What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Your Thoughts - League Agrees To Social Justice Plan (1 Viewer)

I don't see it that way.

The way I judged Obama so too will I judge Trump - why would I change how I view what a President does based on party affiliation ?

Trump taking on the kneeling in the NFL is a side show, lets call it what it is. It is nothing what people here have labeled it. Its a burr to Trump and his supporters so Trump makes it national news, the media eats it up, the snowflakes goes bonkers over it.

But it isn't unconstitutional, mean, hateful, beyond his powers or anything like that. People who are calling it that is who I was reminding of the things Obama did that really WERE beyond what he should have been doing. Forgetting all those things and piling on Trump over kneeing and the NFL is being selectively forgetful

Example - I don't forget Obama enlarged national parks. As long as its done right, I 100% support that. Trump right now is trying to shrink those parks and national lands and 100% against it. My views on how to handle national lands will not change because its Trump, Obama or the next POTUS. 
That's great and all, but I'll disagree when you say Trump's comments aren't hateful. At the very least he's shown to not understand that certain things a civilian not in office can say should not be said by the president. It's not just this, really this is far from the worst. It's just one example.

 
Short Corner said:
This is the starting point?
It is if you believe that black people complaining about racism is a bigger problem than black people experiencing racism.

 
At the very least he's shown to not understand that certain things a civilian not in office can say should not be said by the president. It's not just this, really this is far from the worst. It's just one example
 least polite POTUS since the racist LBJ

hateful ? no - Trump is right, its disgraceful to kneel during the anthem - and millions feel that way and to ignore all those millions of people's feelings? maybe that's the true hate?

It is if you believe that black people complaining about racism is a bigger problem than black people experiencing racism.
if you think racism is only a black thing - then you're racist IMO

racism doesn't know skin color - every shade of skin color can experience it and that's what I don't like, always making it about a skin color. that in itself is racism if you didn't know

 
I have many issues with the way my country treats people here and abroad. The fact that we can criticize the country legally and in public is, in fact, one of the benefits of not living in a fascist state. I, and many others, fear that America may go down the path towards fascism, as many once-democratic societies have.

What does going down the path towards fascism look like? Well, it starts with asserting the sanctity of the flag, anthem, and national leaders, along with religious-style worship of those three. Then, criticism of the deified leaders is squelched and later made illegal. Dissidents are rounded up and arrested, and supporters are elevated and empowered. 

Playing the anthem alone isn't fascist, but it is nationalistic. It's a political act. Protesting nationalism is also a political act. If you'd like the football pre-game to not be politicized, you have to start with not politicizing it by playing the anthem and requiring the players to stand on the field and participate in the nationalistic display.

Suggesting that protestors of nationalism should be fired, arrested, or leave the country is fascist. I might ask you, if protest bothers you so much, "how can you possibly stand living in a country" where the very first amendment in the Bill of Rights asserts, "the right of the people peaceably to...petition the Government for a redress of grievances"?
I and many others have no problem with the NFL protests during the anthem.  The players have that right.  I & many others have a right to not watch NFL football or those teams with players who express their rights.  I really don't see what all the hubbub is about.

 
I and many others have no problem with the NFL protests during the anthem.  The players have that right.  I & many others have a right to not watch NFL football or those teams with players who express their rights.  I really don't see what all the hubbub is about.
There's a difference between a private citizen calling for a boycott, and the President of the United States calling for a boycott. A boycott, I might add, of perhaps the most quintessentially American business.

 
YOu haven't paid much attention to some other social media outlets then. My facebook feed has been chock full of casual fans who cite the protests as their reason not to watch this year. I don't think the NFL lost many of it's hard-core fans, but it lost a ton of the casual fans who only saw a few games yearly anyway.
Yep, lost a lot of fans.  you sometimes reap what you hoe & it isn't pretty.  This should immediately be transferred to the political thread-IMO

 
Possibly but any time money is donated to 1 worthwhile a cause it is at the expense of every other cause. Opportunity cost. 
I don't see taking money away from breast cancer charities and military families and giving it to "community relations" projects as a worthwhile cause.  I think it's pretty damn outrageous actually.

 
I don't see taking money away from breast cancer charities and military families and giving it to "community relations" projects as a worthwhile cause.  I think it's pretty damn outrageous actually.
They're all fine causes. 

If the NFL decided that they would donate $X every year to different causes, one year choose military families, one year community Justice, etc. That would be fine. I just hope, perhaps unrealistically, that they're actually thinking though the use of their money to find the best effective impact in each.

 
if you think racism is only a black thing - then you're racist IMO
I never said anything close to that. What I said is that there are people who think that black people protesting racism is a bigger problem than black people experiencing racism. Thank you for proving my point.

 
I don't see taking money away from breast cancer charities and military families and giving it to "community relations" projects as a worthwhile cause.  I think it's pretty damn outrageous actually.
 I dunno, I'm pretty cynical about "pink-washing", so I'd say that money being diverted from breast-cancer research to just about anything else would be worthwhile.

 
I honestly don't think these protests have affected the ratings that much.

