Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

2012 Election Thread


  • Please log in to reply
2253 replies to this topic

#2221 Strell

Strell

    LOBSTERS!....IN MY PANTS!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 15 November 2012 - 05:52 PM

This reminds me of an exchange in King of the Hill between Bobby and Hank, something like:

Bobby: Yeah, but then they take away OUR privileges, which is bad because we're used to getting them!

Marginally related from the second episode:

BOBBY: I just wanted to say you don't have to worry about me, 'cause I'm never gonna have sex.
HANK: Whoa, Bobby, now don't say that!
BOBBY: I thought that's what you wanted.
HANK: Well, yes, if you were my daughter, but you're my son.
BOBBY: Why is it not okay for girls, but it's okay for boys?
HANK: It's called the double standard, Bobby. Don't knock it, we got the long end of the stick on that one.


Posted Image
Aminal Crossing: Strell@Tazmily, 2836-3590- 0819

"One of the more...amusing screwballs around here..." - shrike4242
Join the El Hoardo Fan Club!
Threadless.com puts the fun back in laundry!...lafundry! HOORAY! (Referral link)
Wii Obscure FAQ and Facts Thread [Version 2.0] ::: Wii Shop Thread ::: DSi Shop Thread


#2222 Clak

Clak

    Made of star stuff.

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 15 November 2012 - 07:52 PM

That show was so full of hidden jokes, I have to wonder how many people even got them. I know plenty of conservative folks who loved it, and I sometimes wonder if they were watching with the sound turned off.

#2223 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 16 November 2012 - 12:47 AM

I'm surprised that some folks are just all in favor of putting official policies, rules, regulations and laws into place that openly favor individuals based on their race alone.

I mean, once we open that door, why shouldn't the rich old white men that run the country just start openly creating laws that benefit them?

We're all supposed to worry about hidden agendas and subconcious racism and the only way to change that is by having transparent agendas and open racism.

Sounds like a plan.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#2224 Clak

Clak

    Made of star stuff.

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 16 November 2012 - 12:55 AM

Little bit of sanity, then the guano starts spewing out, every time.

#2225 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 16 November 2012 - 01:31 AM

I'm going to regret this...but I'm in Vegas and about to get some cheap drinks while "playing" on video poker.

I'm surprised that some folks are just all in favor of putting official policies, rules, regulations and laws into place that openly favor individuals based on their race alone.

This type of legislation has already been codified in the laws of most of the country's history and it favored whites. Once overtly racist language was removed, you still have the same types of legislation that still disproportionally targets non-whites for discrimination while still benefiting whites.

I mean, once we open that door, why shouldn't the rich old white men that run the country just start openly creating laws that benefit them?

This HAS to be a fucking joke.

We're all supposed to worry about hidden agendas and subconcious racism and the only way to change that is by having transparent agendas and open racism.

When did whites start facing the discrimination on the same scale as black people? Someone forgot to send me the fucking memo.

Sounds like a plan.

We're a long way from white being the new black, but it's still better than your non-plan of inaction. Either way, you're still taking attention away from the more well connected whites having their own form of affirmative action that get by in greater numbers, but no, let's focus on that one black kid instead of the 10 other white kids that jumped ahead of both of them.

Regardless, the core of arguments like yours is that those spots should've belonged to another white person because they're "objectively more qualified" instead of some nebulous idea of a black person that was obviously "less" qualified.

Edited by dohdough, 16 November 2012 - 01:43 AM.


#2226 Clak

Clak

    Made of star stuff.

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 16 November 2012 - 03:09 AM

I also love how understanding past history, and the present for that matter, somehow equals guilt. I don't feel personally guilty because i didn't have any hand in putting together the calculated discrimination which has existed since the founding of the country. However, that doesn't mean I can't have a little fucking empathy for my fellow man, and try to understand how it feels to walk in their shoes. I sometimes feel like I'm living in a country half populated by a bunch of sociopaths.

#2227 Temporaryscars

Temporaryscars

    Talks like a Dalek

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 16 November 2012 - 05:36 AM

This type of legislation has already been codified in the laws of most of the country's history and it favored whites. Once overtly racist language was removed, you still have the same types of legislation that still disproportionally targets non-whites for discrimination while still benefiting whites.


Give us an example.



#2228 camoor

camoor

    Jams on foot fires

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 16 November 2012 - 05:40 AM

Give us an example.


Classic example is the penalties for crack vs penalties for cocaine. Penalties for crack are much harsher. There's plenty of other examples too but I doubt you really care - I just replied to shut you up.

#2229 Temporaryscars

Temporaryscars

    Talks like a Dalek

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 16 November 2012 - 05:44 AM

Classic example is the penalties for crack vs penalties for cocaine. Penalties for crack are much harsher. There's plenty of other examples too but I doubt you really care - I just replied to shut you up.


Once overtly racist language was removed

Drug laws had overtly racist language that was removed? :lol: Fucking moron.

I'll give you that blacks suffer from the drug war more than whites do, but I'm asking about laws that once had overtly racist language that was removed and is still in place.

Lets hear some of your other examples.



#2230 UncleBob

UncleBob

Posted 16 November 2012 - 07:10 AM

This type of legislation has already been codified in the laws of most of the country's history and it favored whites. Once overtly racist language was removed, you still have the same types of legislation that still disproportionally targets non-whites for discrimination while still benefiting whites.


The issue is that your solution isn't to remove the laws and policies that are in place that still disproportionally target minorities. You want to keep these same things in place, but just replace "white" with "non-white" - and make it all nice and official.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it."

#2231 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 16 November 2012 - 08:51 AM

Drug laws had overtly racist language that was removed? :lol: Fucking moron.

I'll give you that blacks suffer from the drug war more than whites do, but I'm asking about laws that once had overtly racist language that was removed and is still in place.

Lets hear some of your other examples.

Look up the Lee Atwater quote about coded language. You don't have to say "n****r" to make language overtly racist. Codifying laws targeted to specifically disenfranchise a group based on race is overtly racist in itself. But like I said, keep focusing on those handful of black people when gaggles of your fellow whites are getting door service.

The issue is that your solution isn't to remove the laws and policies that are in place that still disproportionally target minorities. You want to keep these same things in place, but just replace "white" with "non-white" - and make it all nice and official.

So not being dogmatic is a bad thing? Incrementalism is the only way to turn back these types of policies. If the US was truly interested in equality, we wouldn't need band-aid measures like affirmative action. But you're not really interested in equality either so I don't know what the Fuck you're going on about by trying to paint me as someone that's trying to keep this system in place when I've repeatedly said that I want to burn this motherfucker down.

