A clown world.

submitted by [deleted] from (i.imgur.com)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Yayme 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (32 children)

So, if you're going to talk about this, you have to talk about affirmative action. Which is really what this is. Do you think affirmative action is a bad thing?

I guess I personally don't. I mean, I have benefited from it. I am a small business owner, and I contract with major corporations and government agencies. They are required by law to have a diverse supply chain (if they're a tier 1 government supplier or a government agency.)

And the truth is, it's hard to break in to the "Old Boy's Network" of corporate contracting. I guess I'm fortunate enough in that my line of work is similar to accounting, so men do typically view it as "women's work." But it was still hard as hell to get to a point where my business was operating under it's own momentum, and I wasn't always struggling to prove that I know what I'm talking about when I'm pushing back against a man in the industry.

And I realize that doing it "blind" is suppose to remove all bias. But should we allow for some bias? And I'm honestly pretty skeptical that even when judging "blind" the judges don't know who the person playing is. Don't they all sort of have their own flavor? Like when the judges on Ink Master judge blind, they all sort of know who did the tattoo. I would assume the judges will know who is auditing, and will try to guess, and in some instances can guess.

[–]quickbeam 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

I agree partly with you in that affirmative action makes up for generational wealth gaps which are often heavily associated with race/ethnicity in the U.S. I think that an even better way to deal with these wealth gaps would be through raising the minimum wage to a living wage, raising taxes on the wealthiest to 50's or 60's levels and redistributing that money to social programs, and getting everyone Medicare For All. The reason there are probably more white musicians is that more well-off kids will have more time to practice and more money for tutors or music camps, etc. That's pretty hard to bridge unless we start looking at income/wealth inequality in the country as a root cause.

[–]Hard_headed_woman 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

Actually, there are a lot of Asian-American musicians who came from quite meager backgrounds. It's not just a money issue, and these kids were excelling. :) They valued the music, they had talent, AND they worked their asses off. :) It's pretty easy to see when you have kids in high school music programs.

[–]Shinjin_Nana 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Hush. No one wants to hear about the Asians succeeding as a minority /s

It's because their families value education and teach their kids to value it too. I live in the sunset and every commercial block has at least one tutoring or art school and is full of small asian owned businesses. The parents work their butts off so their kids can go to college and get a high paying techie, doctor, or lawyer job and this starts the process of creating generational wealth.

Social programs to stop people from being destitute is a good thing, but you need the work ethic to prevent those handouts from becoming a culture of dependency.

[–]WrongToy 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

The Sunset's typical home value is over a million dollars now. Let's not pretend they are all Horatio Alger stories free of racism themselves. You live there so you know what the attitude is toward Lowell. It's like people's mission to get their kid into Lowell and that's often what they care about more than their kid's mental health.

Asians are just OTHER PEOPLE. They are not more inclined toward mechanical engineering, or medicine, or Big Tech, or anything else. Their culture can be insane on kids.

[–]Shinjin_Nana 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Home value isn't always derivative of personal wealth. If you bought the home before the spike you would have to sell it to see that wealth as liquidity to reinvest in other things. That wealth only exist once it is cashed out, much like stocks.

There's a popup food bank across from where I live and there are plenty of people there of all ages and stripes. My own landlord sends his wife a couple times a week and their house is definitely over a million.

There's no such thing as being free of racism. The Asians here thrive to spite it. When white businesses wouldn't serve them, such as banks, they made their own banks, their own green grocers etc. They saw these things as business opportunities. You don't have to live in some anti-racism scrubbed utopia to find your way to wealth.

"Asians are just other people, not inclined toward... etc" So is everyone else. Why bother talking about ethnic groups, sex classes, or wealth classes if this is the case. So everyone is an individual who should rise and fall based on individual traits, and the culture that raised them plays no part?

[–]WrongToy 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

If you own in the Sunset you have multimillion dollar options. Sorry, but that's the way it is. Sure you can not be taking in income, but then you have the option of a second mortgage or reverse mortgage.