The risk of serious injury to a player lessens my enjoyment greatly. It's all a little too Death Race 2000ish to me.

Also, there are some many more forms of entertainment these days. So much quality TV these days, add in social media and video games. It really shouldn't be surprising that ratings are down.

 
I don't see taking money away from breast cancer charities and military families and giving it to "community relations" projects as a worthwhile cause.  I think it's pretty damn outrageous actually.
The NFL is total BS, I agree with that. They profit of sales of pink items during October and they used to charge the military for their in game publicity. NFL is a pretty greedy disgusting organization. However, I have no issue shifting money from cancer to community outreach. We do charity fundraising at work. Some periods we donate to children's hospital then to humane society and then to a scholarship fund. Is potentially saving a kids life a bigger deal than saving a dog or saving a kid some money for college? Yeah ofcourse. That doesn't make it outrageous. There are many causes that need help. 

 
zftcg said:
I never said anything close to that. What I said is that there are people who think that black people protesting racism is a bigger problem than black people experiencing racism. Thank you for proving my point.
how about this - stop focusing on one color skin? white skin suffer from racism, brown skin does, yellow skin does ........ its like saying female sexual assault is all that matters and forget about all the males that suffer through it too

you again proved my point - black isn't racism - racism is racism, it affects every skin color and only addressing racism towards blacks is actually racist because it ignores all the other racism that exists

 
how about this - stop focusing on one color skin? white skin suffer from racism, brown skin does, yellow skin does ........ its like saying female sexual assault is all that matters and forget about all the males that suffer through it too

you again proved my point - black isn't racism - racism is racism, it affects every skin color and only addressing racism towards blacks is actually racist because it ignores all the other racism that exists
I do not ever recall being followed around a store or harassed by police b/c I'm white, though. Hmm...

 
I do not ever recall being followed around a store or harassed by police b/c I'm white, though. Hmm..
I don't even remember laws that hire white skin people over black skinned ones. I don't remember white helping students get college favoritism. I don't remember Mrs White USA, national white college coaches association, national white month, white quota's etc 

All the above is racist - because it focused on skin color, advancing one while the other is a negative.

What about all the non-white and non-blacks? More and more, we are a mixed race nation and truth is, we're all a little white, a little black etc. 

Isn't it time to move on from racism? If it is - then you have to get rid of all racist laws and rules and actions and start treating everyone equal. Treating people unequally in the name of equality is a lie and it doesn't get us any close to where we should be headed.

Racism is worse right now than it has been in my 48 years. That's a dang shame and if the NFL thinks reallocating moneys from other charities to black only organizations solves anything, they are lying to themselves and only doing it as a gesture to keep players from kneeling and fans from leaving. Pretty clear

 
I don't even remember laws that hire white skin people over black skinned ones. I don't remember white helping students get college favoritism. I don't remember Mrs White USA, national white college coaches association, national white month, white quota's etc 

All the above is racist - because it focused on skin color, advancing one while the other is a negative.

What about all the non-white and non-blacks? More and more, we are a mixed race nation and truth is, we're all a little white, a little black etc. 

Isn't it time to move on from racism? If it is - then you have to get rid of all racist laws and rules and actions and start treating everyone equal. Treating people unequally in the name of equality is a lie and it doesn't get us any close to where we should be headed.

Racism is worse right now than it has been in my 48 years. That's a dang shame and if the NFL thinks reallocating moneys from other charities to black only organizations solves anything, they are lying to themselves and only doing it as a gesture to keep players from kneeling and fans from leaving. Pretty clear
Show me how whites were in the negative before those things came around.

Racism is still out there no doubt, but you sound like someone that should be on Facebook or IG posting nonsense with #whitelivesmatter at the end.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't even remember laws that hire white skin people over black skinned ones. I don't remember white helping students get college favoritism. I don't remember Mrs White USA, national white college coaches association, national white month, white quota's etc 

All the above is racist - because it focused on skin color, advancing one while the other is a negative.
So then you'd agree that it's racist that resumes with black-sounding name are significantly less likely to get call backs than identical resumes with white-sounding names? You'd agree it's racist if equally-qualified blacks earn less money and are less likely to be promoted than whites?

You'd agree it's racist if blacks are more likely to be stopped by police than whites, more likely to be searched when stopped, more likely to be arrested when searched, more likely to be charged when arrested, and more likely to be convicted when charged?

Those are all well-studied facts about the reality of life in America today for blacks. So unless you have some way to dispute those facts, I guess you'd have to agree that America isn't quite the post-racial society that you'd like it to be.

 
how about this - stop focusing on one color skin? white skin suffer from racism, brown skin does, yellow skin does ........ its like saying female sexual assault is all that matters and forget about all the males that suffer through it too

you again proved my point - black isn't racism - racism is racism, it affects every skin color and only addressing racism towards blacks is actually racist because it ignores all the other racism that exists
Dude, you already proved my point, you don't need to keep making it for me! You think that racism against black people is no longer a problem. I get it. I'm not going to engage with you on that topic because the arguments you're putting forward demonstrate that you are either a) the most cluelessly naive/historically ignorant person I have ever come across, or b) a liberal who is trolling conservatives by posting the dumbest possible arguments he can think of in order to discredit the opposing side. Either way, not worth wasting any time on you.