#2232 Clak

Clak

    Made of star stuff.

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 16 November 2012 - 01:24 PM

The way that I took what Doh said was that overtly racist language has basically been removed from the discussion these days, but discriminatory laws still exist. Blacks are no longer less than a full person, but there are still laws that largely effect them more than other races due to how they were written. The crack vs normal cocaine thing mentioned for example.

#2233 Temporaryscars

Temporaryscars

    Talks like a Dalek

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 16 November 2012 - 01:40 PM

Ah, I thought he meant the laws themselves had overtly racist language which was removed. My mistake.

You guys should check out a book called Losing the Race by John McWhorter. Great book on the subject.



#2234 camoor

camoor

    Jams on foot fires

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 16 November 2012 - 02:31 PM

Drug laws had overtly racist language that was removed? :lol: Fucking moron.

I'll give you that blacks suffer from the drug war more than whites do, but I'm asking about laws that once had overtly racist language that was removed and is still in place.

Lets hear some of your other examples.


I never said anything about overtly racist language, don't attribute words to me that aren't mine. You think I'm going to get punked by a strawman, GTFO

You're damn right your mistake.

#2235 Temporaryscars

Temporaryscars

    Talks like a Dalek

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 16 November 2012 - 03:14 PM

*douche chills*



#2236 itachiitachi

itachiitachi

Posted 16 November 2012 - 11:08 PM

Asians are a special and I hate to group all the ethnicities together like that, but the ones that get higher scores tend come from the higher socio-economic strata and tend to not be refugees.

From what I've read it seem that poor Asains still do very well academically.

It still doesn't negate the fact that Asians are still a very small percentage of students in college that are far from being overrepresented except in a handful of regional schools,

Looking at the data from the BLS the percentage of Asian in college is greater than the percentage of Asian Americans of college age.

which isn't a strike against affirmative action, but reiterates a need for it ,
when South East Asians, in particular tend to trend the same as Latinos and black people in regards to socio-economic status and scholastic achievement. They also sometimes require additional support from these institutions in order to navigate these spaces.

Ok let's focus on Chinese and Japanese Americans both groups faced racism and yet both groups overcame it, and affirmative actions seems to have nothing to do with it.

Also affirmative action does not target those who actually need it(poor,people who have been in jail for drugs,people from single parents homes ect....)

Not to mention that outside of college, Asians of all stripes tend to hit the glass ceiling as well as being paid less than their white counterparts even when accounting for experience and education.

The little research I could find on the subject suggest that this is only true for firs generation Asains and 2nd or even 1.5th generations ones are paid the same as their white counterparts.

Forgive me if I have a little nuance to my worldview, and am not a black/white ideologue who can't grasp complexity.

 

This is perhaps the most ironic thing I have ever seen on CAG.

 

#2237 camoor

camoor

    Jams on foot fires

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 16 November 2012 - 11:28 PM

*douche chills*


weak

#2238 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 16 November 2012 - 11:36 PM

I honestly don't even know how to being to address this mess...

From what I've read it seem that poor Asains still do very well academically.

"Poor" does not mean refugee or uneducated.

Looking at the data from the BLS the percentage of Asian in college is greater than the percentage of Asian Americans of college age.

I'm not sure if you understand what that means, but it still has absolutely nothing to do with my point about Asians, regardless of citizenship, being far from being grossly overrepresented in higher education. Even by (mis)interpreting data they way you did, it still makes my case about Asian Americans even stronger about not being overrepresented.

Ok let's focus on Chinese and Japanese Americans both groups faced racism and yet both groups overcame it, and affirmative actions seems to have nothing to do with it.

Uhhh...wut??? You're going to have to explain how they "overcame" it.

Also affirmative action does not target those who actually need it(poor,people who have been in jail for drugs,people from single parents homes ect....)

That's because affirmative action programs aren't supposed to address those things or at least not supposed to directly address them. Affirmative action isn't a social safety net and the things you think it should address are things that other programs would address because a program like affirmative action failed.

The little research I could find on the subject suggest that this is only true for firs generation Asains and 2nd or even 1.5th generations ones are paid the same as their white counterparts.

Except that every reputable study on labor statistics find huge disparities in income when looking at race and gender?

#2239 itachiitachi

itachiitachi

Posted 18 November 2012 - 11:45 PM

I honestly don't even know how to being to address this mess...

You could try and open mind and respect.

"Poor" does not mean refugee or uneducated.

Do uneducated refugee's of any race have a representation in colleges?

I'm not sure if you understand what that means, but it still has absolutely nothing to do with my point about Asians, regardless of citizenship, being far from being grossly overrepresented in higher education. Even by (mis)interpreting data they way you did, it still makes my case about Asian Americans even stronger about not being overrepresented.

You going to have to explain that.

Uhhh...wut??? You're going to have to explain how they "overcame" it.

What you mean how they the stereotypes like "sneaky asain" and racist acts like interments camps?

That's because affirmative action programs aren't supposed to address those things or at least not supposed to directly address them. Affirmative action isn't a social safety net and the things you think it should address are things that other programs would address because a program like affirmative action failed.

So instead of instituting a program based on need that will help minorities get out ghettos and break free from the cycle of poverty, we should go with program that helps middle class and rich minorities get into slightly better schools and leaves poor people to rot?



I
Except that every reputable study on labor statistics find huge disparities in income when looking at race and gender?

Do they account for things like first generation vs second generation, career oriented workers vs family oriented workers.

Forgive me if I have a little nuance to my worldview, and am not a black/white ideologue who can't grasp complexity.

 

This is perhaps the most ironic thing I have ever seen on CAG.

 

#2240 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 19 November 2012 - 06:20 PM

You could try and open mind and respect.

Sorry, but that's reserved for people with actual demonstrated knowledge on a subject that add nuanced views. You've done neither in the area of Asian/Asian American issues here. You're asking questions that show that you're only pretending to know what you're talking about, so you get neither from me.

Do uneducated refugee's of any race have a representation in colleges?

This is so far removed from the original point that it's a completely different subject, but the answer is that they wouldn't be counted as their own demographic anyways. That's like asking if there's a special program for rural Chinese students and rich urban ones, when they're both counted as Asian and international students.

The original point is that an educated family of some means in China would still be poor in the US for a myriad of reasons. We also saw a large influx of refugees from Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and Hmong throughout the 70's and 80's and they weren't exactly welcomed or given jobs with living wages when they got over here. Some were educated, but most weren't, which adds to the difficulties of immigration. How this plays out is that despite both groups being poor in the US, you have educated parents being more economically mobile with kids that do better in school and uneducated parents that don't do well in school, which is consistent with the same trend for most families in the US.

