Physical Revue says "Whiteboards are Racist"

[StringJunky]

Just now, iNow said:

Makes sense. Why did you think I needed this explained to me?

Err, because it followed. I sensed a deficit in your understanding, which seems to be inflexibly mono-railed.

i'm taking time out from this thread. See you later.

[dimreepr]

41 minutes ago, Intoscience said:

I agree, probably unattainable in reality. But this should not prevent us from trying and at least starting somewhere on the right footing. 

Indeed, but "Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

5 hours ago, StringJunky said:

Are we parrots?

“What’s in a name? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet”

[StringJunky]

25 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Indeed, but "Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

“What’s in a name? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet”

Talk sense.

[Phi for All]

7 hours ago, Intoscience said:

Honestly, there is no point in responding to you. We have clearly different views on the subject (even though we want the same eventual outcome). No matter how I respond you will twist my comments, and throw it back at me. 

No matter how you respond, I take the words you've given me and apply them to the arguments the thread is based on. I'm twisting NOTHING, since your words are there for all to see, untouched in any way by me. If I've misinterpreted them, please correct me but don't accuse me of subterfuge or insincerity or manipulation. I'm trying to PERSUADE you with an alternative argument that I had hoped would resonate.

I've held most of the stances I've seen you espouse here. I thought not recognizing color was a fine response to racism. Then I heard other arguments, and realized not only how impossible that would be, but it's also insulting to many POC who finally have a chance to proclaim some pride regarding their heritage, which includes the color of their skin.

So we probably can't or shouldn't ignore our differences. Perhaps we can figure out a way to celebrate them with each other? Instead of pretending they don't exist, maybe we can acknowledge that they don't matter?

I'm really sorry you feel so antagonized over this. Not the intention.

[iNow]

6 hours ago, StringJunky said:

Err, because it followed. I sensed a deficit in your understanding, which seems to be inflexibly mono-railed.

Reading this in context, it appears you thought my position was that we SHOULDN’T seek to end racism and racist policies moving forward and that we should instead ONLY focus on reparations?

This is how you’ve perceived my stance in this thread, is that correct? That I want reparations but also for racism and racist policies to persist?

19 hours ago, StringJunky said:

If you don't prevent the new injuries, you are going up a down escalator.... moving stairs.

6 hours ago, iNow said:

Makes sense. Why did you think I needed this explained to me?

 

[CharonY]

This discussion tends to focus on bits and pieces, sometimes out of context. To make an analogy (yet again), some folks argue that we need more accessibility ramps for wheelchairs (reparations to account for past inadequacies). Others (or the same) might also argue that we need accessibility rules baked into building codes and city design, so that we do not systematically exclude folks who are unable to walk (systemic change). Yet others argue that we should not focus on those, but the ultimate issue is that folks get injured or have developmental issues resulting in their inability to walk, so we should fix that, so that there is no need for the other two approaches.

[MigL]

It seems even our analogies misinterpret each other's positions, Charony.

As I previously posted, when I refer to my friends, I don't qualify them by skin color. I don't qualify them by religion.I don't qualify them by gender or by sexual orientation.
I don't have Jamaican  or brown friends, nor Hindu or Muslim friends, nor gay friends ( that is their business, not mine ), nor girl friends ( a little too old for that ).
They are simply my friends.
( think how demeaning it would be to introduce one of them to someone as "my black friend" )

That is where racism ends; when people are simply people.
Maybe we can't get there overnight, but that doesn't mean we should give up and not even try.
As INow is fond of saying, 'adequate' is on the path to 'good'.
And we have to start somewhere ...

[Alysdexic]

On 5/15/2023 at 1:02 PM, CharonY said:

So before folks focus too much on the "white" in whiteboard thingy (ragebait). I had a quick break and glimpsed at the paper under discussion. The paper is a bit convoluted and is more in social science lingo, which certainly does not endear it to natural scientists. As such I really only skimmed it.

That being said, the whiteboard is not in there, because of the word white, it could have been any board, or a flip chart or similar. What the authors claimed  is that in their observatory session certain persons were using the board as a dominance tool, to focus attention on themselves as opposed to a collaborative tool with equal access for everyone involved. They reframed it in a hierarchical system prevalent in white patriarchic societies. There is a bit of a stretch (IMO) that is not uncommon in social science papers in establishing these contexts, but it definitely reads different than saying whiteboards are racist.

