tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10557263.post7613298242551756536..comments2024-01-26T10:20:37.836+00:00Comments on Diary of a Goldfish: On Privilege #1: A History LessonThe Goldfishhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15213378454070776331noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10557263.post-59517047807117904882008-07-12T11:51:00.000+01:002008-07-12T11:51:00.000+01:00Goldfish--The problems we have had with Affirmativ...Goldfish--<BR/><BR/>The problems we have had with Affirmative Action in the US (positive discrimination) is primarily a cognitive one. As Anonymous stated, people have trouble conceptualizing aggregates-- they see the individual and personalize it. <BR/><BR/>In addition, this paradigm pits two parties fighting for the same piece of pie, as we say in the US. The parties both do not realize there is more pie in the refrigerator, and why is it that only one piece was presented for consumption? There are people and businesses that benefit from privilege. Everyone in a government job, union shop or university post is not necessarily the best person for the job, but the one (many times) who looks the most like the hiring manager or knows their sister's, next door neighborhood, college roommate's cousin (by marriage).<BR/><BR/>The new trend in the States however, is interesting-- organizations are hiring people of color in direct response to the bottom line. People of color are being identified as a market segment with cash value. Several TV stations catering to Spanish language and Black programming have made millions. Companies that advertise and promote in multiple languages, with people of color in advertisement make money. <BR/><BR/>Organizations are also sensitive about the accusation of racism, and strive to find qualified people of color to join their organizations.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10557263.post-82567647854983094712008-06-30T21:44:00.000+01:002008-06-30T21:44:00.000+01:00great jumping point for discussion. i like how you...great jumping point for discussion. i like how you wrote clearly and didn't "bash" for the privilege being there. it just means things are easier. this is a refreshing blog post. i'm looking forward to reading more!Naomi Mimihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10636489041182400478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10557263.post-23230089492722980802008-06-21T16:12:00.000+01:002008-06-21T16:12:00.000+01:00Some people may deny having privilege because they...Some people may deny having privilege because they may fear admitting privilege means having to give it up. True enough.<BR/><BR/>But I think there is also partly a purely *conceptual* difficulty at issue, in that some people have a lot of difficulty wrapping their brains around the idea of statistical aggregates and broader historical trends. <BR/><BR/>Many people find it easier to understand *individual cases* than they do group tendencies, even when there is no privilege that seems to be under threat. For instance they might say, "It can't possibly be true that the people in Town X are more likely to enjoy eating marmite than the people in Town Y because I know this person from Town X who just loathes marmite and this other person from Town Y who loves it." People who think like this have difficulty grasping that statements about overall trends are not MEANT to describe each and every single individual case within the sample group. Kind of like missing the forest because they're too focused on the individual details and nuances present in each and every single tree.<BR/><BR/>It's not so much of an extension to go from that kind of thinking to, "It can't possibly be true that white people have an inherent economic advantage in society because I know family Z who are all white and all dirt poor. I don't think it's accurate to say that any one group has an advantage over the other, it's all down to individual people and individual luck."<BR/><BR/>So to some extent, I think there are cognitive issues at work that need to be addressed at a sheerly cognitive level. No, this won't take care of the OTHER aspects of the problem (including the impulse to protect one's perceived self interests; or a deeply buried sub-conscious belief that maybe people in certain population groups *deserve* to have less privilege than others; or a knee-jerk assumption that merely *having* privilege makes you a bad person because you can't have privilege if you didn't want it and claim it and good people don't do that; or whatever). <BR/><BR/>But I do think that the purely cognitive aspect is a critical barrier to a wider understanding of what "privilege" really means that often get overlooked in more theoretical discussions. In short: it's not all about psychology.<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://wecando.wordpress.com" REL="nofollow">wecando.wordpress.com</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10557263.post-43988003108934113092008-06-19T23:31:00.000+01:002008-06-19T23:31:00.000+01:00Thanks folks :-)Yes Jack, I'm totally against posi...Thanks folks :-)<BR/><BR/>Yes Jack, I'm totally against positive discrimination. There are lots of ways of supporting disadvantaged groups without actually disadvantaging others - even if it is just the matter of one job, inequality is inequality. And frankly, the backlash is not worth the trouble; we've had very little of this kind of thing in the UK, and yet there is this perception that it happens all the time.<BR/><BR/>Trouble is, it is <I>proposed</I> on a regular basis as a response to different issues - the last one was the number of black and Asian people in the police. I mean, if someone was wondering why there aren't a great number of black and Asian people in the police, I don't think the recruitment process is the most obvious problem...The Goldfishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15213378454070776331noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10557263.post-23643652364440848282008-06-18T21:28:00.000+01:002008-06-18T21:28:00.000+01:00Best tit joke ever.Oh, and, what Jack said, obviou...Best tit joke <I>ever</I>.<BR/><BR/>Oh, and, what Jack said, obviously.Lady Bracknellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06140991035663374911noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10557263.post-88236630155923421712008-06-18T08:23:00.000+01:002008-06-18T08:23:00.000+01:00Great post and history lesson for a Yank.Great post and history lesson for a Yank.Diane J Standifordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11862850657925658079noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10557263.post-33293178022971433612008-06-17T10:16:00.000+01:002008-06-17T10:16:00.000+01:00I thought it sounded better under Kinnock when peo...I thought it sounded better under Kinnock when people were worried about a 'Welsh Mafia' and called it the 'Taffia'. Stereotyping and puns, all in the one package!<BR/><BR/>As regards priviledge, I'm quite well of. I'm white, male, semi-middle class (grandparents were poor but parents both professionals - teacher/pharmacist), and well educated and without disability (although I do have a dodgy knee which plays up from time to time, if that's any help). <BR/><BR/>This gives me considerable advantages over many. Yet I wouldn't argue that in a run-off between two candidates for a job, the one from the poorer background should get more 'points': it should go to the best man* for the job irrespective of race, colour, gender, sexuality etc etc.<BR/><BR/>But what we should be doing is trying to ensure that everyone has an equal opportunity (and incentive) to get an education, to learn skills and so on that will stnad them in good stead. <BR/><BR/>For example, we need better childcare provision; we need better maternity AND paternity schemes so that mothers can return to work quicker (if they want) and fathers can take more time off with their little 'uns...<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>*obviously :-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com