You going to have to explain that.

Seriously? You want me to explain your own point to you? Are you asserting that Asians, regardless of "American" status, are grossly overrepresented? Or maybe you should explain your reason for posting that BLS statistic and your interpretation of it because it doesn't refute my point.

What you mean how they the stereotypes like "sneaky asain" and racist acts like interments camps?

Uhhh...those aren't examples of overcoming racism. That's like saying black people overcame racism because they aren't considered monkeys anymore and that they aren't slaves on plantations.

So instead of instituting a program based on need that will help minorities get out ghettos and break free from the cycle of poverty, we should go with program that helps middle class and rich minorities get into slightly better schools and leaves poor people to rot?

The short answer is yes. Again, that's not the goal or purpose of affirmative action. Education and social safety nets are the things that are supposed to address poverty. This is not complicated. It's like asking why the GI Bill doesn't help or cover people before they entered the military.

Do they account for things like first generation vs second generation, career oriented workers vs family oriented workers.

How is this relevant when this is the trend of income disparity for every one in the country according to race and gender? The gap between white men and white women alone is 25% with everyone else being much worse.

#2241 itachiitachi

itachiitachi

Posted 20 November 2012 - 04:45 AM

Sorry, but that's reserved for people with actual demonstrated knowledge on a subject that add nuanced views. You've done neither in the area of Asian/Asian American issues here. You're asking questions that show that you're only pretending to know what you're talking about, so you get neither from me.

Basically you are admitting you are close minded, and saying anyone who disagrees with you doesn't deserve respect.

This is so far removed from the original point that it's a completely different subject, but the answer is that they wouldn't be counted as their own demographic anyways. That's like asking if there's a special program for rural Chinese students and rich urban ones, when they're both counted as Asian and international students.

Then why did you bring it up?

The original point is that an educated family of some means in China would still be poor in the US for a myriad of reasons. We also saw a large influx of refugees from Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and Hmong throughout the 70's and 80's and they weren't exactly welcomed or given jobs with living wages when they got over here. Some were educated, but most weren't, which adds to the difficulties of immigration. How this plays out is that despite both groups being poor in the US, you have educated parents being more economically mobile with kids that do better in school and uneducated parents that don't do well in school, which is consistent with the same trend for most families in the US.

The original point is groups have overcome racism, bringing up groups that may not have done had nothing to do with the fact that other groups have overcome.

Seriously? You want me to explain your own point to you? Are you asserting that Asians, regardless of "American" status, are grossly overrepresented? Or maybe you should explain your reason for posting that BLS statistic and your interpretation of it because it doesn't refute my point.

You mean my point that higher percentage of Asians who get into college is larger than than the number of Asians who go to highschool?

Uhhh...those aren't examples of overcoming racism. That's like saying black people overcame racism because they aren't considered monkeys anymore and that they aren't slaves on plantations.

Going from being thought of as sneaky and placed in interment camps to being the group with the highest income is not overcooking rascism?

The short answer is yes. Again, that's not the goal or purpose of affirmative action. Education and social safety nets are the things that are supposed to address poverty. This is not complicated. It's like asking why the GI Bill doesn't help or cover people before they entered the military.

So basically we should go on with affirmative action "to fix rascism" even-though it does not address any of the problems that are keeping minorities from succeeding? Is the point to simply make some places look more diverse?
I think I'll stick with the system that focuses on helping the people who have been totally screwed over by society rather than a system that helps people who look like the poeple who have been screwed over.

How is this relevant when this is the trend of income disparity for every one in the country according to race and gender?

The gap between white men and 2nd generation Asians is maybe 1%.
Is it surprising that someone who is new to a country and is not master of it's language and culture does not earn as much as someone who has mastered them?

The gap between white men and white women alone is 25% with everyone else being much worse.

The gap between carrier oriented men and carrier orientated women is almost nill, in fact some jobs the women earn more.

The are more homeless men than women and more men in jail in women does this mean are society sexual discriminates against men?
Or are the more complicated factors, and claiming discrimination simply based on a disparity between groups shows a lack of curiosity and strong confirmation biased.

Forgive me if I have a little nuance to my worldview, and am not a black/white ideologue who can't grasp complexity.

 

This is perhaps the most ironic thing I have ever seen on CAG.

 

#2242 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 20 November 2012 - 06:09 AM

[quote name='itachiitachi']Basically you are admitting you are close minded, and saying anyone who disagrees with you doesn't deserve respect.[/quote]
All points of view are NOT equal. We're not debating flavors of ice cream here, so stop treating it as such. I happen to know a lot about Asian American issues and you sound like you barely know anything about it beyond model minority stereotypes.

[quote]Then why did you bring it up?[/quote]
Because "Asian" is not a homogenous group and there are huge disparities when breaking down by nationality and ethnicity when being a homogenous group is exactly what you're implying. While there's some overlap, there are marked difference between "Asian" and "Asian American" issues and statistics. My only mistake was taking what you said as face value because I assumed that you understood the difference because you used the terminology, despite me having the strong feeling that you didn't understand it.

[quote]The original point is groups have overcome racism, bringing up groups that may not have done had nothing to do with the fact that other groups have overcome.[/quote]
Yeah that's nice, but your premise conceptually flawed. No one overcomes racism; society just becomes less racist or at least less overtly racist and only some of the time.

[quote]You mean my point that higher percentage of Asians who get into college is larger than than the number of Asians who go to highschool?[/quote]
You actually said "Asians" and then "Asian American." There's a difference and not my fault that you think those terms are interchangeable when it fits your mood. Maybe you should stop pretending that you know what you're talking about. If this IS your point, it still doesn't change my point that Asians and Asian Americans are far from being grossly overrepresented on college campuses nor does it refute my argument and the math simply doesn't work. Just cite your source because you're making a mess of this particular point.

[quote]Going from being thought of as sneaky and placed in interment camps to being the group with the highest income is not overcooking rascism?[/quote]
The devil is in the details and you don't seem to care for them. Asians are still thought of as sneaky and a whole slew of other conflicting stereotypes and not being interred in internment camps isn't exactly a high bar to set. The elimination of Jim Crow doesn't mean that racism is over.

Disaggregate that income data by gender and education and Asian males are only doing slightly better with post graduate education and the spread with white males is less than 5%.

