Dare you to reply!

Panacea Financial Contract Review
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Members don't see this ad.
thecarbonionangle said:
Not just NC, but basically the entire south has ridiculous disctricts which were consistently struck down before SCOTUS struck down preclearance. i was reading about the proposed hellpit TX redistricring which is totally egregious.
Click to expand...
Both parties are equal opportunity here. See the proposed Illinois map. Don't think putting this down to systemic racism is the way to go. Unless the democrats are part of the system keepin the people down.
 
temujim said:
Both parties are equal opportunity here. See the proposed Illinois map. Don't think putting this down to systemic racism is the way to go. Unless the democrats are part of the system keepin the people down.
Click to expand...
Both parties do some gerrymandering yes but truth would disagree with you that both equally egregiously do so to minimize the effect of voting minorities. Take hellpit TX map which basically takes heavily minority districts and gives them no chance to elect someone they want diluting their vote. Gerrymandering Kinzigers district away aint the same. He will go make tons of money and continue the grift as a lobbyist.
 
thecarbonionangle said:
Both parties do some gerrymandering yes but truth would disagree with you that both equally egregiously do so to minimize the effect of voting minorities. Take hellpit TX map which basically takes heavily minority districts and gives them no chance to elect someone they want diluting their vote. Gerrymandering Kinzigers district away aint the same. He will go make tons of money and continue the grift as a lobbyist.
Click to expand...
You appear to assume that minorities will only vote for democrats. Weird.

True or not, each state legislature controlled by whichever party will try to maximize their share. That is just politics like it or not. I live in a +20D district. The system is against me!
 
temujim said:
You appear to assume that minorities will only vote for democrats. Weird.

True or not, each state legislature controlled by whichever party will try to maximize their share. That is just politics like it or not. I live in a +20D district. The system is against me!
Click to expand...
No that asumption is clearly being made by a party which barely wins now with less than two percent of the vote in recent cancun cruz re-election and recent presidential election. They are clearly scared and rather than winning people over, for which i agree there are plenty who would consider another party based on ideas, they choose to dilute their vote. Nice try tho.

I suppose let us assume your point that dems are equal opportunity race gerrymanders (a clear fake whataboutism imo but whatever), then you should be able to point out numerous recent examples which do not predate party realignment ( strum thurmund being a “democrat”) where in the era of preclearance numerous democratic maps must have been thrown out because of race? We’ll be waiting for your plethora of examples so please proceed!
 
temujim said:
Both parties are equal opportunity here. See the proposed Illinois map. Don't think putting this down to systemic racism is the way to go. Unless the democrats are part of the system keepin the people down.
Click to expand...
Based upon part affiliation, it looks like il is 50% dem 30% republican, which isn't quite so egregious. I get it, though, which is why I say it's a hard argument to make. What is happening, though, is there is a dearth of black representation in the south. Blacks comprise a greater proportion of the population in the south than elsewhere. Consequently, a population that has been historically neglected remains so. However we get there, that adds up to systemic racism in my estimation. Illinois is a case of a government being systemically anti-rural based on what I know of the situation as the husband of an Illinois farmers daughter.
 
temujim said:
You appear to assume that minorities will only vote for democrats. Weird.

True or not, each state legislature controlled by whichever party will try to maximize their share. That is just politics like it or not. I live in a +20D district. The system is against me!
Click to expand...
This is and always will be a lame argument. It's really not so much weird as reality.

recent pres elections, blacks for dem >90% of the time.
 
thecarbonionangle said:
No that asumption is clearly being made by a party which barely wins now with less than two percent of the vote in recent cancun cruz re-election and recent presidential election. They are clearly scared and rather than winning people over, for which i agree there are plenty who would consider another party based on ideas, they choose to dilute their vote. Nice try tho.