There hasn't been anti-Asian financial discrimination in SF, and especially the Sunset, for the past half century. Well, unless you count Lowell. And that got consent decreed so that Chinese Americans had less of an advantage than say, Filipinos or APIs.

A lot of Asian culture is INSANE. Let's face it, very few can be the best but Asians drive and drive their kids to the brink of mental health issues and sometimes suicide over not living up to their insane standards. Lowell. Cal. Julliard. Whatever they can brag about to their other friends.

[–]Shinjin_Nana 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Now you're pretending that their good sense to buy up most of San Francisco when it was cheap just popped out of nowhere. Also a second mortgage is not wealth. It's debt.

Of course there isn't financial discrimination against Asians. They have no fewer than three Asian focused banks here (East-West, Bank of the West, and Bank of the Orient, which was the first), build by Asians for Asians. Here's more information about Chinese banking on the West coast: https://imdiversity.com/villages/asian/a-history-of-chinese-american-banking-in-los-angeles/

They knew they were financially underserved and didn't wait for old ytee to fix it for them, and there is generational wealth because of it. It became their business and the business they passed down to their children.

We were talking about how to build generational wealth, not mental health issues. I'd rather drive a kid crazy trying to get into a good school then having them shot on the street playing gangsta. But, pick your poison, I guess.

[–]WrongToy 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

The multimillion-dollar asset still stands. Yes it's debt against your house. You are milking it BUT you have it. I'm not a big believer in generational wealth and I'm not a big believer in torturing children either over status either. Maybe some of them are JUST HAPPIER going into skilled trades, haircutting or having a liquor store or working for UPS or driving Uber.

Those are just as valid careers as being a bank consultant, or a doctor, or a lawyer or whatever. Besides the doctors, I'd say they've been less necessary recently than the above.

[–]Shinjin_Nana 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

But it's just an asset that can as easily be devalued as it can be milked. It's not actual liquid wealth until it's sold.

Well, if you don't believe in generational wealth, or think that valuing education and getting a kid into a good school is just for status, then I don't know why we're bothering to discuss this at all.

I work as a self-employed freelance artist and know that being poor (18-20k annual gross) and happy (and loaded with student loans lulz) is a thing, it's my lived reality. BUT I also understand that it's a privilege of the family and culture that raised me and I rely on peace in the neighborhood that I choose to inhabit.

I can be poor and happy in a low crime area because others before me have made it possible.

You're trying to skip that intermediary step that stabilizes the home environment and I think at this point you're mixing generalities and race/class disparities with individual goals and pursuits and it is not adding to the discussion.

I have nothing more to say on this.

[–]quickbeam 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

If these Asian American students had come from richer backgrounds, they'd be even better. And having parents who support your ability to play music is also an institutional advantage. So I do think we should be doing more to make a more equitable society where students without economic advantages or supportive families could potentially become musicians. Nothing wrong with that.

[–]Hard_headed_woman 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Unless you plan on raising kids in orphanages, the family and the immediate community will always have a strong influence on children. How do you expect to get a child to practice the violin 5 hours a day without parental involvement? Social programs are supposed to be safety nets to protect families when they fall. They don't and never will replace actual families. That might suck, but it is the reality.

[–]quickbeam 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Are you aware that many families are unable to support their kids emotionally because they have to work 2-3 jobs just to make ends meet? A lot of people can't afford a violin, period. And schools are unequally funded by property taxes instead of using some more equitable means. What we do on an economic basis absolutely affects the ability of families to support their children emotionally and artistically.

[–]Realwoman 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think funding schools through property taxes is an abomination. Kids should have access to quality schools no matter where their parents live. And for high school/middle school even, it might be a good idea to separate schools based on achievement, with entry tests. That's how it where I grew up and it was such a relief to finally be surrounded by other motivated students, not have the unmotivated/lazy students drag down everyone.

[–]DimDroog 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

And some parents don't support their kids emotionally b/c they are screwed up themselves.

What do we do then?