[quote]So basically we should go on with affirmative action "to fix rascism" even-though it does not address any of the problems that are keeping minorities from succeeding? Is the point to simply make some places look more diverse?[/quote]
Affirmative action isn't meant to "fix" racism and never was. You're absolutely correct in thinking that it is a move to make places more diverse, but it isn't as simple and cynical as you make it sound. If we didn't have affirmative action, even those middle and upper class people of color wouldn't have had the kind of access that they currently do. Don't think for a second that we still don't need a program like affirmative action because those that already have limited access will see even more limited access.

[quote]I think I'll stick with the system that focuses on helping the people who have been totally screwed over by society rather than a system that helps people who look like the poeple who have been screwed over.[/quote]
Could a rich guy from Africa NEVER experience racism in the US? Could a South Korean NEVER experience racism in the US? Racism happens specifically because of the way a person looks and to think that money makes you exempt is beyond stupid. I mean Fuck, how the hell do you think racism works?

The fact of the matter is that we DON'T have a system that effectively helps people screwed over by society. A large enough part of our society and the power elite, prefer to keep certain segments of our society, especially the most vulnerable parts of it, down.

[quote]The gap between white men and 2nd generation Asians is maybe 1%.
Is it surprising that someone who is new to a country and is not master of it's language and culture does not earn as much as someone who has mastered them?[/quote]
Except that you're completely wrong. Look up the stats.

[quote]The gap between carrier oriented men and carrier orientated women is almost nill, in fact some jobs the women earn more.[/quote]
Women making more money in porn and strip clubs doesn't mean that there is a negligible gap. Again, look up the stats. "Career oriented" is a sloppy fucking term to be using in this conversation too. How the Fuck do you even quantify that?

[quote]The are more homeless men than women and more men in jail in women does this mean are society sexual discriminates against men?[/quote]
Given your data, I'd say that society is harsher on homeless men and in the justice system. Judging from your posts in this thread, you'd say that more men are homeless and/or criminals. Unlike you, I'm coming at these issues looking at the systems; not the individuals.

[quote]Or are the more complicated factors, and claiming discrimination simply based on a disparity between groups shows a lack of curiosity and strong confirmation biased.[/QUOTE]
This is funny as shit coming from you. I don't think you really have an idea of what those terms mean in relation to what we're talking about. I don't know if it's because english is a secondary language for you or that you can't write for shit. I sincerely hope it's the first because I'm losing my patience.

Edited by dohdough, 20 November 2012 - 06:48 AM.


#2243 itachiitachi

itachiitachi

Posted 21 November 2012 - 07:15 AM

[quote name='dohdough']All points of view are NOT equal. We're not debating flavors of ice cream here, so stop treating it as such. I happen to know a lot about Asian American issues and you sound like you barely know anything about it beyond model minority stereotypes.[/QUOTE]
Knowing more(or thinking you do) makes being disrespectful and close minded ok?

[quote name='dohdough']
Yeah that's nice, but your premise conceptually flawed. No one overcomes racism; society just becomes less racist or at least less overtly racist and only some of the time. [/QUOTE]
If your measure of racism is how many people have racists beliefs then there will always be some amount of racism.
If your measure of racism is being a certain race helping or hurting your opportunists than that is something that can be practically eliminated.

For some reason you have decided to hinge your whole argument on the first definition even though the 2nd definition is the one that is relevant.

[quote name='dohdough']

You actually said "Asians" and then "Asian American." There's a difference and not my fault that you think those terms are interchangeable when it fits your mood. [/QUOTE]
It's not my fault language is mutable and the terms are used interchangeably, and it's not my fault that rather than figuring out which one I meant by context, or asking for clarification you decided to go of on semantical tangent.


[quote name='dohdough']
Maybe you should stop pretending that you know what you're talking about. If this IS your point, it still doesn't change my point that Asians and Asian Americans are far from being grossly overrepresented on college campuses nor does it refute my argument and the math simply doesn't work. Just cite your source because you're making a mess of this particular point.[/QUOTE]
1. Please show me where I ever said "Asians are grossly overrepresented".
2. I already gave you the source.

[quote name='dohdough']
The devil is in the details and you don't seem to care for them. Asians are still thought of as sneaky and a whole slew of other conflicting stereotypes and not being interred in internment camps isn't exactly a high bar to set. The elimination of Jim Crow doesn't mean that racism is over.[/QUOTE]
Racism doesn't have to be over, for it to be overcome, if despite some people having racists view, people form all races have equal opportunity than it has been overcome
[quote name='dohdough']
Disaggregate that income data by gender and education and Asian males are only doing slightly better with post graduate education and the spread with white males is less than 5%. [/QUOTE]
Why don't you disaggregate it more to 1st generation vs 2nd generation?

[quote name='dohdough']
Affirmative action isn't meant to "fix" racism and never was. You're absolutely correct in thinking that it is a move to make places more diverse, but it isn't as simple and cynical as you make it sound. If we didn't have affirmative action, even those middle and upper class people of color wouldn't have had the kind of access that they currently do. Don't think for a second that we still don't need a program like affirmative action because those that already have limited access will see even more limited access.[/QUOTE]
In places where racial affirmative action is banned it has been replace by economic affirmative action, which not only produce racial, economic, and cultural diversity. Those that had limited access gained more access.

[quote name='dohdough']
Could a rich guy from Africa NEVER experience racism in the US? Could a South Korean NEVER experience racism in the US? Racism happens specifically because of the way a person looks and to think that money makes you exempt is beyond stupid. I mean file:///C:%5CUsers%5COverLord%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_image001.gif, how the hell do you think racism works?[/QUOTE]
By that standard everyone faces racism. If you are going to use a real standard, what opportunists does a rich African lose from his race?


[quote name='dohdough']
The fact of the matter is that we DON'T have a system that effectively helps people screwed over by society. A large enough part of our society and the power elite, prefer to keep certain segments of our society, especially the most vulnerable parts of it, down.[/QUOTE]
So rather than acknowledge a problem, we should institute a system that tries to hide it?


[quote name='dohdough']
Except that you're completely wrong. Look up the stats.[/QUOTE]
I did, second generation out earns firsts generation by a sizable margin.
This is the only online stat I could find.
http://www.census.go...n/cb10-159.html


[quote name='dohdough']
Women making more money in porn and strip clubs doesn't mean that there is a negligible gap.Again, look up the stats. [/QUOTE]
Actually women tend to earn more in many fields of engineering and services.