I suppose let us assume your point that dems are equal opportunity race gerrymanders (a clear fake whataboutism imo but whatever), then you should be able to point out numerous recent examples which do not predate party realignment ( strum thurmund being a “democrat”) where in the era of preclearance numerous democratic maps must have been thrown out because of race? We’ll be waiting for your plethora of examples so please proceed!
Click to expand...
Why are you so focused on race? Parties will maximize their advantage based on votes. Each party does this. If you want to change it, vote to take away this power from the state legislature like California. Then give it to an independent commission dominated by democrats... like California.
 
temujim said:
Why are you so focused on race? Parties will maximize their advantage based on votes. Each party does this. If you want to change it, vote to take away this power from the state legislature like California. Then give it to an independent commission dominated by democrats... like California.
Click to expand...
lol way to ignore the point
 
temujim said:
Why are you so focused on race? Parties will maximize their advantage based on votes. Each party does this. If you want to change it, vote to take away this power from the state legislature like California. Then give it to an independent commission dominated by democrats... like California.
Click to expand...
It's not necessarily about the motivation behind the redistricting, it's the manifestation. I'm not arguing that every state where there is a republican majority means systemic racism is necessarily present. I'm simply suggesting that when you gerrymander a state to the point that it egregiously biases against one party, which happens to be a party a particular race most identifies with politically by a 15:1 ratio, the end result is probably something that could be called systemic racism, as evidenced by the Civil war generals still adoning the outside of the local houses of "justice."
 
temujim said:
Why are you so focused on race? Parties will maximize their advantage based on votes. Each party does this. If you want to change it, vote to take away this power from the state legislature like California. Then give it to an independent commission dominated by democrats... like California.
Click to expand...
Stay woke!
 
jondunn said:
another false equivalency.

instead of focusing on a straw man, maybe just focus on the problem?
Click to expand...
You don't think they are equally absurd, or you don't feel that my description of the extreme progressive perspective aligns with what you believe?

If it's the latter, I would point out that we don't disagree. If it's the former, we do disagree.
 
temujim said:
You appear to assume that minorities will only vote for democrats. Weird.
Click to expand...
The numbers don't lie. Trump gained a little bit with the Hispanic vote, mainly in FL, otherwise it's a pretty clear pattern that they generally fall towards one side. The race lines were even more hardened in the era of 45, although maybe not as much as the education ones

www.newsweek.com

How Education, Not Income, Came to Define America's Political Divide

Over the past few decades, economic class is an increasingly weak predictor of belonging to left-leaning parties in the UK, US, and elsewhere.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com
 
Lamount said:
You don't think they are equally absurd, or you don't feel that my description of the extreme progressive perspective aligns with what you believe?

If it's the latter, I would point out that we don't disagree. If it's the former, we do disagree.
Click to expand...

the latter.
 
jondunn said:
the latter.
Click to expand...
To half the country, they think that everyone who believes in systemic racism believes that. If you listen to Ben Shapiro (who is always worth a good laugh), he spends half of his time complaining about crazy folks on tik tok. We are guilty of this as well. We are a country of people yelling at unrealistic projections of each other.
 
Lamount said:
To half the country, they think that everyone who believes in systemic racism believes that. If you listen to Ben Shapiro (who is always worth a good laugh), he spends half of his time complaining about crazy folks on tik tok. We are guilty of this as well. We are a country of people yelling at unrealistic projections of each other.
Click to expand...


this is my entire point. you should not further add to that narrative by making that the 'two sides'

ben shapiro makes millions of dollars by making people think that. you should be better. you know better.

he grifts idiots out of their cash.
 
Last edited:
Chartreuse Wombat said:
Marinate. Good verb. MLK was assassinated more than 50 years ago. Of course we still have work to do but life in 2021 is very different for Blacks than it was in 1968.
Click to expand...
I’m sure it was also different for blacks in 1928 compared to 1968. Too bad it continues to take multiple generations to move towards equality.

I guess an example would be that there is a “side” that believes we are graduating too many residents in the field and there are not enough jobs to support them. Another “side” would argue, there are plenty of jobs, I have one, why are “those people” always complaining?

As a minority who lived in many parts of the country, I’ve had plenty of negative experiences (some PTSD) solely because of my race. As a country, we still have a vey long ways to go and the Trump years have truly set us back approximately 50 years in regards to race relationship and how we interact with each other.
 
Last edited:
RadOncDoc21 said:
I’m sure it was also different for blacks in 1928 compared to 1968. Too bad it continues to take multiple generations to move towards equality.

I guess an example would be that there is a “side” that believes we are graduating too many residents in the field and there are not enough jobs to support them. Another “side” would argue, there are plenty of jobs, I have one, why are “those people” always complaining?

