

[QUOTE=BANNED USER;48497343]Boy we sure do love splitting people up into groups don't we? Can't right racism until you get rid of the labels, until then we're just fooling ourselves into thinking we're combating racism. As soon as there are no white men, or black men, or red men, or yellow men, and there's just men (and women) left that's when we can honestly tell ourselves we've fought and beaten racism on a huge scale.[/QUOTE] But not all people are the same. People are different. When you say that all people are the same and give the "one size fits all" argument, you turn blind eye to things like black income disparity. You're not going to solve the riots and incarceration rates by saying, "Okay, no more looking at race."

[QUOTE=Velocet;48497438]I don't need to watch a documentary about white privilege. Just because I am white and male doesn't mean I have $100,000 to spend on a degree and since my parents make around $3,000 a month, I'm in the same situation as every middle class woman/minority where we're "too rich" to get help and too poor to actually afford it. However, those women and minorities have organizations that provide scholarships exclusively for them, meaning the competition is cut in half in the case of gender and racial-based scholarships are cut down significantly more. Not to mention that quotas have been set putting white men at a severe disadvantage where it doesn't matter if you're the greatest applicant or not, if there's too many white guys in your school, take the black woman with a 3.0GPA[/QUOTE] You obviously do need to watch it because it addresses everything you said. I'll specifically comment on it putting white men at a disadvantage: It's factually not, something that again was said in the documentary. [QUOTE=Velocet;48497438]Also I'm looking at the subject of men and women's chess and all I see are editorials calling men out for being sexist. Why is it so controversial to admit that women and men are biologically different to the point of brain structure and activity?[/QUOTE] And I'm looking at the actual scientific papers that show that dude was way off. If you're not gonna actually read past editorials or watch a single documentary speaking about one of the most important issues we have then what do you have to seriously offer to a conversation as complex as this?

Another thing: There's a big Mexican community in Las Vegas that is usually underrepresented. I did some volunteer web design for a Mexican candidate and all but one person that volunteered for him was Mexican. In my first three schools, most people were Mexican. Would it then be wrong to push for Mexican representation and values? Is representation not a part of that? What's the difference in putting money towards a political or religious scholarship?

[QUOTE=Antdawg;48497461]It depends really. Like in economics it's necessary that inequality of outcomes exists, that's why the market economy is the most effective and efficient economic system. However when we're talking about race, equality of opportunity does not necessarily go far enough; it is not guaranteed that outcomes will correlate proportionally with other ethnic groups.[/QUOTE] Why does it matter if outcomes correlate proportionately between ethnic groups?

[QUOTE=AlexConnor;48497539]Why does it matter if outcomes correlate proportionately between ethnic groups?[/QUOTE] Because otherwise it shows systematic racism still exists. If for instance a white household has a median wealth twelve times greater than a median black household, something isn't right.

[QUOTE=AlexConnor;48497539]Why does it matter if outcomes correlate proportionately between ethnic groups?[/QUOTE] Because the remnants of racism still lingers, negatively affecting minorities in terms of economy, power, education, quality of life, etc. It's like asking "why should we care for the poor" or "why should we care for people who have mental issues" in that doing otherwise is really unfair and kills equal representation, resulting in a domino effect of awfulness.

[QUOTE=Antdawg;48497415]But they are less able, that's the point of me posting that picture. African Americans are less likely to finish schooling, have a lower life expectancy, are more-likely to be in poverty, are less-likely to own their own home...[/QUOTE] Perhaps we should focus on the [U]poor[/U] instead of the [B]black[/B] when we look at the poor black population.

[QUOTE=DOG-GY;48497482]You obviously do need to watch it because it addresses everything you said. I'll specifically comment on it putting white men at a disadvantage: It's factually not, something that again was said in the documentary. [/QUOTE] I'm just not understanding how watching a video will make the objective fact that the odds are not in my favor as a white male while seeking scholarships any less true. These targeted scholarships have a smaller pool and thus, have less people applying for them. I also don't see how admitting minorities based on mandatory quotas is a good thing either, considering every single black college student I know grew up in the same sort of background that I did, lived a comparable lifestyle and were preferred by admissions. I've had this conversation and even they think it's bullshit. I understand the situational "I grew up in the projects, went to a bad school, I want to further my education". Let that guy in, but preferring someone with a 3.0GPA over a 3.5GPA in an educational setting based in skin color due to government legislation? That's ridiculous. The fact is, just because I'm "privileged" doesn't change the fact that I'm in the situation that most of us are in where on paper, the household makes too much money, but yet we can't afford a $40,000 tuition leading to a degree, and it's only going to get worse from here as the next generation is still paying college loans back in addition to the mortgage and car payments.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;48497598]Perhaps we should focus on the [U]poor[/U] instead of the [B]black[/B] when we look at the poor black population.[/QUOTE] Perhaps we should focus on socioeconomic factors that cause people to become poor which often includes socioeconomic factors like racism, mental health (which is also often a part of racism), and education (which is also often a part of racism).

The black people you grew up around did not live a compareable lifestyle as you. Because they are black and you arent - so they had to face and will probably for the rest of their lives face systemic racism, and you won't. In more ways than you can even imagine, which you would realize if you'd watch that documentary. You'll like it.