[quote name='dohdough']
"Career oriented" is a sloppy file:///C:%5CUsers%5COverLord%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_image001.gifing term to be using in this conversation too. How the file:///C:%5CUsers%5COverLord%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_image001.gifdo you even quantify that?[/QUOTE]
Surveys, or looking at married people who left the work force to take of kids vs those who don't, is it really that hard for you?

[quote name='dohdough']
Given your data, I'd say that society is harsher on homeless men and in the justice system. Judging from your posts in this thread, you'd say that more men are homeless and/or criminals.[/QUOTE]
1. There are more homeless men than women. What does that have to do with the point?

2. You Really think my whole explanation is that there are more male criminals than female? I'd say the exact opposite of the point I was making?



[quote name='dohdough']
Unlike you, I'm coming at these issues looking at the systems; not the individuals.[/QUOTE]
The only system you seem to believe in is if their is a disparity than it must be discrimination.

Unlike you I'm interested in why there are disparities.
[quote name='dohdough']
This is funny as shit coming from you. I don't think you really have an idea of what those terms mean in relation to what we're talking about. I don't know if it's because english is a secondary language for you or that you can't write for shit.[/QUOTE]
It's funny that you are criticizing someone else's "english". What kind of person draws a conclusion about somebody's language ability based on typos?
I can't help but notice that rather than respond to my point.
Rather than ask yourself the question "if are society is so male biased why are men more likely to be homeless?", "why is the justice system different?",
you decided to go ad hominem.

[quote name='dohdough']
I sincerely hope it's the first because I'm losing my patience.[/QUOTE]
What patience? You seem far more interested in insults than discussion, and whenever any facts come up that fly in the face of your world view you go off on some tangent. You've practically admitted that you have no interest in understanding others.
Spoiler

Forgive me if I have a little nuance to my worldview, and am not a black/white ideologue who can't grasp complexity.

 

This is perhaps the most ironic thing I have ever seen on CAG.

 

#2244 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:58 AM

Goddamn, you're fucking ignorant as all hell...

[quote name='itachiitachi']Knowing more(or thinking you do) makes being disrespectful and close minded ok?[/QUOTE]
I've forgotten more than you've ever known about racism and you've clearly demonstrated that you don't have the knowledge to discuss the complexities of it. You whine like a child about semantics because you don't even understand the underlying concepts of the terminology you use and again, I'm going to show you how little you truly understand.

[quote]If your measure of racism is how many people have racists beliefs then there will always be some amount of racism.
If your measure of racism is being a certain race helping or hurting your opportunists than that is something that can be practically eliminated.

For some reason you have decided to hinge your whole argument on the first definition even though the 2nd definition is the one that is relevant.[/quote]They're both relevant and can't exist without another especially in the modern day US. You can't remove all context from how racism exists in the US and assume that different racial groups experience racism the same way or were treated the same while saying one group "overcame" it and others didn't. Your analysis of my argument and racism, in general, are woefully superficial.

There are loads of seemingly non-racist sentiment that has a foundation in racist attitudes and racism does not require hate, but the implied inferiority of non-white groups. Holding up Asians as model minorities is racist in nature because it serves the narrative of the inferiority of other racial groups as well as a way to deny resources to that group. The fact that some Asians "made it" doesn't mean that they've "overcome" racism as a group when most still face serious discrimination. Would you say black people overcame racism because Obama got elected president or that any black kid could be president because he was elected? Of course not because that would be so stupid as to not need an explanation.

[quote]It's not my fault language is mutable and the terms are used interchangeably, and it's not my fault that rather than figuring out which one I meant by context, or asking for clarification you decided to go of on semantical tangent.[/quote]
It IS your fault because the terms are NOT interchangeable in the way you used it in that sentence as it means a VERY specific thing. When you say there are more Asians entering college than there are Asian Americans in high school, it means that there are more foreign born Asians entering college than US born Asians in high school. The two terms have very distinct meaning in that context and like I said, it was my fault for thinking you knew what you were talking about. You also dropped that line without any explanation or context. When I say Asian, I imply Asian Americans and am consistent with my usage. If I said that there were more Africans entering college than there are African Americans in high school, how the Fuck would you interpret that?

[quote]1. Please show me where I ever said "Asians are grossly overrepresented".
2. I already gave you the source.[/quote]
Well why the Fuck did you post that statistic when it implies that they are grossly overrepresented and keep defending it instead of clarifying? How many times have I addressed it since you brought it up? GTFO with that bullshit.

[quote]Racism doesn't have to be over, for it to be overcome, if despite some people having racists view, people form all races have equal opportunity than it has been overcome[/quote]
What the motherfuck??? Asians haven't even come close to overcoming racism according to your own goddamn metric! How many Asian leading men are there in Hollywood? How many CEO's that are members of the Fortune 500 are Asian? How many goddamn Asians are in the US Congress? Gangnam Style being played on the radio doesn't mean that Asians have overcome racism when most talented artists can't get any exposure.

[quote]Why don't you disaggregate it more to 1st generation vs 2nd generation?[/quote]
I did. You're just too dumb to figure out how.

[quote]In places where racial affirmative action is banned it has been replace by economic affirmative action, which not only produce racial, economic, and cultural diversity. Those that had limited access gained more access.[/quote]
Bull-fucking-shit. Most studies conclude that non-white enrollments tend to drop as a percentage of the student body and graduation rates drop as well, of which both statistics get worse as you move up the chain to more selective schools. States that have affirmative action bans have also seen a drop in graduate programs. The fact that the UC system has an Asian "problem" is not emblematic of the most likely nationwide trend if affirmative action was banned in the US for college admissions.

[quote]By that standard everyone faces racism. If you are going to use a real standard, what opportunists does a rich African lose from his race?[/quote]
Are you seriously implying that a rich black man can't experience racism in the US? And yes, black is accurate because racism tends to happen before someone even opens their mouth. The social construct of "black" is well defined. You don't have to say anything to be followed around a store as if you might be a thief or be pulled over for Driving While Black.

[quote]So rather than acknowledge a problem, we should institute a system that tries to hide it?[/quote]
What the Fuck? Are you for real? Did you NOT see the kind of crazy that came out of the Republican presidential primaries? How the hell would we institute a program that more effectively lifts more people out of poverty if we're had a hard enough problem getting people increased access to healthcare?

And affirmative action doesn't hide the problem and acknowledges it directly because socio-economic mobility has hit the non-white population the hardest. It's a special program because most of the programs we've had has either excluded them and/or not sufficient to address the needs of those groups. How many times do I have to tell you the purpose of affirmative action works until it sinks into your thick skull?