If someone said that they either have not read the paper or are stretching context in an arguably similar or worse way as they are accusing the authors of.

You're the first one with brains in the thread.

[zapatos]

1 minute ago, Alysdexic said:

You're the first one with brains in the thread.

Gee, thanks.

[Alysdexic]

Misunderstanding the whiteboards paper as badly as many'v here does harm to the subject itself (a new freshman in community college could interpret the arguments better than this; you'll learn simple content analysis in introductory courses).

That many would post all of these Clowneries rather than read the paper first shows you are likely a dropout who doesn't know how to tell between reality and fantasy, how to verify a belief, how to premise conditions for observations that should support and defy the belief, how to recognize observations that are irrelevant to the belief. Why do so many hate the scientific method? This kind reflects the American tolerated trash who are why America is with the last in first-world STEM aptitude and industry.

And who did this to them? Their parents? Their halfwitted teachers (who committed the fraud of letting them pass)? I shudder!

[swansont]

1 hour ago, Alysdexic said:

You're the first one with brains in the thread.

!

Moderator Note

Please review the rules of the forums, which you agreed to follow when you joined.

https://www.scienceforums.net/guidelines/

This includes 2.1, “Be civil”

 

[Intoscience]

16 hours ago, Phi for All said:

So we probably can't or shouldn't ignore our differences. Perhaps we can figure out a way to celebrate them with each other? Instead of pretending they don't exist, maybe we can acknowledge that they don't matter?

I'm really sorry you feel so antagonized over this. Not the intention.

I agree with you, (my bold) this is really the point I'm trying to make. I feel in order to achieve this then in the first place we may require to ignore the differences. By this I mean that maybe we should ignore the differences for purposes of reparations and any other discriminate actions that might pursue. Highlighting the differences in these situations may ignite the very thing we are trying to eliminate. 

My daughter has severe learning difficulties, she is 21 years old, cannot form a sentence only uses random words and hand gestures to communicate in her own way and understanding. But one thing she does do is try to gain attention by doing things, e.g. she will stand near the tv with her hand over the power button waiting for a response. If we engage with her and highlight that she should not press it, guess what, she does so. In my experience to divert attention from something the easiest way is to "ignore" it. Not ignore that it doesn't exist! Ignore it in a way so that it matters not for that particular situation. 

Do you see my point? I'm not saying we should ignore people's difference's as though they don't exist, I'm saying lets not highlight those differences in situations where they should not matter.

Thank you for clearing things up, If I come across upset or offended this is not my intention either. I'm as passionate as most for making the world a better place to live, for all people! I just worry that sometimes in our efforts to do so we may just end up making things worse. 

11 hours ago, iNow said:

This is how you’ve perceived my stance in this thread, is that correct? That I want reparations but also for racism and racist policies to persist?

I know you aimed this at String Junky but may I reply,

I don't believe any of us think that or perceive that stance. I think the argument is that we feel you are ignoring the possibility that pursuing the reparations in a manner that may invoke further racism is not the way forward.  

9 hours ago, Alysdexic said:

Misunderstanding the whiteboards paper as badly as many'v here does harm to the subject itself (a new freshman in community college could interpret the arguments better than this; you'll learn simple content analysis in introductory courses).

That many would post all of these Clowneries rather than read the paper first shows you are likely a dropout who doesn't know how to tell between reality and fantasy, how to verify a belief, how to premise conditions for observations that should support and defy the belief, how to recognize observations that are irrelevant to the belief. Why do so many hate the scientific method? This kind reflects the American tolerated trash who are why America is with the last in first-world STEM aptitude and industry.

And who did this to them? Their parents? Their halfwitted teachers (who committed the fraud of letting them pass)? I shudder!

Wow, that is a very judgemental approach towards your fellow posters. You are making a lot of unfounded assumptions.

Good luck with that. 

Edited June 21, 2023 by Intoscience
spelling

[dimreepr]

22 hours ago, StringJunky said:

Talk sense.

I am in the context of the thread, all the arguments from the defence have been rebutted, so:

This thread has ceased to be, gone to meet its maker < snip > this is a dead parrot.

