does being well-off help or hurt you?

[Aerus]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Fine, I'll entertain you again by going through each of your points. The reason why I didn't respond to your points is because I already addressed them in the PM, which I assume you didn't read carefully because I answered those questions already. I'll repeat them.

I'm not implying im entitled to anything. handwaving and saying I don't understand doesn't do anything to wipe away what I said. very selfish? what? Ive talked about giving everyone the benefit of the doubt and a proper context. if that's selfish do you consider MLK selfish?

That makes no sense. MLK was an activist for Black rights. You are not arguing for the equalization of disadvantaged groups. You are arguing for keeping an inherently unequal system in place.

What about those who are affluent and from URM backgrounds?

That average successful, affluent Black person had to work MUCH harder to get to where he was than an equally average affluent White person because of the discrimination against Black people in our society. There are obviously exceptions, but this is a trend we are talking about.

Even after the black man is affluent, he still faces racial discrimination. That's something you can't escape in our society as you are born into it.

Also, are you going to answer the questions I asked at the end? When are all the slews of equally qualified applicants who are potentially passed up for these sort of generalizations going to get their fair treatment and will they eventually be considered underrepresented?

If you had a monkey and a fish and tested them on climbing a tree and the monkey wins, is the monkey more qualified? The current system is biased against those who did not have the educational opportunities to do well or the class opportunities to network as well.

What a ridiculous classist assumption. This isn't even about me, ignoring the fact that people can face adversity even if they're affluent is just reverse discrimination. Making it solely about race remains a good portion of the context of the issues people face.

Saying that you can assume so much because someone happens to be affluent is like saying you can assume that because people shy people they are automatically autistic. It's just wrong and shows no contextual knowledge.

No, I'm saying that, based off of your RACE, you have not faced RACIAL adversity so you do not understand RACIAL adversity. If you are also upper/middle class, you do not understand CLASS adversity because you have not faced CLASS adversity.

I sincerely hope you took the time to read my post instead of ignoring it like you did with my PM.

 

[mrh125]

Fine, I'll entertain you again by going through each of your points. The reason why I didn't respond to your points is because I already addressed them in the PM, which I assume you didn't read carefully because I answered those questions already. I'll repeat them.



That makes no sense. MLK was an activist for Black rights. You are not arguing for the equalization of disadvantaged groups. You are arguing for keeping an inherently unequal system in place.



That successful, affluent Black person had to work MUCH harder to get to where he was than an equally affluent White person because of the discrimination against Black people in our society. Even after he's affluent, he still faces racial discrimination. That's something you can't escape in our society.



If you had a monkey and a fish and tested them on climbing a tree and the monkey wins, is the monkey more qualified? The current system is biased against those who did not have the educational opportunities to do well or the class opportunities to network as well.




No, I'm saying that, based off of your RACE, you have not faced RACIAL adversity so you do not understand RACIAL adversity. If you are also upper/middle class, you do not understand CLASS adversity because you have not faced CLASS adversity.

I sincerely hope you took the time to read my post instead of ignoring it like you did with my PM.

I did and my points still stand. Saying I didn't argue about the equalization of all is wrong. What if that black person didn't have to work harder than equally affluent white people because of race and had the same opportunities as those around him did regardless of their ethnic background? It isn't the case 100% of the time and this is not a black and white issue. You can't assume that someone automatically has it worse off because of their race, it's not like most people are card-carrying members of the KKK. Also, who is to say white people don't face racial discrimination when they do, especially when you're eroding their individuality and assuming that they're privileged and don't face racism which is just a blatant double standard. Poor destitute disadvantaged white people exist too. If the current system is biased against those without educational opportunities and class opportunities why not to put those into context as well as race instead of making race a main factor?

As for saying I'm not facing racial adversity you have no context of my life or anyone else's and there's no way you can say that. Plus I definitely am now with your assumption about whites getting it easier than those of other races. Also, how can you say that middle class and upper class don't face adversity? From you alone they face adversity because you can't seem to be bothered to understand them or comprehend that they face obstacles. You just took of 2 out of 3 or arguably 4 possible class demographics depending on how you break down classes and said they cant experience adversity. It sounds like you're just being jaded because of your experiences. Just because you haven't seen them experience it doesn't mean they haven't. If middle class people can't experience adversity then how can some end up on the street, poor, and totally destitute? I suppose it's from all of the adversity they didn't experience. -_-. All need a context of their achievements, to be understood and weighted equally with the proper context.