 
For those who are interested, Slate's Hang Up and Listen podcast had an interesting discussion of this issue. All of the panelists lean decidedly to the left, so if you're not of that persuasion, I'm sure you will find much to disagree with. But it's a good rundown of the split between the Jenkins/Boldin group that reached the settlement and the Reid/Stills group that's opposing them.

 
Dude, you already proved my point, you don't need to keep making it for me! You think that racism against black people is no longer a problem. I get it. I'm not going to engage with you on that topic because the arguments you're putting forward demonstrate that you are either a) the most cluelessly naive/historically ignorant person I have ever come across, or b) a liberal who is trolling conservatives by posting the dumbest possible arguments he can think of in order to discredit the opposing side. Either way, not worth wasting any time on you.


Your cute little ruse to paint someone into a position they have not put forth and then use that to treat them with profound disrespect is appalling, but unfortunately not surprising.  Typical Alinski style tactics.  I’m surprised such overt antagonistic behavior is tolerated here.  Tell me, what exactly do you hope to accomplish with this type of post?  Score points with your echo chamber?  

 
You think that racism against black people is no longer a problem.
where did I say that ?

YOU seem to think racism is only applicable to black people. 

Notice the title of the thread "your-thoughts-league-agrees-to-social-justice-plan"

its not "your-thoughts-league-agrees-to-social-justice-for-black-people-plan"

 
where did I say that ?

YOU seem to think racism is only applicable to black people. 

Notice the title of the thread "your-thoughts-league-agrees-to-social-justice-plan"

its not "your-thoughts-league-agrees-to-social-justice-for-black-people-plan"
What is your definition of social justice? Does it involve blacks being more likely to be arrested and less likely to be hired, after controlling for criminality and experience? I notice you didn't respond to that point.

 
What is your definition of social justice? Does it involve blacks being more likely to be arrested and less likely to be hired, after controlling for criminality and experience? I notice you didn't respond to that point.
I have a radical idea - treat everyone the same. Don't judge people on skin color. Treat everyone the same. 

Rules and laws that focus on skin color are racist.

I know what happened in our past - but applying injustice to white skinned people as payback is essentially what affirmative action and quota's etc are. And they're racist. 

Don't judge people on skin color. Treat everyone the same.

If you're the best RB on the team, you play. The best dancer you dance. The best leader you lead. The best for a position you get it, the highest accolades and accomplishments to get scholarships you get them.

I talked to a long time friend the other night. She's white, married to a black man and she didn't see my point of view at all. She is part of a hiring firm, and she said they do customer based hiring. Example, 80% of the community is hispanic, they try to hire about 80% hispanic workers. 

So I asked if a community was 100% white then they'd turn away every black and brown who applied. She said goodness no! They hire X amount of blacks to satisfy company diversity. I said ok - you break your customer based policy and what if a white person has better resume and you screw them from getting a job.

Her answer was tough - blacks dealt with that for a long time, whites can deal with it now.  I said great, paybacks are what we're talking about then and racism towards whites who've never done anything wrong. Fantastic way for out next generation to grow isn't it ? Racism and unfairness and inequality in the name of racial justics, fairness and equality. Helluva concept.

And that was what I see here - 100 million towards black only racism. Its like financially supporting female only sexual assault and all the males tough. 

 
no racism, no special treatment, no special rules, no unequal applications, no quotas

everyone treated the same 

isn't that what everyone wants?

 
no racism, no special treatment, no special rules, no unequal applications, no quotas

everyone treated the same 

isn't that what everyone wants?
In a perfect world where we start with the same benefits, yes. 

In the world we actually live in? We've set the conditions to favor, in general, white men enough that the"special treatment" is necessary for all our benefit in the long run.

 
pink-washing is the single most disgusting money grab in the history of charities..it's not just coming from the NFL, but 7-11 ( buy a pink Bic lighter to support breast cancer research!) to the pink license plate frames at AutoNation down here in Fla, to the 'a 'portion' of the proceeds goes to support BC research.total BS. I'd LOVE for the NFL to flat-out ban the pink crap in october altogether..I dont mind the cleats as long as they're charity driven...one dude wants to give money to Big brothers and sisters? very cool. another guy wants to do something for a charity that makes new ball fields for kids in poverty stricken areas? thats terrific! but the NFL has hid behind the pink washing for far too long, it's an incredible revenue stream for them , from pink Gronk jerseys, to scarfs,hats,mittens, etc..women eat it up, buy it in droves , they give a portion to Suzan Komens ripoff foundation, and poof, a non profit CEO gets rich, with less than 25% of the donated money making it to actual research..but hey,you got your pink winter cap with the Steelers' logo on it, and you look like you care about BC, but you've been snookered by the worst organizations on the planet..donate your time at cancer hospitals instead, bring dogs in to cheer up things, even if just for a little bit..but the NFLs marriage to this pink washing is alarming, it's fake all the way to the bank..and no, buying a $5 baseball cap to parade around for 31 days of october doesn't make you a thoughtful person or caring person.stop the smug..it makes you a victim of fraud from the suzan G komen foundation.

