(05-09-2019 02:53 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(05-09-2019 01:31 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  How does this account for the pitiful number of black CEO's of Fortune 500 companies? Or holding executive positions in general in most industries? How about when two equally qualified candidates apply for a home loan and the black candidate is much less likely to get the loan approved? Is this also all in their heads?

The term 'equally qualified' is always a tough one. People are never identical... so it depends on how you define 'qualified'.

The usage of the term 'equally qualified' is always the bastion of the person whom the decision did not go their way. This pertains to the progressive victim-mongers as well as the conservative cousins.

As to the first two exemplars, the CEO and upper management, I do note that the poster did not attempt to fall to the knee-jerk 'equally qualified' argument.

In that case, 93 is making a picture perfect 'equality of outcome' argument and attempting to generate the base level outrage typically associated with progressive identity politics.

Can you point to any structural restrictions that does not allow an equally qualified African American from obtaining those positions? If not, all you are doing is the chant of the 88 year old wacko who keeps muttering under their breath that 'the SYSTEM wouldnt let me do that'.

Hate to tell you, there is *no* impediment from anyone of any race or ethnicity from obtaining the top spot in any organization (excepting the obvious ones like the American Nazi Party and the NAACP, Rachael Dolezeal taught us that).

Again, the picture perfect example of inequality of outcome being the determinative factor in some minds.