You Know What’s Pretty Racist? Standards.

[Jeff]

How sad is this, police in some areas no longer need a degree to get a job just to get a certain type of person a job, hell lifeguards dont even know how to swim in some insistence's just so we may get certain folks jobs. This is the real problem in this country, give the job to who ever meets the requirements the best, forget about having certain colors or nationality's in these titles, the old saying, the best man/woman for the job still goes.



Chief of Police Bernadette DiPino of Sarasota, Florida is on a mission to recruit more minority officers and she isn’t shy about sharing her strategy. Chief DiPino’s department no longer requires new hires to hold an associate’s degree. From now on, a high school diploma or even a GED will suffice.
Because diversity. That’s why.
Do cops really need a college education? I can entertain for a moment the idea that they might not. Lawmen didn’t always need associate’s degrees, and I’m sure that there were plenty of good cops in the forties and fifties who had only high school diplomas. On the other hand, criminal justice degrees are supposed to teach aspiring cops something about citizens’ constitutional rights, which some cops could use a dose more of, not less. Yet the value of a two year degree was not in question until the department determined that it was a stumbling block to minority applicants who always seem to need some hand-holding to get over the finish line. Don’t blame me for saying it, blame Chief DiPino for implying that minority applicants can’t meet the same standards as everyone else.





http://patriotupdate.com/articles/you-know-whats-pretty-racist-standards/

[fj1200]

... give the job to who ever meets the requirements the best...

Well the issue would be are the requirements set purposefully to ensure that minorities are not eligible (which I doubt currently but possibly historically) or are they set to high in the first place (which is arguable). Either way the civil rights question is whether there is discrimination by disparate impact (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disparate_impact).

[tailfins]

The way I have seen this play out in practice is that standards get lowered, then someone in management decides that those lowered standards can be met for half price with an H1B Visa holder. I presume someone from India could meet Affirmative Action guidelines. If they don't an H1B Visa could be issued to someone from Nigeria or Kenya if the person hired MUST be black.

[Jeff]

Well the issue would be are the requirements set purposefully to ensure that minorities are not eligible (which I doubt currently but possibly historically) or are they set to high in the first place (which is arguable). Either way the civil rights question is whether there is discrimination by disparate impact (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disparate_impact).

In some cases yes they may have been set to high but if you read the article this is one that got me.


In North Miami, Florida, the police department abandoned its swimming test in 2004 because black applicants couldn’t pass it. Swimming is raaaaacist! Like all standards destined to be abandoned, the swimming test was uncontroversial until a push for diversity made people question its necessity. Suddenly it became a silly requirement with no practical application to police work, something like knowing how to juggle or ride a unicycle. There’s just one problem—a police officer, in the course of his duties, might someday have the swim. He might have to, oh I don’t know, rescue someone from drowning.
Once we’ve accepted that cops don’t really need to know how to swim, it’s only a short mental hop to the idea that lifeguards don’t either. Yes, lifeguards. In 2013, the city of Phoenix decided that it needed more minority lifeguards at its city pools. “The kids in the pool are all either Hispanic or black or whatever, and every lifeguard is white and we don’t like that,” said a Phoenix official. Geez, no racism there. She added that “the kids don’t relate; there’s language issues.”




fj it is just like lowering standards for school testing, that helps no one, no matter your color or ethic background you should be able to learn just like the kid next to you, yes I know in some cases there is a language barrier but lowering the standards for them isn't going to help that either.

[fj1200]

^He certainly isn't the first to identify the bigotry of lowered expectations.

[Perianne]

Even more racism.

Ethnic Minorities Deserve Safe Spaces Without White People
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/aeman-ansari/ethnic-safe-spaces_b_6897176.html

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Well the issue would be are the requirements set purposefully to ensure that minorities are not eligible (which I doubt currently but possibly historically) or are they set to high in the first place (which is arguable). Either way the civil rights question is whether there is discrimination by disparate impact (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disparate_impact).

A conservative would say--hire the best and most qualified person for the job..
Why am I not shocked that you didn't go with that ?
Instead you put out that goobly-gook..:laugh:---Tyr

[Kathianne]

There were times, not so long ago that rules were in play to keep groups out of jobs, housing, public services based upon race, sex, and to lesser degree, (or at least not as widespread regarding time periods), on religious beliefs. I think most people of good will today will say that was wrong.

Over time however, things have changed. Some of the changes were 'forced' by the courts and punishments laid out; more however was by changes over time, a lowering of prejudice held by many. That's not to say that all forms of prejudice are gone, nor all forms of discrimination-one is of thought process, the other is demonstrated by actions. Laws, rules, etc., can only be aimed at the later.

IMO the lowering of standards and quotas, while at some point in time a reasonable way to address discrimination, have not only created instances of reverse discrimination, but also an unfair perception of lower ability projected unto qualified persons that are perceived as holding positions or qualifications that aren't 'up to snuff.'

Take the simple example of 'lifeguards' cited, whether or not true. Years ago, both in the north and south, many poor kids of all races did not have access to swimming pools, much less lessons. No surprise, they didn't learn to swim if they didn't happen to live by a swimming hole or other venues.

My mom never went 'swimming' until in her late 20's. They couldn't afford the public pools and though Lake Michigan was less than 10 miles away, it might has well have been the Atlantic or Pacific. Black kids were prohibited from the same pools she couldn't afford-though some neighborhoods had 'black pools.' She never ventured into water over her head without a life vest.

Needless to say, my folks made sure my brother and I had swim lessons from the time we were little. Both of us were Red Cross Certified Lifeguards by 12 or 13.