As a minority who lived in many parts of the country, I’ve had plenty of negative experiences (some PTSD) solely because of my race. As a country, we still have a vey long ways to go and the Trump years have truly set us back approximately 50 years in regards to race relationship and how we interact with each other.
Click to expand...

What do you think of DEI in Rad Onc? We can argue about the past but do you think the proposed solutions are helpful?

It’s really heating up with provider diversity hiring. I really like Dr. Tendulkar, but does he not realize he is an Asian male and part of the problem he is fighting against? I would be FAR less hostile if those supporting these rules would apply it to themselves. Who will be the first Rad Onc academic (not on the verge of retirement with millions of dollars in the bank) to willing give up their academic position for the sake of diversity. Just put your own skin in the game and not everyone else’s.

 
Be specific. What is your problem with his tweet? What part do you disagree with.

People like you get off on the abstract.
 
RadOncMegatron said:
What do you think of DEI in Rad Onc? We can argue about the past but do you think the proposed solutions are helpful?

It’s really heating up with provider diversity hiring. I really like Dr. Tendulkar, but does he not realize he is an Asian male and part of the problem he is fighting against? I would be FAR less hostile if those supporting these rules would apply it to themselves. Who will be the first Rad Onc academic (not on the verge of retirement with millions of dollars in the bank) to willing give up their academic position for the sake of diversity. Just put your own skin in the game and not everyone else’s.

Click to expand...

I don’t believe it’s an all or none type of situation and the issues underlying society and the field can be addressed without penalizing anyone. I think it’s far too easy of a play to create fear and that in order for one person to gain, somebody else has to lose.

I do believe there are unfair advantages and it doesn’t mean the people who are benefiting the most had anything to do with it but I believe the first step is to have empathy and understand there is a problem that needs to be addressed. Only from there, we can come up with a better solution to the problem vs not admitting there is one and we should all just simply “shut up and play.”
 
RadOncDoc21 said:
I don’t believe it’s an all or none type of situation and the issues underlying society and the field can be addressed without penalizing anyone. I think it’s far too easy of a play to create fear and that in order for one person to gain, somebody else has to lose.

I do believe there are unfair advantages and it doesn’t mean the people who are benefiting the most had anything to do with it but I believe the first step is to have empathy and understand there is a problem that needs to be addressed. Only from there, we can come up with a better solution to the problem vs not admitting there is one and we should all jus simply “shut up and play.”
Click to expand...

God this is such common sense. It’s so wild to me that people make it any more complicated. More sad than wild.
 
Is the APM disproportionally reducing healthcare benefits for minorities with a specific focus on cancers that affect them more (such as prostate CA in African Americans)? Does anyone know if CMS looked into this? Scary to think that they might not have…
 
jondunn said:
Be specific. What is your problem with his tweet? What part do you disagree with.

People like you get off on the abstract.
Click to expand...

@jondunn Let’s be fair here, I have written a lot here with multiple specific examples over the course of four years. I don’t have time right now to be more specific.

If there are nuanced statements like what @RadOncDoc21 has been written here there wouldn’t so much ruckus. It’s again, the fact that these conversations cannot happen in the open that is very worrisome.

The solutions offered like “inc. diversity” lack the nuance needed to fix these problems and will likely make things worse

It is definitely fair game though to point out hypocrisy. If i rah rah photons but use only protons for prostate don’t I deserve at least to be questioned? A simple “excuse me you say photons are just as effective and financially toxic, why do you use protons?”

I’m asking a question. You want diversity. You say patients should be treated by doctors of their same race, gender, etc.

Can I not ask, if Dr. Tendulkar really believes those things, what does he think about his own spot as an over represented male in a high academic position? Can I ask him if he is able to treat all races gender etc equally? If so, why is he pushing the diversity agenda. These are very fair questions and why can’t we ask them?
 
‘Very fair questions’ totally reasonable and not a sign of someone that’s totally lost sense of reality, yes.
 
RadOncMegatron said:
@jondunn Let’s be fair here, I have written a lot here with multiple specific examples over the course of four years. I don’t have time right now to be more specific.

If there are nuanced statements like what @RadOncDoc21 has been written here there wouldn’t so much ruckus. It’s again, the fact that these conversations cannot happen in the open that is very worrisome.