for the other causes, I hope the NFL allows someone like Witten to wear his cleats with the names of the 5 officers killed in dallas, and for their foundations, stuff like this I can get behind. 

as for the NFL losing viewers, its not just the kneeling..for me at least it has nothing to do with that.its' more of the licensing of games on display that irks the crap out of me.living in NJ for decades, I missed a lot of games from around the country, mostly missed the entire career of Shaun Alexander and players like him.we didn't see much Marcus Allen..we got a large dose of Emmitt and Troy..but every week an NFC east game was on TV..why am i forced to watch an Eagles game in the NY market? why??? they need to stop force-feeding us lousy games like the giants a few weeks ago , on tv here in miami while vikings/rams were playing at the same time..why wasn't that game broadcast in Miami, wtf does NYG have to do with MIami?? I get all the ny/nj transplants here, but it's a different market, why cant they show me a Chargers game, or Raiders. 

another thing the NFL is failing on is the SNF/MNF lineups/can anyone tell me why one team from this weeks SNF WILL be on next weeks MNF, it happens ever week year after year..we're now entering in to a portion of the season where Steelers have been or will soon be, SNF/MNF 3 weeks in a row.I dont care about the Steelers, they're a weak team that can't win anything as long as Brady and Co. are around..I can't stand watching NE either, and they're also force fed to the entire nation..as is Dallas.and GB..I didnt get to see a single Deshaun Watson game this year..you hear all these great things, but you wont see him,they wont play their games on TV outside of Houston..Jags have a great defense?! oh really ? haven't seen diddly squat from them, either.and I'm just 4.5 hours down i-95 from Jax. 4 hours away from TB haven;t seen a lick of the Bucs except miami/bucs game recently..it's all Eagles, Dallas, lousy NYG, NE, horrible Pitt, GB and for whatever reason the NFL thinks everyone wants to watch the Denver Broncos, they're always on TV..can we see the RAMS please..how about more of the Vikings.ya know, the GOOD teams, the CONTENDERS..seen enough of ATL to know they're not good.stop showing them already..if you're going to show bad teams, at least give us a buffalo game..haven;t seen cleveland but they're just 2 wins behind NYG and I've seen them a bunch down here..Carolina is good, haven't hardly seen any of them either..Chargers? they still in SD or what? whats that, they move the L.A?!? when did that happen? it's the same ole teams every week the product is dull..and while I'm a NE hater, the more they win the more fans stop watching..it's becoming like NASCAR with the rules changes.first Waltrip cries about Fords being too fast, then come restrictor plates killing Ford for a decade..then the car of tomorrow, then the changes to the cars that make the field travel in packs when clearly the fans want breakaways because there are far fewer crashes and more racing..but NO!!! let's ruin a good thing - see the dopes that changed Indy and rid the sport of the Unsers and the big names of the 60s 70s 80's..now the Indy 500 winner is on the back of milk cartons - have you seen me i won indy 500, not that you care, but...

NFL has a big time identity problem.the Mexico game is great, London games are lousy , as are TNF games.. NFL needs to be VERY careful here, the College football experience is far better and quickly passing the NFL..its a better product, better fan experience, more excitement, better games, more games to choose from on TV - FOR FREE - , etc..we get Alabama v Clemson new years day?! awesome!  if the patriots go to another SB it's likely to be the least watched SB ever..not just because of the pats, for other reasons as well, but they're killing the sport like Jimmy Johnson has helped kill NASCAR,..the nascar fans haven't come back, doubtful the NFL fans will..

 
I have a radical idea - treat everyone the same. Don't judge people on skin color. Treat everyone the same. 

Rules and laws that focus on skin color are racist.

I know what happened in our past - but applying injustice to white skinned people as payback is essentially what affirmative action and quota's etc are. And they're racist. 

Don't judge people on skin color. Treat everyone the same.

If you're the best RB on the team, you play. The best dancer you dance. The best leader you lead. The best for a position you get it, the highest accolades and accomplishments to get scholarships you get them.
Yes, that would be very nice. But it's not the way the U.S. is today. Again, there's plenty of scholarship on this, and it's repeatable; people with black faces or black names make less money and get fewer opportunities than people with white faces and white names.

They also are less likely to be accepted for mortgages, or AirBNBs, or to be picked up by Uber.

That is the actual reality of America today.

So while I may agree with your assertion that color should not matter, I cannot agree with your implication that color does not matter. All the evidence points to whites having significant unearned advantages over blacks in America today. Whites get special (advantageous) treatment. No one is applying injustice to whites; in fact, whites are given advantages in every aspect of their lives over people of color in America.