If you want me to explain the relevance of Shelly's poem, just ask nicely... 😉 

edit. some people accuse me of being cryptic, and that's a lot of pressure, so I like to keep my hand in...

15 hours ago, Alysdexic said:

Misunderstanding the whiteboards paper as badly as many'v here does harm to the subject itself (a new freshman in community college could interpret the arguments better than this; you'll learn simple content analysis in introductory courses).

Perhaps you should take one; feel free to ask us when you get stuck. 🙂

Edited June 21, 2023 by dimreepr

[dimreepr]

6 hours ago, Intoscience said:

I don't believe any of us think that or perceive that stance. I think the argument is that we feel you are ignoring the possibility that pursuing the reparations in a manner that may invoke further racism is not the way forward.  

A tyre doesn't care who inflates it...

It's just happy it wasn't kicked this time... 😉

[iNow]

18 hours ago, Intoscience said:

we feel you are ignoring the possibility that pursuing the reparations in a manner that may invoke further racism is not the way forward. 

I see. Thank you.

I believe there is not a single path which won’t lead some yahoos to feel MORE racist if reparations move forward.

Therefore, I accept that some marginal increase in racism will happen and that it’s an acceptable risk given the overwhelming benefit reparations would provide.

The tangible widespread benefits IMO far outweigh the small potential (even likely) social cost.  

Edited June 22, 2023 by iNow

[zapatos]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

I see. Thank you.

I believe there is not a single path which won’t lead some yahoos to feel MORE racist if reparations move forward.

Therefore, I accept that some marginal increase in racism will happen and that it’s an acceptable risk given the overwhelming benefit reparations would provide.

The tangible widespread benefits IMO far outweigh the small potential (even likely) social cost.  

There is always an interesting group of "allies" who advocate for delayed or denied rights/justice, since that will be in the best interest of those who have been harmed. 

'Delay gay marriage since it will give people time to get used to the idea, else they will fight you.'

'Impeaching Trump will only embolden his supporters. It is in the best interest of Democrats to let his transgressions slide so that you don't risk him winning again.'

'Telling people it is time we had a black woman on the Supreme Court is a bad idea. It will be bad for black women since there will be a lot of pushback.'

Sometimes I have a hard time telling certain 'allies' from the adversaries.

[MigL]

I hate to ask, since you're not talking to me, but who are these 'allies' you speak of ?
No one involved in this thread has made similar comments; we have advocated for a specific method of making restitution for past injustices, AND, have suggested ways to mitigate racism producing such injustices in the future.
This second part has been dismissed by some forum members as unworkable, impossible and useless to even attempt.

Just setting the record straight, as I see it from my PoV.
( I realize other PoVs may differ )

[iNow]

16 minutes ago, MigL said:

This second part has been dismissed by some forum members as unworkable, impossible and useless to even attempt.

I’ve been interpreting that 2nd part as “we need to end racism.” Where is my interpretation inaccurate? 

We ALL would like that, but it seems that only SOME of us see that as pollyannish or as unworkable, impossible, and almost useless to even attempt. 

[Intoscience]

2 hours ago, iNow said:

We ALL would like that, but it seems that only SOME of us see that as pollyannish or as unworkable, impossible, and almost useless to even attempt

I don't agree that it's useless to attempt, and I think that's where a few of us disagree with some of the arguments put forward. 

Even if its not possible to eradicate racism completely (most likely reality) a start would be to reduce it. I just feel that some methods employed to compensate those that have faced injustice will only invoke future racial tension or compound the current attitude of those who may not be direct active racists but have racist tendencies due to there social upbringing/environment.

Of course you are always going to have the minority radical groups who no matter what will remain racists  both white and black. Agreed these attitudes are going to be difficult, probably impossible, to eradicate.

People in general, are more accepting when changes are more subtle. You see this with kids, and as adults we still tend to be more tolerant and accepting with a considered approach.      

3 hours ago, zapatos said:

There is always an interesting group of "allies" who advocate for delayed or denied rights/justice, since that will be in the best interest of those who have been harmed.

Where do you get this idea from? Who wants to delay anything? All I have seen so far on this thread is 2 arguments that want the same outcome but following differing methods to achieve it. 

17 hours ago, dimreepr said:

A tyre doesn't care who inflates it...