The solutions offered like “inc. diversity” lack the nuance needed to fix these problems and will likely make things worse

It is definitely fair game though to point out hypocrisy. If i rah rah photons but use only protons for prostate don’t I deserve at least to be questioned? A simple “excuse me you say photons are just as effective and financially toxic, why do you use protons?”

I’m asking a question. You want diversity. You say patients should be treated by doctors of their same race, gender, etc.

Can I not ask, if Dr. Tendulkar really believes those things, what does he think about his own spot as an over represented male in a high academic position? Can I ask him if he is able to treat all races gender etc equally? If so, why is he pushing the diversity agenda. These are very fair questions and why can’t we ask them?
Click to expand...
This is the problem. Nuance is nearly impossible. Pointed questions only lead to being called -ist. We are considering how to approach DEI on the podcast and not sure exactly how to do it.
 
RealSimulD said:
This is the problem. Nuance is nearly impossible. Pointed questions only lead to being called -ist. We are considering how to approach DEI on the podcast and not sure exactly how to do it.
Click to expand...
The problem with this is that people are so afraid of being “cancelled” that its imposible to have these conversations without some sort of risk. Someone will get offended.
 
StIGMA said:
You will offend people by just having the conversation
Click to expand...
I offend people by wearing a mask. Ironically these are the same people who think a discussion on race shouldn’t be offensive.

We are living in strange times. We can continue to have these discussions as I will continue to wear my masks. Just because someone gets offended doesn’t mean it’s either right or wrong, just that strong feelings are something to consider.
 
Last edited:
RealSimulD said:
This is the problem. Nuance is nearly impossible. Pointed questions only lead to being called -ist. We are considering how to approach DEI on the podcast and not sure exactly how to do it.
Click to expand...

@RealSimulD You really are a great guy. You’d probably have to get a “big name” like James Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose, Peter Boghossian, John McWorther , or Glenn Loury who are not cancellable at this point. However, I fear you and your crew would be put in much trouble by even hosting such a podcast. Kudos to you for trying and best of luck in this my friend. It is a very important topic.
 
RadOncMegatron said:
@RealSimulD You really are a great guy. You’d probably have to get a “big name” like James Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose, Peter Boghossian, John McWorther , or Glenn Loury who are not cancellable at this point. However, I fear you and your crew would be put in much trouble by even hosting such a podcast. Kudos to you for trying and best of luck in this my friend. It is a very important topic.
Click to expand...
There a few well spoken ROs that I would like to have, but I’m certain they would say no. I doubt they’d want their (in my mind, completely reasonable) views public.
 
RealSimulD said:
There a few well spoken ROs that I would like to have, but I’m certain they would say no. I doubt they’d want their (in my mind, completely reasonable) views public.
Click to expand...
I definitely couldn’t discuss this issue in the public light, especially in our field, in this day and age and I’m just a nobody.
 
RealSimulD said:
There a few well spoken ROs that I would like to have, but I’m certain they would say no. I doubt they’d want their (in my mind, completely reasonable) views public.
Click to expand...
I think this would be a neat topic, but agree with others that I would be weary of putting my views or thoughts on the subject out there.

I struggle with how best to interpret the DEI issue in our field and in medicine in general. At our institution, we have mandatory diversity training now. But I feel that the training really oversimplifies the issue at hand. I also do not understand how I fit.
I am an asian male. I certainly benefitted from my upbringing, value placed on education by my family, etc.
At the same time, I took out loans for all of school. I was driven and have spent my 20s busting my ass.
I also have been on the receiving end of microagressions.

I just dont know what diversity means
 
temujim said:
Call for censorship? Lame.
Click to expand...
I think most of us are in favor of increased diversity in medicine. That doesn’t mean it is ok to shunt urm into a collapsing specialty so I also don’t see the point. In fact, by warning urm about the sh— show in radonc, I hope to increase the diversity of other specialties.
 
jondunn said:
This is one of the first things listed in the terms of service:



Yet this thread remains open?
Click to expand...
Yawn. What specifically is your issue with this thread? I have appreciated thus far, that despite being nonsensical, you have at least been succinct. Feel free to expound, so long as you have a point.
 