Here's the most depressing stat I learned in doing an urban studies program recently. We know that there's a huge wage gap between blacks and whites, but what's depressing is that the wage gap actually gets worse with education. That is, an African-American who does the right thing, stays out of trouble and gets a college degree will be even further behind his white colleagues who did the same. If he goes on to grad school he'll be even further behind. If he gets a corporate job he will continue to fall further and further behind his white colleagues who have the same education, the same experience, and the same skills as he does. 

Do you think that's social justice? If not, how do you propose to address it?

 
Here's the most depressing stat I learned in doing an urban studies program recently. We know that there's a huge wage gap between blacks and whites, but what's depressing is that the wage gap actually gets worse with education. That is, an African-American who does the right thing, stays out of trouble and gets a college degree will be even further behind his white colleagues who did the same. If he goes on to grad school he'll be even further behind. If he gets a corporate job he will continue to fall further and further behind his white colleagues who have the same education, the same experience, and the same skills as he does. 
 And those studies proved that race was the single determining factor for the difference?  There are numerous other reasons why this could be occurring.  It’s intellectually lazy and deceptive to simply look at that one factor.  The alleged gender gap in wages has been disproven - when all other factors are shown to be equal - yet despite that the social justice warriors continue to hammer out that false drum beat.  

But drilling down and being much more thorough so that causal factors are actually determined doesn’t fit your version of the “facts”, do they?  You don’t really want to deal with root issues, because then your positions fall apart and your knee jerk feel good solutions either end up being meaningless, or worse that they are detrimental.

 
Do you think that's social justice? If not, how do you propose to address it?
penalizing people because they have not black enough skin isn't the answer CalBear

I think the answer is treat everyone equally and the same. Are we there yet? No. We were closer until about 6-8 years ago .......... and now we've lost decades in the fight to abolish racism and we've done it as a nation by being racist. 

If anyone wants to live in a land of quota's and percentages, then the NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL etc all need to have their employee's mirror demographics in the US. 

XX percentage players black, latino, white, native american etc etc.

See, every time someone is hired based on their skin color so we can claim to be diverse and advancing people ....we also do not hire someone and we hold them back based on THEIR skin color.

So yeah - I propose we move towards a world where people are all treated equally and fairly and nobody is help back or advanced because of what their skin color or gender might be. No special schools for white people, no special events for heterosexuals, no special clubs for black people, no special conferences for brown people, no quotas for native americans ..............we all get treated based on who we are as people, what we are as people, not color of skin.

Racism is racism - to all skin colors

 
 And those studies proved that race was the single determining factor for the difference?  There are numerous other reasons why this could be occurring.  It’s intellectually lazy and deceptive to simply look at that one factor.  The alleged gender gap in wages has been disproven - when all other factors are shown to be equal - yet despite that the social justice warriors continue to hammer out that false drum beat.  

But drilling down and being much more thorough so that causal factors are actually determined doesn’t fit your version of the “facts”, do they?  You don’t really want to deal with root issues, because then your positions fall apart and your knee jerk feel good solutions either end up being meaningless, or worse that they are detrimental.
Actually, academics spend entire careers drilling down into observed phenomena looking for causal factors. If you're interested in digging into the research, I can send you some papers.

And yes, the people who've looked at this have controlled for race in the observational studies, or in some cases, used experimental design to isolate race. For example, they sent out identical resumes to hiring managers, some with black-sounding names and some with white-sounding names, and the white-sounding names got significantly more call-backs. (That study has been repeated multiple times). They created identical profiles on AirBNB and Uber, with the only difference being name and photo, and the whites got more acceptances than blacks. 

Or, a less academic context, here's how people react differently to a white kid or a black kid stealing a bike:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0kV_b3IK9M

So while there are still academic questions about why this effect exists, there is not a single shred of evidence which supports the hypothesis that we're living in a post-racial society. Not one. 

By the way, you're also incorrect about the gender pay gap. While the commonly quoted 79 cent figure is conflated by a number of factors, once you control for education, experience, and time in the workforce, there is still a gender pay gap. Different studies have come up with different numbers but it's in the 5-10% range.

 
penalizing people because they have not black enough skin isn't the answer CalBear
Whites aren't penalized for their skin color in America. In fact, they're given enormous advantages in every aspect of their lives. My question is, how do you propose to address that inequity? "We shouldn't give advantage based on skin color" is a statement of values that many would agree with, so, given that we do give advantages based on skin color (to whites), what should we do to "move towards a world where all people are treated equally," as you say?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
when a person is hired with way lower accolades and accomplishments over someone much more qualified- that's a travesty and its exceptionally unfair to the person way more qualified, do you agree ?

when a person with lower scores, lower GPS and lower ratings gets into a college over someone with much higher GPA, higher scores etc, do you think that's fair ?

 
when a person is hired with way lower accolades and accomplishments over someone much more qualified- that's a travesty and its exceptionally unfair to the person way more qualified, do you agree ?
Yes, I agree. Now given that the existing research about disparity in hiring and promotion shows that whites with lower accolades and accomplishments are more likely to be hired, and more likely to be paid more, what do you propose to do about it?

 
when a person is hired with way lower accolades and accomplishments over someone much more qualified- that's a travesty and its exceptionally unfair to the person way more qualified, do you agree ?

when a person with lower scores, lower GPS and lower ratings gets into a college over someone with much higher GPA, higher scores etc, do you think that's fair ?
Just curious, how often does this happen as you say? The much more qualified that is. I'm in favor of looking at the whole person and how they will likely impact the team - be that school, office, etc. 