[quote]I did, second generation out earns firsts generation by a sizable margin.
This is the only online stat I could find.
http://www.census.go...n/cb10-159.html[/quote]
So.fucking.what. This refutes my point about kids with educated parents having better outcomes how?

[quote]Actually women tend to earn more in many fields of engineering and services.[/quote]
Are you shitting me? STEM has been one of the worse fields for women in terms of wage, advancement, and professional climate since forever. Even then, that does not refute my point about wage disparity as an overall demographic. You need to learn what an outlier is.

[quote]Surveys, or looking at married people who left the work force to take of kids vs those who don't, is it really that hard for you?[/quote]
It must be too hard because because your assertion that there's not only parity, but implied disparity in which women make more overall is complete bullshit. If that was reality, why the Fuck would "equal pay for equal work" be such a huge campaign slogan for the past few months and why would we need the Ledbetter Act?

[quote]1. There are more homeless men than women. What does that have to do with the point?

2. You Really think my whole explanation is that there are more male criminals than female? I'd say the exact opposite of the point I was making?[/quote]
Fuck, do you even realize how dumb #1 is in relation to your point about me being intellectually incurious and having selection bias? Do you even know what those terms mean?

[quote]The only system you seem to believe in is if their is a disparity than it must be discrimination.

Unlike you I'm interested in why there are disparities.[/quote]
Did you not understand what I said? Cause that's what it looks like.

[quote]It's funny that you are criticizing someone else's "english". What kind of person draws a conclusion about somebody's language ability based on typos?
I can't help but notice that rather than respond to my point.[/quote]
I can forgive typos and I make them myself, but my posts aren't riddled with them, nor are my points poorly written. Not only do you have typos, but your posts show an overall lack of effort both in composition and in content. Frankly, I find it more disrespectful than the insults I'm leveling at you. But since you put up the dick fingers around "english," are you implying that there's something wrong with my writing?

[quote]Rather than ask yourself the question "if are society is so male biased why are men more likely to be homeless?", "why is the justice system different?",
you decided to go ad hominem.[/quote]
Are you implying that having more homeless men than women means that we don't live in a patriarchy? Cause if you are, you're damn right I'm going to call you a dumb motherfucking Fuck.

[quote]What patience? You seem far more interested in insults than discussion, and whenever any facts come up that fly in the face of your world view you go off on some tangent. You've practically admitted that you have no interest in understanding others.
Spoiler
[/QUOTE]
WHAT FUCKING FACTS? Every reputable study done for the last 20+ years in the social sciences refutes your conclusions. All your conclusions revolve around outliers and no amount of "facts" change that.

Just fucking put me on ignore and tell me to Fuck off, so we can be done with this. You haven't contributed anything of value.

Edited by dohdough, 21 November 2012 - 11:12 AM.


#2245 Thekrakrabbit

Thekrakrabbit

    Is Making A Comeback!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 21 November 2012 - 06:17 PM

Holy quotes!

Check out @RealKrakrabbit - Twitter Page Full of News, Tidbits, etc., etc.

 

Also looking to make trades/sells to anyone who is interested. Check out my tradelist! :grouphug:


#2246 itachiitachi

itachiitachi

Posted 22 November 2012 - 06:56 AM

[quote name='dohdough']
They're both relevant and can't exist without another especially in the modern day US. You can't remove all context from how racism exists in the US and assume that different racial groups experience racism the same way or were treated the same while saying one group "overcame" it and others didn't. Your analysis of my argument and racism, in general, are woefully superficial..[/QUOTE]
Perhaps you are unaware that overcoming something does not mean you have to destroy it.

[quote name='dohdough']
There are loads of seemingly non-racist sentiment that has a foundation in racist attitudes and racism does not require hate, but the implied inferiority of non-white groups. Holding up Asians as model minorities is racist in nature because it serves the narrative of the inferiority of other racial groups as well as a way to deny resources to that group. The fact that some Asians "made it" doesn't mean that they've "overcome" racism as a group when most still face serious discrimination. [/QUOTE]
Well I'm referring to the sub groups of Asian who have made it. Nowhere did I argue that recourses should be denied to minorities, just that they should be distributed more efficiently.


[quote name='dohdough']Would you say black people overcame racism because Obama got elected president or that any black kid could be president because he was elected? Of course not because that would be so stupid as to not need an explanation.[/QUOTE]
No, you would say Obama overcame racism to become president.

[quote name='dohdough']
It IS your fault because the terms are NOT interchangeable in the way you used it in that sentence as it means a VERY specific thing. When you say there are more Asians entering college than there are Asian Americans in high school, it means that there are more foreign born Asians entering college than US born Asians in high school. The two terms have very distinct meaning in that context and like I said, it was my fault for thinking you knew what you were talking about. You also dropped that line without any explanation or context. When I say Asian, I imply Asian Americans and am consistent with my usage. If I said that there were more Africans entering college than there are African Americans in high school, how the file:///C:\Users\OverLord\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\03\clip_image001.gifwould you interpret that?[/QUOTE]
When I said Asian I also implied Asian American, why is that so hard for you to grasp?

[quote name='dohdough']
Well why the file:///C:\Users\OverLord\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\03\clip_image001.gifdid you post that statistic when it implies that they are grossly overrepresented and keep defending it instead of clarifying? How many times have I addressed it since you brought it up? GTFO with that bullshit.[/QUOTE]
Stating that the percentage of Asians in college is greater that then percentage of the Asian population does not imply that they are "grossly over represented". I don't know why you feel the need label my fact with a hyperbolic value judgment.

[quote name='dohdough']
What the motherfile:///C:\Users\OverLord\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\03\clip_image001.gif??? Asians haven't even come close to overcoming racism according to your own goddamn metric! How many Asian leading men are there in Hollywood? How many CEO's that are members of the Fortune 500 are Asian? How many goddamn Asians are in the US Congress? Gangnam Style being played on the radio doesn't mean that Asians have overcome racism when most talented artists can't get any exposure.[/QUOTE]
The answers to those question depend on 1. How many Asians pursue carriers in Politics, congress, or as CEO's and if those numbers are affected by pressure from their community or outside their community. 2. How does the average Asian in those field compare to the average member of those fields.


[quote name='dohdough']
I did. You're just too dumb to figure out how. [/QUOTE]
Which is why you decided to post an insult rather than contribute something of value?