The issue of not needing more rad onc trainees, URM or not, is a totally different one. This thread is a lot more than that.

Call it censorship if you wish, but it’s one of the first things listed in the TOS so it’s clearly something this website takes seriously, whether or not the sub forums individual moderators care or not.

You’re on a regulated/moderated Internet forum, sir. It is 2021 so I didn’t think I needed to explain this, but rules exist. The fact that people think it’s acceptable to use terms like ‘race baiting’ if discussing race is pretty embarrassing.

In before you post about ‘cancel culture’
 
jondunn said:
The issue of not needing more rad onc trainees, URM or not, is a totally different one. This thread is a lot more than that.

Call it censorship if you wish, but it’s one of the first things listed in the TOS so it’s clearly something this website takes seriously, whether or not the sub forums individual moderators care or not.

You’re on a regulated/moderated Internet forum, sir. It is 2021 so I didn’t think I needed to explain this, but rules exist. The fact that people think it’s acceptable to use terms like ‘race baiting’ if discussing race is pretty embarrassing.

In before you post about ‘cancel culture’
Click to expand...
So basically, "says you." All the while, the most recent, and perhaps only, thread you've contributed is a reminder to not try to sleep with RTT's. Thanks for your contributions.
 
thecarbonionangle said:
I prefer to read about a neo-marxist conspiracy to oppress the WASP on my daily review of the Breitbart comment section. You're really messing up my routine.

Minorities are not the "new" oppressed class. They have been the oppressed class for some time. Wanting diversity is not an "odious ideology". It is simply a commitment to the reality that this makes our specialty and the profession of medicine better. People do not exist in a vacuum separated from the economic, political, social, historical forces which affect them, and yes in some cases do oppress them. There is a a strong component of self to success but there is also a component of environment and opportunity. We need people in all specialties from all backgrounds. It's naive to ignore that there are people with connections (family, economic, etc) which played an important part in their success. Maybe you got into Harvard, then Harvard medschool took you and then Harvard rad onc decided to take you along with all other 6 of your classmates. Maybe your family member was in the field and you got opportunities that not everyone had. Life isn't fair and we can't eliminate some of these things. I can tell you I have learned a lot from my colleagues of different backgrounds and very much like having them around me, and yes this even includes the privileged bourgeois ones.
Click to expand...


Yep!
 
jondunn said:
The issue of not needing more rad onc trainees, URM or not, is a totally different one. This thread is a lot more than that.

Call it censorship if you wish, but it’s one of the first things listed in the TOS so it’s clearly something this website takes seriously, whether or not the sub forums individual moderators care or not.

You’re on a regulated/moderated Internet forum, sir. It is 2021 so I didn’t think I needed to explain this, but rules exist. The fact that people think it’s acceptable to use terms like ‘race baiting’ if discussing race is pretty embarrassing.

In before you post about ‘cancel culture’
Click to expand...
ASTRO uses membership dues to pay a radical extremist like Kendi, but this thread should be cancelled? Kendi is a race baiter, just ask John McWhorter.
Here is what Kendi thinks about inter-racial adoption: "Some White colonizers 'adopted' Black children. They 'civilized' these 'savage' children in the 'superior' ways of White people, while using them as props in their lifelong pictures of denial,"
Astro takes your money, gives it to this guy for a keynote, and you don’t have a right to even discuss it?
 
Last edited:
Here are the terms of service:

  • We believe health care is a right.
  • We believe diversity in health care is critical to good health care. We want students of every gender, race, social status, religion, and sexual orientation to become doctors. Having a diverse medical workforce ensures every American has a doctor that reflects their values and history. This improves the quality of health care for all.
  • We believe privacy is a right. That’s why we never sell or share member information.
  • We believe that academics should be about education, not profit. That’s why all our resources are donor-supported and free for all students. That’s why we don’t promote a service or product, and we have no corporate affiliation.
  • We believe in the scientific method and evidence-based medicine. Scientific debate is healthy, but anti-science conspiracy agendas are harmful to the advancement of medicine.
  • We believe in the volunteer spirit and investing in our future. The vast majority of our team are volunteers; we have two part-time staff to help with coordination. All revenues generated by the organization are reinvested into enhancing services for students.
I'm not seeing where term number 2 is violated in this thread. OTOH, I see a lot of respectful discussion in here about how the spirit of term number 5 is being violated by many of those publishing in this space.
 
jondunn said:
This is one of the first things listed in the terms of service:



Yet this thread remains open?
Click to expand...