Hire or accept the person likely to make the best impact. Sometimes that's about grades to show work ethic, sometimes it's showing how you handle challenges.

 
Yes, I agree.
but you support it ..... so how is it different when you do it vs when people did it 40 years ago ? 

I know a white girl given a scholarship at a black college to play volleyball ......... because she was white and they needed a white girl just one on their team. That's wrong - it was wrong for her, it was wrong for all the girls she took their spots on.

I read Geno Smith first black QB to start for NY Giants. Huge deal right? Until you realize Geno had no business starting, Eli should have been. Color of skin irrelevant and isn't that what we should be working towards? If you follow this train of though, starting Geno was a GOOD thing - no, he's not the better QB but he's got the right skin color right ?

I've said the solution over and over - you cannot create a society where people are not advanced wrongly or held back wrongly by advancing wrongly and holding back wrongly. Impossible, and its racist to do it. 

we are/were on a good path to eliminating discrimination ........... but now I don't think that's true anymore. 

Just curious, how often does this happen as you say? The much more qualified that is. I'm in favor of looking at the whole person and how they will likely impact the team - be that school, office, etc. 
most colleges have it - the SC upheld colleges using racism in admissions. didn't you know? skin color gives a weighted edge ..... its not about GPA or test scores so much as what color skin you have ..... 

 
Your cute little ruse to paint someone into a position they have not put forth and then use that to treat them with profound disrespect is appalling, but unfortunately not surprising.  Typical Alinski style tactics.  I’m surprised such overt antagonistic behavior is tolerated here.  Tell me, what exactly do you hope to accomplish with this type of post?  Score points with your echo chamber?  
Huh? I didn't realize I was engaged in any ruses. I must confess, I know next to nothing about Saul Alinsky, so I will defer to you on whether I'm using his tactics. I responded to another poster with what I thought was an uncontroversial statement, which is that there are people who believe that, in today's society, efforts by African Americans to oppose racism are a bigger problem then the racism itself. I wasn't even expressing an opinion on those people, just stating that they exist.

Stealthycat injected himself into the conversation to spout a bunch of ahistorical nonsense and repeatedly implied that I was a racist. I saw no need to take his bait.

I'm sorry if my post offended you by proxy. If you think I've violated the site's TOS, you are free to report me to the mods, although I suspect it would be the first time in the history of the Internet that someone got in trouble for *not* continuing an argument.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've said the solution over and over - you cannot create a society where people are not advanced wrongly or held back wrongly by advancing wrongly and holding back wrongly. Impossible, and its racist to do it. 

we are/were on a good path to eliminating discrimination
You haven't said anything about a solution. You've reasserted your position on the matter.

So, let me restate the problem. People with black-sounding names, or black pictures on LinkedIn, are less likely to get recruiter calls or call backs for jobs, given identical resumes. This has been extensively studied. What "path to eliminating discrimination" will address that problem, and the unearned advantages it provides to white job seekers?

 
but you support it ..... so how is it different when you do it vs when people did it 40 years ago ? 

I know a white girl given a scholarship at a black college to play volleyball ......... because she was white and they needed a white girl just one on their team. That's wrong - it was wrong for her, it was wrong for all the girls she took their spots on.

I read Geno Smith first black QB to start for NY Giants. Huge deal right? Until you realize Geno had no business starting, Eli should have been. Color of skin irrelevant and isn't that what we should be working towards? If you follow this train of though, starting Geno was a GOOD thing - no, he's not the better QB but he's got the right skin color right ?

I've said the solution over and over - you cannot create a society where people are not advanced wrongly or held back wrongly by advancing wrongly and holding back wrongly. Impossible, and its racist to do it. 

we are/were on a good path to eliminating discrimination ........... but now I don't think that's true anymore. 

most colleges have it - the SC upheld colleges using racism in admissions. didn't you know? skin color gives a weighted edge ..... its not about GPA or test scores so much as what color skin you have ..... 
https://www.usnews.com/opinion/knowledge-bank/articles/2017-12-05/what-the-trump-administration-gets-wrong-about-affirmative-action

Agree or disagree?

 
So, let me restate the problem. People with black-sounding names, or black pictures on LinkedIn, are less likely to get recruiter calls or call backs for jobs, given identical resumes.
so you do not know about affirmative actions, quotas and using skin color against equally qualified white people ? the SC ruled colleges can discriminate against white people - you agree with this ?

you want to talk about one side of racism only - why ?  