[quote name='dohdough']
Bull-file:///C:\Users\OverLord\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\03\clip_image001.gifing-shit. Most studies conclude that non-white enrollments tend to drop as a percentage of the student body and graduation rates drop as well, of which both statistics get worse as you move up the chain to more selective schools. States that have affirmative action bans have also seen a drop in graduate programs. The fact that the UC system has an Asian "problem" is not emblematic of the most likely nationwide trend if affirmative action was banned in the US for college admissions.[/QUOTE]
Graduation rate for at risk minorities increase after banning of affirmative action.
http://www.nber.org/papers/w18523

[quote name='dohdough']
Are you seriously implying that a rich black man can't experience racism in the US? And yes, black is accurate because racism tends to happen before someone even opens their mouth. The social construct of "black" is well defined. You don't have to say anything to be followed around a store as if you might be a thief or be pulled over for Driving While Black. [/QUOTE]
I'm saying he is unlikely to miss out on opportunities.


[quote name='dohdough']
What the file:///C:\Users\OverLord\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\03\clip_image001.gif? Are you for real? Did you NOT see the kind of crazy that came out of the Republican presidential primaries? How the hell would we institute a program that more effectively lifts more people out of poverty if we're had a hard enough problem getting people increased access to healthcare?[/QUOTE]
Such problems have already been implemented. National partisan extremisms has nothing to do with what measure states are allowed to take.

[quote name='dohdough']
And affirmative action doesn't hide the problem and acknowledges it directly because socio-economic mobility has hit the non-white population the hardest.[/QUOTE]
Which is why it helps the minorities with the least socio-economic mobility the least?


[quote name='dohdough']
It's a special program because most of the programs we've had has either excluded them and/or not sufficient to address the needs of those groups. How many times do I have to tell you the purpose of affirmative action works until it sinks into your thick skull?[/QUOTE]
Because repeating something makes it true? How about some data showing improved socio-economic mobility for those benefiting from normal affirmative action vs those benefiting from economical affirmative action .



[quote name='dohdough']
So.file:///C:\Users\OverLord\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\03\clip_image001.gifing.what. This refutes my point about kids with educated parents having better outcomes how? [/QUOTE]
It demonstrates my point that second generation immigrants earn more, than first generation immigrants.
[quote name='dohdough']
Are you shitting me? STEM has been one of the worse fields for women in terms of wage, advancement, and professional climate since forever. Even then, that does not refute my point about wage disparity as an overall demographic. You need to learn what an outlier is.[/QUOTE]
You need to learn to not straw man, I never said outliers represented the whole group, I was just pointing out that they existed despite your implied assertions otherwise.

[quote name='dohdough']
It must be too hard because because your assertion that there's not only parity, but implied disparity in which women make more overall is complete bullshit. If that was reality, why the file:///C:\Users\OverLord\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\03\clip_image001.gifwould "equal pay for equal work" be such a huge campaign slogan for the past few months and why would we need the Ledbetter Act?[/QUOTE]
Is it surprising that groups care more about what helps them, than what is fair or true?
Remember the shit storm over that penny arcade "rape comic", how do you think feminist would react to someone who publish such data? High profile people have lost their jobs for less.

[quote name='dohdough']
file:///C:\Users\OverLord\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\03\clip_image001.gif, do you even realize how dumb #1 is in relation to your point about me being intellectually incurious and having selection bias? Do you even know what those terms mean? [/QUOTE]
Again an insult rather than answering the question.


[quote name='dohdough']
Did you not understand what I said? Cause that's what it looks like.
[/QUOTE]
What you said is different from what you do.

[quote name='dohdough']
I can forgive typos and I make them myself, but my posts aren't riddled with them, nor are my points poorly written. Not only do you have typos, but your posts show an overall lack of effort both in composition and in content. Frankly, I find it more disrespectful than the insults I'm leveling at you. But since you put up the dick fingers around "english," are you implying that there's something wrong with my writing?[/QUOTE]
You didn't capitalize a proper noun. You have also made multiple typos in this post as well.

[quote name='dohdough']
Are you implying that having more homeless men than women means that we don't live in a patriarchy? Cause if you are, you're damn right I'm going to call you a dumb motherfile:///C:\Users\OverLord\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\03\clip_image001.gifing file:///C:\Users\OverLord\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\03\clip_image001.gif. [/QUOTE]
I'm asking if we live in a society that favors men so much, then why are more men homeless?
Why do you continually avoid the question rather than answer it?

[quote name='dohdough']
WHAT FUCKING FACTS? Every reputable study done for the last 20+ years in the social sciences refutes your conclusions. All your conclusions revolve around outliers and no amount of "facts" change that.[/QUOTE]

More homeless men than women, percentage of Asians in college vs population, 1st generation pay vs 2nd generation pay, ect...
Do you even now what my conclusion is?


[quote name='dohdough']
Just file:///C:\Users\OverLord\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\03\clip_image001.gifing put me on ignore and tell me to file:///C:\Users\OverLord\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtml1\03\clip_image001.gifoff, so we can be done with this. You haven't contributed anything of value.[/QUOTE]
Funny being I'm the only one who has provided links and stats.

Forgive me if I have a little nuance to my worldview, and am not a black/white ideologue who can't grasp complexity.

 

This is perhaps the most ironic thing I have ever seen on CAG.

 

#2247 dohdough

dohdough

    Sum Dum Guy

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 22 November 2012 - 10:35 AM

[quote name='itachiitachi']Perhaps you are unaware that overcoming something does not mean you have to destroy it.

Well I'm referring to the sub groups of Asian who have made it. Nowhere did I argue that recourses should be denied to minorities, just that they should be distributed more efficiently.

No, you would say Obama overcame racism to become president.[/QUOTE]
If Obama isn't representative of all black people, then those Asians that "overcame" racism don't represent all Asians as a group.

[quote]When I said Asian I also implied Asian American, why is that so hard for you to grasp?[/quote]Look. I'm telling you for the nth time that the way you worded it specifically means something other than what you "implied." Be pissed at yourself for being careless. Be clear or be gone.

[quote]Stating that the percentage of Asians in college is greater that then percentage of the Asian population does not imply that they are "grossly over represented". I don't know why you feel the need label my fact with a hyperbolic value judgment.[/quote]That is not your original "fact" and this is maybe the 5th time you've mentioned something of this nature in reference to me stating that they're not grossly overrepresented in higher ed. If you agree with me, then drop it. If you don't, then make your fucking point instead of having me play guessing games because I'm tired of your passive aggressive bullshit.

[quote]The answers to those question depend on 1. How many Asians pursue carriers in Politics, congress, or as CEO's and if those numbers are affected by pressure from their community or outside their community. 2. How does the average Asian in those field compare to the average member of those fields.[/quote]The answers to those questions are that there are no Asian leading men in Hollywood, 9 CEO's in the Fortune 500, and 13 members in both houses of Congress. Again, if those people "overcame" racism and they are outliers, then Asians, as a group, cannot have overcome racism.