Nobody I know here says that we don't want a diverse health care force. A diverse health care force is a natural outcome of merit based, hard work, practices that do not discriminate based on gender, race, social status, religion, and sexual orientation. Many of us here believe here all race, gender, etc. can competently and compassionately treat any other individual patient that differs from.

Problem solved. Thread remains open. Mind you the "other side" notes:

"However, our data suggest that oncologist implicit racial bias may uniquely contribute to these disparities and should be further explored. Greater understanding of how oncologist implicit bias affects the quality of care received by black patients with cancer may enable researchers to identify which of many proposed interventions" (Penner, JCO, 2016) https://ascopubs.org/doi/full/10.1200/JCO.2015.66.3658

If you believe in implicit bias (Banaji and Greenwald's definition being pushed) and admit you treat URMs poorly that's not my problem.

Also, if you are a male do you agree with Dr. Winkfield below? If so you are saying male physicians can't treat women fairly, that's not my problem (see below).

RadOncMegatron said:
Listen to this nonsense: ASCO in Action Podcast Series Launches with Discussion on Ethnic and Racial Diversity in the Oncology Workforce

Dr. Hudis, a white male who specializes in breast cancer, tries to defend himself, but gives into to the idea that minorities/females are better served by other minorities/females. This begs the question if Dr. Hudis, as a male, if he cannot treat female patients as well, should refer his female patients to a female oncologist. Also, Dr. Winkfield who is an African American female, might as well admit that she cannot treat white men as well. She quotes articles (flawed articles based on IAT - see above) that state that minorities feel better when they are seen by their own race. Doesn't that imply white people feel more comfortable with white people, so minorities shouldn't treat them? Are we really going to go there? Are we really at the point where I have to defend Dr. Winkfield in saying she can treat all ethnicities equally, but she is saying that she cannot treat other ethinicities equally? This is truly the twilight zone...

Alas, it may be too late: https://www.asco.org/sites/new-www....&et_rid=1829342265&linkid=summary+of+the+plan
Click to expand...
 
"Affluence separates people. Poverty knits 'em together. You got some sugar and I don't; I borrow some of yours. Next month you might not have any flour; well, I'll give you some of mine." Ray Charles

Some of you folks need some suga’ today. I got flour as well for those in need. Hot cakes or takes coming right up!
 
thecarbonionangle said:
"Affluence separates people. Poverty knits 'em together. You got some sugar and I don't; I borrow some of yours. Next month you might not have any flour; well, I'll give you some of mine." Ray Charles

Some of you folks need some suga’ today. I got flour as well for those in need. Hot cakes or takes coming right up!
Click to expand...
I am very much for diversity, equity, and inclusion. Hope rad onc is including people into a healthy and safe space and not including people into a burning house. As rad onc began tasting a little bit of poverty, it had to go to the med-student-matching welfare line. There it seems to have discovered the sugar of being woke. Poverty knits people together but misery also loves company.
 
jondunn said:
This is one of the first things listed in the terms of service:



Yet this thread remains open?
Click to expand...

Why engage in honest debate when you can just shut it down?

We need to fight against illiberalism like this wherever and whenever it is found. The debates on this thread about race/sex/religion have been some of the more thoughtful I've seen on the topic, and I am glad a forum like this does exist where these ideas can actually be debated rather than simply worshipped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

CurbYourExpectations
  • Poll Poll
Would you apply today?
2 3
Replies
103
Views
11K
TheWallnerus
TheWallnerus
CurbYourExpectations
  • Locked
Thank you all
Replies
8
Views
2K
evilbooyaa
evilbooyaa
CurbYourExpectations
  • Poll Poll
Do you support encroachment into the field?
Replies
46
Views
3K
medgator
M
DoctwoB
Which of you is irradiating Joel Embiid?
Replies
8
Views
2K
SneakyBooger
SneakyBooger
Anthodite
To rad oncs who acknowledge rt students, I love you
Replies
0
Views
868
Anthodite
Anthodite
Top