 

[Aerus]

I did and my points still stand. Saying I didn't argue about the equalization of all is wrong. What if that black person didn't have to work harder than equally affluent white people because of race and had the same opportunities as those around him did regardless of their ethnic background? It isn't the case 100% of the time and this is not a black and white issue. You can't assume that someone automatically has it worse off because of their race, it's not like most people are card-carrying members of the KKK. Also, who is to say white people don't face racial discrimination when they do, especially when you're eroding their individuality and assuming that they're all privileged and don't face racism which is just a blatant double standard. If the current system is biased against those without educational opportunities and class opportunities why not to put those into context as well as race instead of making race a main factor?

As for saying I'm not facing racial adversity you have no context of my life or anyone else's and there's no way you can say that. Plus I definitely am now with people your assumption about whites getting it easier than those of other races. Also, how can you say that middle class and upper class don't face adversity? From you alone they face adversity because you can't seem to be bothered to understand them or comprehend that they face obstacles. You just took of 2 out of 3 or arguably 4 possible class demographics depending on how you break down classes and said they cant experience adversity. It sounds like you're just being jaded because of your experiences. Just because you haven't seen them experience it doesn't mean they haven't. If middle class people can't experience adversity then how can some end up on the street, poor, and totally destitute? I suppose it's from all of the adversity they didn't experience. -_-. All need a context of their achievements, to be understood and weighted equally with the proper context.

You need to understand the difference between individual anecdotes (n=x) and trends. Trends exist because of some larger factor that you cannot use specific examples of exceptions to explain.

I can assure you that the average black person has it harder than the average white person in our country. THAT is a trend.

White people control the society. They don't experience any institutional discrimination. All discrimination they might face is just individual base. If some single person is against you, then tough luck. If a whole institution in society is against you, then that's something that is inherently unfair.

We need to stop this. We obviously are never going to agree, since you don't have any background analyzing these sociological trends.

 

[Aerus]

If the current system is biased against those without educational opportunities and class opportunities why not to put those into context as well as race instead of making race a main factor?

You really need to get it into your head. Med schools are NOT TRYING TO EQUALIZE when they consider race. I keep saying it and you keep misunderstanding.

They have adversity essays and the disadvantaged box for a reason. When they ask for race, it is for diversity purposes.

 

[mrh125]

You need to understand the difference between individual anecdotes (n=x) and trends. Trends exist because of some larger factor that you cannot use specific examples of exceptions to explain.

I can assure you that the average black person has it harder than the average white person in our country. THAT is a trend.

White people control the society. They don't experience any institutional discrimination. All discrimination they might face is just individual base. If some single person is against you, then tough luck. If a whole institution in society is against you, then that's something that is inherently unfair.

We need to stop this. We obviously are never going to agree, since you don't have any background analyzing these sociological trends.

oh ok, well then i guess i'll go back to controlling society with all the other white people .

 

[Aerus]

oh ok, well then i guess i'll go back to controlling society with all the other white people .

As I said, you aren't going to understand if you don't take a course in sociology, since you've never faced institutional racism before.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile

 

[OneTwoThreeFour]

Somehow a URM discussion.

Here is some data:

Patients trust a doctor their own race more:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18474881

Medical students are better prepared for having a racially diverse class:
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=182528

Having a lower statistical threshold for URM admittance benefits everyone, the patients, the physician, and his/her classmates. This is not even about leveling a historical playing field, it is about providing the best care to the most people.

 

[235009]

time to unsubscribe from this thread

 

[petyr_baelish]

I don't know why you have to tell them that your family is well off at all? Just say you worked for your parents because they were offering you a job. You can even speak about the special challenges you faced working for your family rather than someone else. Stakes are higher and you've got skin in the game. Sometimes you are expected to work harder for less pay. It's not always a joy ride to work in a family business, as you probably know. Unless you are notoriously wealthy and can hand out money, people don't really take kindly to hearing about it.