 
Stealthycat said:
so you do not know about affirmative actions, quotas and using skin color against equally qualified white people ? the SC ruled colleges can discriminate against white people - you agree with this ?

you want to talk about one side of racism only - why ?  
When you look at the sum total of everything related to race in our society–including affirmative action, racial quotas (which are illegal), "using skin color against equally qualified white people," and racism against blacks–the net result is that whites are given substantial unearned advantages over blacks in employment, education, finance, and other aspects of their lives. We are not living in a post-racial society. My question, which you appear to lack an answer for, is how you would address today's reality of an unequal, racist society to achieve your stated desire for a post-racial society. Pretending that racism doesn't exist isn't a plan of action.

 
-OZ- said:


agree or disagree with what part ?

lets look at that article

But the truth is, race is barely a factor in admissions decisions in most cases

But race IS a factor and truth is, race isn't used against people in most cases in any scenario. Not in today's politically correct world.  50-75-100 years ago yes. Not today.

If its "barely" used, then its racist, whether the racism is towards black or white or brown, they are saying yes its there.

Based on these factors, low-income students and students of color immediately enter the admissions process disadvantaged compared to their white and more affluent peers, who have better access to resources and opportunities

wait - what about low income white students? impoverished white and brown skin kids? 

"The NCCP fact sheet shows that among America’s poor children, 4.2 million are white, 4 million are Latino, 3.6 million are African American, 400,000 are Asian, and 200,000 are American Indian"

yes, there are more white people but the numbers don't lie - there are a LOT of poor people and skin color is irrelevant. As to the resources and opportunities, those are highly dependent on what city, county, state etc your family has chosen to live in.

However, the Department of Education issued a report on college and career readiness, which found that black and Latino students have less access to college prep coursework.

That might be but that's a local issue to the city/school district. If your schools are not what you want them to be - that's change that needs to come from the community/city/state isn't it ? And its not a black/white problem, its a community issue. 

I graduated in a poor white town - I think I had 28 in my graduating class. That school now places at the very top of all testing in Arkansas. Why? It changed 180 degrees from when I went there. The faculty changed it, the community demanded it. The kids excelled at it. Examples across the nations of schools turning it around - but the people have to do it. The solution is there, in the communities.

Every person is their own person, making their own choices. If a kid don't want to try hard - that's on them, and their families. Almost every kid in school can excel if they choose. That's where the change starts. Education.

Something I've thought about recently is this too. Lets say race is used to let the kid with a 20 on the ACT and a 3.0 GPA take an admissions spot from the 25 ACT and 3.8 GPA kid - that screws the higher graded kid and is racist. We've already established that. 

But it also screws the other kid. How? You've given them something they didn't earn. You've also placed them in a position where high standards are expected and the one kid with higher scores is more prepared ..... the kid with less scores is less prepared and more likely to fail.

Another part of this is financial aid granted to low income homes. Sounds great - until you realize all these kids simply are not prepared to go to colleges and achieve high GPA's. We can discuss all the why's in the world about it - bottom line they are not. So they get a scholarship first year - fail to meet the expectations and then they have 3 more years or more of taking massive student debt. 

Just been making me wonder lately ... heck of a nice way for colleges to make money, financial lenders etc. But the students shackled with heavy debt, graduating and getting min wage jobs .... is that REALLY the best situations we have in society today? I dunno ....

 
the net result is that whites are given substantial unearned advantages over blacks in employment, education, finance, and other aspects of their lives. We are not living in a post-racial society. My question, which you appear to lack an answer for, is how you would address today's reality of an unequal, racist society to achieve your stated desire for a post-racial society. Pretending that racism doesn't exist isn't a plan of action.
it seems to me the answers are to punish white people through racism - or that's strongly what ya'll are supporting. 

stop all racism now - its unacceptable, intolerable, using skin color on anyone for any reason should never be allowed - there, that's the solution

continuing the cycle of using skin color to give unearned advantages doesn't break the cycle

 
it seems to me the answers are to punish white people through racism - or that's strongly what ya'll are supporting

stop all racism now - its unacceptable, intolerable, using skin color on anyone for any reason should never be allowed - there, that's the solution

continuing the cycle of using skin color to give unearned advantages doesn't break the cycle
Actually, no one in this thread has said anything about punishing white people through racism. I haven't talked about solutions at all.

I have done a lot to describe the disadvantages experienced by blacks, and I've asked you, as a person who claims to desire a post-racial society, what you would do address them. It seems the best you can come up with is that you wish it would go away. Fine. I also wish it would go away. But I'm pretty sure that wishing it would go away won't change the fact that blacks are less likely to get call backs for job interviews, or that they're more likely to be stopped, arrested, and beaten by the police.

 
CalBear

Actually, no one in this thread has said anything about punishing white people through racism.
using skin color against someone at its core, is racism

affirmative actions, quotas, using race based hiring and skin color admissions - racism 

be it towards black skin, white skin, brown skins ........... yes, that's punishing people based on their skin color. if I told you a college gave weighted admittance based on WHITE you'd call that racist. If I told you they do it based on BLACK there is already a precedence there of doing it, .... and its exactly the same thing. Justify it or not - it IS racism

I have done a lot to describe the disadvantages experienced by blacks, and I've asked you, as a person who claims to desire a post-racial society, what you would do address them. It seems the best you can come up with is that you wish it would go away. Fine. I also wish it would go away. But I'm pretty sure that wishing it would go away won't change the fact that blacks are less likely to get call backs for job interviews, or that they're more likely to be stopped, arrested, and beaten by the police.


people are hired on skills, stopped when they do something wrong, arrested and beaten for reasons ......... skin color really is irrelevant 99.9 % of the time

 
The problems that you want to list for black communities are long - but guess what? White communities have those same problems as does brown and yellow and every skin color you want to split out and label.