[quote]Which is why you decided to post an insult rather than contribute something of value?[/quote]I've already said many times that outcomes are determined more by the socio-economic status of parents rather than merely being generational. What you're asserting is completely at odds with the trends of socio-economic mobility of the US. Stating a fact without any explanation is meaningless and looks like your m.o.

[quote]Graduation rate for at risk minorities increase after banning of affirmative action.
http://www.nber.org/papers/w18523[/quote]The UC system is not representative of the US.

http://dailycollegia...rmative-action/

http://www.insidehig...ate-enrollments

[quote]I'm saying he is unlikely to miss out on opportunities.[/quote]And people of color, especially black and Latinos, were discriminated against by being given sub-prime mortgages despite qualifying for prime rates. Is not getting a low interest loan not missing an opportunity?

There was a study done several years ago regarding housing discrimination that showed that people with ethnic names were either flat out ignored or being directed towards ethnic enclaves despite being able to afford more affluent and white areas. Is not being able to live where one wants not a missed opportunity if one can afford it?

[quote]Such problems have already been implemented. National partisan extremisms has nothing to do with what measure states are allowed to take.[/quote]What the motherfuck are you talking about? At least a third of the states are actively trying to tear apart their social programs and you're trying to tell me that states can do whatever the Fuck they want as if partisan extremism we see on the national level doesn't exist on the state level?

A system is not a program, so stop mixing up the terms and stop trying to use terms to sound smart because you look like you don't know a goddamned thing.

[quote]Which is why it helps the minorities with the least socio-economic mobility the least?

Because repeating something makes it true? How about some data showing improved socio-economic mobility for those benefiting from normal affirmative action vs those benefiting from economical affirmative action.[/quote]Looks like I'm just going to keep repeating it because it IS true. Affirmative action is a program specifically targeted towards hiring practices and admissions in higher ed for people of color. That's it and as basic as I can make it. All your hemming and hawing about it not being a program that addresses all the social inequities of people of color is just wasted air if you can't understand what affirmative action is specifically instituted to address.

"Economic affirmative action" exists as tax subsidies, food stamps, welfare, housing subsidies, heathcare subsidies, loan subsidies, grants, and a whole mess of other things that again, aren't adequate enough or weren't given to address the needs of communities of color. Affirmative action is a goddamn bandaid, so stop acting like it is or should be a program to address every single problem experienced by (poor) people of color.

[quote]It demonstrates my point that second generation immigrants earn more, than first generation immigrants.[/quote]First off, what the Fuck is a second generation immigrant? Secondly, your point still doesn't refute mine, so why the Fuck are you treating it like it does? And thirdly, stop using terms incorrectly because it's annoying as Fuck to see you butcher them.

[quote]You need to learn to not straw man, I never said outliers represented the whole group, I was just pointing out that they existed despite your implied assertions otherwise.[/quote]That entire sentence is a goddamn strawman. You're (misre)presenting outliers as if they're significant and that their mere existence makes them statistically significant. I'm not even close to saying that they don't exist. So fucking what if women make more money in porn than men? Does that mean as a group, there isn't wage disparity between the sexes?

This is also the third time I've literally said that some women make more than men, which is the exact opposite of what you think I'm asserting.

[quote]Is it surprising that groups care more about what helps them, than what is fair or true?
Remember the shit storm over that penny arcade "rape comic", how do you think feminist would react to someone who publish such data? High profile people have lost their jobs for less.[/quote]Yeah, the fucking Economist has a feminist agenda!

http://www.economist...2012/04/focus-3

And the WSJ!

http://blogs.wsj.com...han-many-think/

And even the BLS!

http://www.bls.gov/o...ed_20110216.htm

You wouldn't know "fair and true" if it was curbstomping you.

[quote]Again an insult rather than answering the question.

What you said is different from what you do.[/quote]I DID answer it. The insult was for you not understanding it.

First you asked me why there were more homeless and incarcerated men than women, and when I sarcastically gave your interpretation, you fucking said that there were more homeless men than women as if it was a goddamn explanation! Like seriously???

[quote]You didn't capitalize a proper noun. You have also made multiple typos in this post as well.[/quote]The lower case "e" in "english" was intentional and rhetorical just like how I use a lower case "c" in "christian." But I challenge you to run that post through a goddamn spell checker to see how numerous they are. Here's a hint: they're not. If you want me to start pointing out every single error though, I can certainly start if you insist on picking on minutiae.

[quote]I'm asking if we live in a society that favors men so much, then why are more men homeless?
Why do you continually avoid the question rather than answer it?[/quote]Because you're asking a loaded fucking question that implies that society is not biased in favor of men. And for the record, I already answered it. Hell, you don't even answer your own goddamn questions! Turning a question into a statement isn't a fucking answer.

[quote]More homeless men than women, percentage of Asians in college vs population, 1st generation pay vs 2nd generation pay, ect...
Do you even now what my conclusion is?[/quote]It'd surprise me if it wasn't your question in the form of an answer. You've done this numerous times in numerous posts. But I have a crazy fucking idea, just make your fucking point. I know you have difficulty understanding, so "make your fucking point" means plainly state your conclusions.

[quote]Funny being I'm the only one who has provided links and stats.[/quote]Yeah, but I'm not the one strawman-ing, making false equivalencies, misusing terms, answering with reworded questions, using circular logic, and concern trolling amongst a few other things. One of your biggest offenses is high word count with low content. How the Fuck does that even happen unless you're a special kind of idiot?

#2248 cancerman1120

cancerman1120

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 22 November 2012 - 03:09 PM

This thread has taken on epic proportions.

#2249 EdRyder

EdRyder

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 22 November 2012 - 05:42 PM

Part of this whole discussion really sticks in my craw : That Men are more likely to be homeless than women is presented as a fact , but the reasons why are never explained.
1 , Its a indisputable fact that Women represent the highest percentage in poverty between the genders. They're more at risk for homelessness than men.
2. The reason why men make up the brunt of the homeless population can be explained in several factors. Men are more likely to be veterans. Men are the gender thats unlikely to seek help for substance abuse or mental health issues. Men are more likely to be felons.
And lastly , Women are more likely to engage in survival sex for housing

#2250 Temporaryscars

Temporaryscars

    Talks like a Dalek

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 23 November 2012 - 05:11 PM

A little belated, but happy Thanksgiving vs. forum!

Posted Image