NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/misc/educatio/4463

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-23 | 3.6 KB

Xref: sparky misc.education:4463 alt.discrimination:4713 soc.culture.african.american:11475 soc.women:20200
Newsgroups: misc.education,alt.discrimination,soc.culture.african.american,soc.women
Path: sparky!uunet!s5!sethb
From: [e-mail] (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: Racist/Sexist Role Models
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: my opinions only
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 22:46:49 GMT
Lines: 71

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Stanford Guillory) writes:
>[e-mail] (Brian K. Yoder) writes:
>
>>There is another perfect example of racism.  You chose those people not on
>>the basis of their intelligence or aptitude, but on the basis of their
>>sex and race.  That IS racism/sexism every bit as much as if you had
>>special scholarships for white males only.
>
>Using your logic, there is no possible solution to the problems minorities face
>in this country. If someone says that they want to increase the number of black
>engineers, then they are going to do something for blacks that they are not doing
>for whites.

How about the following scenario:

We want to increase the number of engineers in this country.  (I don't
care about their skin color, I want more engineers so they can design
more toys for me to play with.)  Therefore, any child who shows any
aptitude for/interest in engineering will be guaranteed a decent
technical education.

In the present circumstances, this will probably increase the number
of black engineers more than it does the number of white engineers.
More precisely, it will increase the number of engineers who come from
low-income backgrounds (since people of high-income backgrounds
already have access to good educations).

> Bias is commonly used to solve  some of the country's problems. Seniority
>systems to help older workers,

Seniority systems are put in place because people who have worked at a
job for a long time (not people who are chronologically gifted) tend
to be better at it.

> veteran preference to help former members of the
>armed forces get adjusted,

This is part of their compensation for having risked their lives for
their country, along with GI Bill benefits.

> and on and on. I think that sometimes, bias is an acceptable
>approach to solving a problem.

How would you feel about a law requiring that 80% of each professional
basketball team must be white, and 80% of the total salaries paid to
players should go to white players?  Or do you perhaps feel that bias
is only acceptable if your group gains by it?

> And the problem of underachievement by minorities is a
>serious one that will have repercussions throughout the next century. You seem to think
>that the problem will just go away and if it doesn't, then that is too bad, because
>we can't do anything "special" to help.

We can help *everybody* without giving preference to anybody.  Any
child who grows up poor and without hope is more likely to become a
violent criminal than one who doesn't; therefore, we should not let
any children grow up poor and without hope.  Do you disagree with that
statement?  Do you see anything "special" for any race in it?

>>The racist/sexist premise that
>>people ought to be treated differntly based on their sex/race rather than
>>as an individual with unique abilities and interests is wrong no matter
>>who the beneficiary happens to be.
>
>True. But then so much of idealism is.

Are you claiming that some racism is based on idealism?

Seth        [e-mail]