Education is the key to it all - young people of all colors getting education, being ethically and morally sound, having goals and dreams and ambitions and a hard working ethic.

Skin color doesn't define or determine any of that - the person does, the people do, the families and communities etc. 

Having racist regulations and rules and laws to stop racism is continuing the cycle of racism and creates more division, more hate, more racism. We are not getting better as a society 

 
The problems that you want to list for black communities are long - but guess what? White communities have those same problems as does brown and yellow and every skin color you want to split out and label.

Education is the key to it all - young people of all colors getting education, being ethically and morally sound, having goals and dreams and ambitions and a hard working ethic.

Skin color doesn't define or determine any of that - the person does, the people do, the families and communities etc. 

Having racist regulations and rules and laws to stop racism is continuing the cycle of racism and creates more division, more hate, more racism. We are not getting better as a society 
As I pointed out earlier in this thread, education actually makes the gap worse. Blacks who finish college, go on to a master's program, get a PhD, fall further and further behind their white colleagues. They fall still further behind the longer they are in the workforce. And after controlling for all other measurable factors, the bulk of the effect remains determined by skin color.

You can deny that if you like, but if you do so, you're denying all of the research that's been done on this subject.

 
Calbear  you are right, to the people who think education is worse, they're liars and question their true motives of being to keep poor people poor and the uneducated uneducated. There is great political power in keeping people poor, uneducated and telling them decades after decades that you'll do something to help them - and never helping them - but getting voted in every 2-4 years promising promising. 

As I pointed out earlier in this thread, education actually makes the gap worse.
so the opposite is uneducated makes it better? 

Blacks who finish college, go on to a master's program, get a PhD, fall further and further behind their white colleagues.
why gauge people on their skin colors ?  There are so many variables to why people have positions they have or not its insane to use color of skin as a reasons ................. and that infers that its white skinned people's fault as well. 

I'm curious, do you think the NFL should run its teams like we're talking about in this thread?  Players being signed and drafted and positions filled and players starting based on skin color and not their level of talent and production ?

That's crazy isn't it? Teams want the best players, and that's who they get. 100 years ago sports was different. 40 years ago too. But today's sports in the US ? Best players play period. 

Why in the world would a company not want the best people, the best qualified? In today's world, you cannot excel by hiring people based on skin color alone. 

 
the questions should be - how to we get poor people and uneducated people to not be poor and uneducated. Don't focus on skin color - blacks, whites, browns .... lots of people in this country that have no moms, no dad's, no families at all, no education, not good foundations for life ........... they all need help

focusing on black and forgetting about white and brown is racist , its no better than 100 years ago when everyone focused on white and ignored black and brown. 

 
Calbear  you are right, to the people who think education is worse, they're liars and question their true motives of being to keep poor people poor and the uneducated uneducated. There is great political power in keeping people poor, uneducated and telling them decades after decades that you'll do something to help them - and never helping them - but getting voted in every 2-4 years promising promising. 

so the opposite is uneducated makes it better? 

why gauge people on their skin colors ?  There are so many variables to why people have positions they have or not its insane to use color of skin as a reasons ................. and that infers that its white skinned people's fault as well. 

I'm curious, do you think the NFL should run its teams like we're talking about in this thread?  Players being signed and drafted and positions filled and players starting based on skin color and not their level of talent and production ?

That's crazy isn't it? Teams want the best players, and that's who they get. 100 years ago sports was different. 40 years ago too. But today's sports in the US ? Best players play period. 

Why in the world would a company not want the best people, the best qualified? In today's world, you cannot excel by hiring people based on skin color alone.
All of the evidence is that U.S. companies do hire based on skin color. Whites are more likely to get call-backs, more likely to get interviews, more likely to be hired, and more likely to be promoted than equally-qualified blacks. And blacks are more likely to be stopped by police, more likely to arrested when stopped, more likely to be charged when arrested, more likely to be convicted when charged, and more likely to be injured or die in custody, than equally-criminal whites. 

That's the problem. And platitudes won't make it go away.

Since we're talking in circles, I'll return to the initial question of this thread. Having thought it through, even if this initiative meant diverting money from causes such as breast cancer, I think it makes sense for the NFL. Breast cancer awareness is a PR thing for the league, but most NFL players have personal experiences of racial injustice. The league should be more involved in dealing with that.

Now, exactly what you can allocate money to that could make a difference, I'm not sure. The issues are way bigger than the NFL.

Also, the fact that different factions of the oppressed group are arguing over what to do is entirely par for the course. In particular, conflict over whether to work within the system, or engage in radical protest, are structural among activists of all kinds.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top