It's just happy it wasn't kicked this time... 😉

But there's no point inflating the tyre without fixing the puncture properly first. Sure it may get you a few more miles down the road, but the problem still persists.

You may stick a patch on it, inflate it, and then say there you go all fixed, only to find next time you are out in the middle of nowhere and it goes flat again leaving you worse off than when it punctured in the first place. 

Edited June 22, 2023 by Intoscience
spelling

[dimreepr]

5 hours ago, Intoscience said:

But there's no point inflating the tyre without fixing the puncture properly first. Sure it may get you a few more miles down the road, but the problem still persists.

You may stick a patch on it, inflate it, and then say there you go all fixed, only to find next time you are out in the middle of nowhere and it goes flat again leaving you worse off than when it punctured in the first place. 

Sometimes with a slow puncture, it's easier and more cost effective to just pump it up.

Nevertheless, it's still glad it wasn't kicked this time.

Edited June 22, 2023 by dimreepr

[iNow]

7 hours ago, Intoscience said:

I just feel that some methods employed to compensate those that have faced injustice will only invoke future racial tension or compound the current attitude of those who may not be direct active racists but have racist tendencies due to there social upbringing/environment.

I feel that way too, and I don’t find that marginal risk of marginal racist asshats to be sufficient reason for the rest of us not to proceed with a policy that would bring enormous benefits and equity of experience to enormous numbers of families. 

Edited June 22, 2023 by iNow

[dimreepr]

7 hours ago, Intoscience said:

Even if its not possible to eradicate racism completely (most likely reality) a start would be to reduce it. I just feel that some methods employed to compensate those that have faced injustice will only invoke future racial tension or compound the current attitude of those who may not be direct active racists but have racist tendencies due to there social upbringing/environment.

It's like trying to downsize a ponzi scheme, first you have to recognise... 🧐

[MigL]

A two pronged approach has been suggested.
Restitution is given to all who have suffered past injustices, and decided through the courts, with no reference to racial discrimination.
That is part of the second prong; the reduction or mitigation of racism by taking 'race' out of the equation. The color of a person's skin, or outward appearance does not define that person. Other  suggestions have also been made for mitigation, in terms of laws and governance, and their implementation.

I am of the opinion that there is no need to 'celebrate' a person's skin color or appearance; I celebrate what he/she says and does.
I have no clue what any of you look like, so I definitely don't celebrate your appearance.
I do, however, celebrate what you post, and although we may disagree about some issues, I conaidder most of you my friends.
That's what I would celebrate about a group of people.

[TheVat]

8 hours ago, Intoscience said:

People in general, are more accepting when changes are more subtle. You see this with kids, and as adults we still tend to be more tolerant and accepting with a considered approach. 

When I was in 4th grade, I lived in one of the last US cities to desegregate.  The change was not subtle.  One day, every face in our classroom was white.  The next day, there were three black children.  Everyone was fine with it, except one kid who enjoyed crushing insects with a hammer and had a virulently racist Dad - he thought they smelled bad.  No one paid him much attention.  

10 minutes ago, MigL said:

I am of the opinion that there is no need to 'celebrate' a person's skin color or appearance; I celebrate what he/she says and does.

This lack of need is rarely expressed when it's some other ethnic group.  Cinco de Mayo street festivals.  St Patrick's parades.  Columbus Day in Boston and New York. Czech festivals in Nebraska.  Russian festivals in Ann Arbor, NYC, etc. Chinatown festivals and lunar New Year all over the Western US.

In fact, I seem to recall we had an Italian-Canadian member here who seemed to be proud of his heritage and cuisine.  But perhaps he didn't get too carried away and "celebrate."  

[zapatos]

8 hours ago, Intoscience said:

But there's no point inflating the tyre without fixing the puncture properly first. Sure it may get you a few more miles down the road, but the problem still persists.

 

If you were unfairly denied a loan which resulted in financial harm caused to you I would be in favor of you receiving financial restitution without delay. I do not think it would be fair to make you wait until the financial institution has reviewed, created, vetted and implemented new policies to ensure their unfair practices have been eliminated.

Even more so, if a government institution or company wronged you, I don't think your restitution should be dependent on first implementing a behavior change of the general population. I feel confident in labeling that as justice delayed.