I wouldn't want non-swimmers being 'guarded' by lifeguards that couldn't swim or perform CPR. Sure they could be taught to intervene/warn about 'unsafe' behaviors by patrons, but they could not deal with the events that occur in pools in the time available to find someone qualified to rescue.

Another example of lowering standards would be in military/first responders. These areas have positions where strength and endurance are absolutely necessary. For these positions, certain requirements/standards are only commonsense. That those standards have been lowered to meet quotas is really illogical, yet there is little doubt that such has been implemented. Again, the lowering of standards has resulted in the perception of those holding the positions being less than qualified than in the past, though some of the 'beneficiaries' of the programs, could have qualified under the old standards.

I've no problem in reviewing standards that may be discriminatory for reasons of eliminating qualified persons based upon race or other prejudices. I'm not in favor of eliminating standards that exist for performance of the position, even if the results discriminate against those that are physically, intellectually, or mentally not qualified for the position. Indeed that would be the justification for the standards.

[fj1200]

A conservative would say--hire the best and most qualified person for the job..
Why am I not shocked that you didn't go with that ?
Instead you put out that goobly-gook..:laugh:---Tyr

:facepalm99: An educated individual knows what the issues are; Why am I not shocked you don't understand that? A conservative (i.e. a small government advocate) would insist that one shouldn't use the power of the state to limit access to opportunity.

Do you have anything of substance to add or do you want to try the gotcha game?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

:facepalm99: An educated individual knows what the issues are; Why am I not shocked you don't understand that? A conservative (i.e. a small government advocate) would insist that one shouldn't use the power of the state to limit access to opportunity.

Do you have anything of substance to add or do you want to try the gotcha game?

I see, so you feel it is a gotcha comment.. Amazing admission amigo, since it is a self-indictment to say the least.

Now Hoss, do explain what it is that I fail to understand. As you made that accusation to try to re-enforce your attitude of intellectual superiority.
My comment was indeed about character while your comment represents you attitude of being intellectually my superior which is utter rubbish.

I've got news for you hoss, this ole Southern man , sho' aint no dummy.
Your problem is that I see far too clearly the game you play here and your true political character..-Tyr

[tailfins]

A conservative would say--hire the best and most qualified person for the job..
Why am I not shocked that you didn't go with that ?
Instead you put out that goobly-gook..:laugh:---Tyr

Now I see that you're anti-Asian! For shame!

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Now I see that you're anti-Asian! For shame!Thursday, October 15, 2009





Goobly Gook and The Ewing Theory Analogy



Today I went through the entire day of lecture without thinking that anything I learned was all that interesting or useful.

Instead of memorizing who was Zeus' dad or Poseidon's roman name, what Longinus thought about poetry or what sublimity was, or the historical/economical breakdown of China through the last 5 centuries... two completely different thoughts that randomly popped in my head today.

1. Goobly Gook. Used in the context today, to mean 'absolute gibberish.' My question is... who decided on goobly gook to mean that?! Literally anything at all could be an example of gibberish, yet people usually know what you mean with "goobly gook". Why not... woombaja hoobamja?




.
Goobly Gook. Used in the context today, to mean 'absolute gibberish.'

Now was it a racist oriented mind that separated the word "gook" to tag me with?
If I say I hate horseradish are you going to now call me a horse hater?the word ?
Words have meanings, lets not try to mix the meanings up by division or out of context separations..---Tyr

Now shoot me for not caring to use the word gibberish. :laugh:

[tailfins]

Thursday, October 15, 2009








.

Now was it a racist oriented mind that separated the word "gook" to tag me with?
If I say I hate horseradish are you going to now call me a horse hater?the word ?
Words have meanings, lets not try to mix the meanings up by division or out of context separations..---Tyr

Now shoot me for not caring to use the word gibberish. :laugh:

You make this way too much fun. And I bet you do hate horses and puppies too!

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

You make this way too much fun. And I bet you do hate horses and puppies too!

Children's minds are easy occupied and kept amused by simple things I guess.
If it brings you such a thrill , have at it..-Tyr

[tailfins]

Children's minds are easy occupied and kept amused by simple things I guess.
If it brings you such a thrill , have at it..-Tyr

Simple things do amuse me. That's why your mind is a regular Mardi Gras.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

You make this way too much fun. And I bet you do hate horses and puppies too!

Thanks for proving it yet again..
If you think it upsets me you are insane.
I just like to point out the weaknesses, follies and mistakes of others that are so arrogant about their supposed magnificent capabilities.

I hate catnip too.. watermelon, and hotdogs... :laugh:

Childish fun you like so HAVE AT IT...--Tyr

[fj1200]

I see, so you feel it is a gotcha comment.. Amazing admission amigo, since it is a self-indictment to say the least.

Now Hoss, do explain what it is that I fail to understand. As you made that accusation to try to re-enforce your attitude of intellectual superiority.
My comment was indeed about character while your comment represents you attitude of being intellectually my superior which is utter rubbish.

I've got news for you hoss, this ole Southern man , sho' aint no dummy.
Your problem is that I see far too clearly the game you play here and your true political character..-Tyr

I don't feel it's a gotcha comment I know you tried a gotcha comment because I can read.


Why am I not shocked that you didn't go with that ?

The only thing I admit to is that I can see your comments coming a mile away. But I must admit that you can't reconcile your last paragraph; you blather on about you not being dumb yet you see games that don't exist. It would be helpful if you would discuss issues rather than attempting gotchas.