(05-06-2021 11:14 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(05-06-2021 11:00 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(05-06-2021 10:36 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(05-06-2021 10:15 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-06-2021 09:52 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  The article was from Newsweek which as far as I know is not a biased publication. I know nothing about the author.

I am sorry you think SJW is name-calling. Interesting you would see that as a pejorative.

Everybody here is for social justice, but the ones who are most likely to support certain actions in the name of social justice, like many of those in the article, are the ones farthest to the left. But absolutely, nobody here is a social injustice warrior. At least in my opinion/definition.

I tend to agree with the Cambridge definition above. I think nobody should be advantaged or disadvantaged due to race - whether that race/ethnic origin is white, black, Asian, Hispanic, mixed, whatever. Some people do consider this brand of evenhandedness to be racist, and think policies discriminating on behalf of one race or another are better. Certainly a ripe topic for debate.

It was an opinion piece, which are inherently that, an opinion. I looked up the author and she is a senior contributor at The Federalist. But not really sure why that matters, or it being published in Newsweek matters. I pointed out a clear mischaracterization of a quote...

LOL at you trying to spin that SJW is not name calling or a pejorative. When have you ever heard of someone using it in a positive way? My experience is that it is used to attack people who others view as going to far in advocating for social justice causes.

The author can try and advocate for the definition of racism to minimize the negative connotation that has historically been associated with it, in order to neuter the term and try and fling it back on to a group of people she disagrees with. But she ignores and doesn't highlight the Cambridge definition that does just that:

- harmful or unfair things that people say, do, or think based on the belief that their own race makes them more intelligent, good, moral, etc. than people of other races

- the belief that some races are better than others, or the unfair treatment of someone because of his or her race

Merriam-Webster offers these definitions:

- belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
- behavior or attitudes that reflect and foster this belief : racial discrimination or prejudice
- the systemic oppression of a racial group to the social, economic, and political advantage of another

But even so, defining programs that preference one group over the other, regardless of all historical context, as -ist (racist, sexist, etc.) is likely a very shallow take on the subject.

I do think, in a similar vein, we need to be careful that those programs do no create an environment where they become racist, sexist, etc. Do certain advantages or encouragements for group X begin to actively discourage or harm group Y as a whole in a systemic way. But we shouldn't cry "that's racist!" every time we see a portion of a program provide encouragement for things like women owned small businesses, veteran owned businesses, black owned businesses, etc.

So you reject out of hand my explanation. Good to know that you know my mind better than I do.

would you have preferred it if, instead of SJW, I had asked for the opinions of leftists, left-wingers, liberals, activists, or "The Left"? If so, consider the proper term as substituted.

I think SJW, like right winger, has certain connotations in the minds of some people. But I think we all here support the idea of racial equality. I, personally, don't support policies that discriminate on the basis of race - any race, and I know some here do - including some of the polices in the article. I guess in my mind, most SJWs are supporters of certain race-based policies that I, a different kind of advocate for equality, consider to be discriminatory. My solution is simple: treat everybody the same. Radical concept.

I think that's been tried but, damn... that unconscious bias is a *****.

Has it really been tried yet? Seems all my life we have been trying to correct Bias Type A with Bias Type B.

Is the answer to unconscious bias really conscious bias?

I don't think there is so much outward/conscious racism built into the system in 2021. There are, however, multiple areas that you can point to where one could say that BIPOC still do not have an even playing field with white people.

Look at all the studies on unconscious bias when it comes to BIPOC. It's staggering.

When you say, "Let's just treat everybody the same" the problem is that even when we try to treat people the same we don't.

I'm not necessarily advocating for those programs that you pointed out above... I'm just saying that solving the issue is not so easy.