My folks were like that.

[–]quickbeam 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I would say that we need to provide the best community resources we can to make up for bad parenting whenever possible. A lot of schools don't even have music classes or teachers anymore because of funding issues.

[–]Realwoman 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There's no institution that makes parents support their kids playing music. Did you mean cultural advantage?

[–]Realwoman 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yep, when it comes to kids, there needs to be enforced equality, so that if the kid is smart/talented /hardworking she can succeed no matter what her background is, and if she's lazy, she doesn't get special privileges thanks to her rich parents.

[–]oofreesouloo 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

And I'm honestly pretty skeptical that even when judging "blind" the judges don't know who the person playing is.

As a former professional musician (I'm changing career path now), no, they don't usually know who the person playing is. Usually, there are LOADS of people doing auditions and the competiton is fierce and if it's orchestral auditions, we're all playing exactly the same excerpts (according to our instrument). When it reaches a professional and high level, it can make it really hard to guess who is playing what. We, for sure, don't play all the same, and yes, we all do have some uniqueness that makes us "characteristic". Heck, even the fact that we have different instruments from different luthiers makes our sound different from each other. But in professional auditions, ESPECIALLY for orchestral auditions, you REALLY need to respect what the score tells you to do, meaning there's not that many space for interpretation. There are SOME cases in which it IS unfair and the judges know BEFOREHAND that X or Y person will compete and are expecting to hear that person. But they know it beforehand or look at the candidate information. Basically, it can be possible to guess, but it's not that easy at all as you seem to imply.

NOTE: This is based on my personal experience and country.

[–]Realwoman 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

I personally don't support affirmative action, it think it makes people resentful. It could be useful in some situations as an initial boost, when it's about interest representation more than merit (for instance, lawmakers). But in general, I'm against it.

[–]Yayme 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

And that's fair enough.. but I'll be honest, people being resentful would never be enough reason to persuade me to be for or against anything.

People will always be resentful. If you could say that it doesn't help the people it's targeted to help, or show how it's not necessary (not you specifically, just people who are against it in general) then I might be persuaded to change my mind. But resentful people are going to resent. And, I would wonder if they have my best interests in mind if they're so resentful of institutions trying to level the playing field a little.

[–]Realwoman 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I don't think it helps minorities either. People will not respect someone from a minority or an oppressed class if there are rumors that they only got the job/university entry thanks to their ethnicity or sex. It slows down equality and perpetuates stereotypes. Also, if you need certain skills in order to do something, then it makes sense to do hiring based on merit alone and try to either have objective criteria (test scores for example) or blind the judges in some way.

Also, it's important to address the reasons disparities in achievement exist and try to fix those. It's important to give kids equal opportunities, no matter what their parents' background is. It's important that kids have access to educational opportunities independent of their parent's income or neighborhood. And that they don't end up in debt for persuinh that same education.

But when it comes to hiring and university admissions, merit should be the only criteria. I don't want my doctor to have been admitted to medical school only thanks to to his ethnicity, with lower scores than others that were not admitted.

[–]Yayme 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Again, I'm not worried about people "respecting me" so that argument carries no weight with me. I don't care if someone I beat out on a job "respects me." I'm worried about being successful.

I agree that addressing disparities would be a much better solution.

Just because someone gets admitted to college because of preferential treatment doesn't mean they get to graduate, so the doctor argument seems invalid. too.

Again, I feel that anyone arguing against affirmative action, which has benefited me, doesn't really have MY best interests at heart, so I'm not really going to care what they say. BUT, I 100% agree that it would be better to address these issues at the root, rather than way on down the line, like we do now.

[–]Realwoman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I meant, respect the group as a whole.

And of course that there are competing interests when it comes to limited resources. In a competition, some lose, some win. I don't have transwomen's best interest at heart when I don't want them to compete against actual women in sports. I don't have the interests of low performers at heart when I want high performers to get the privilege they're applying for and that they deserve.

I don't see how the doctor argument is invalid at all. So if that person is admitted and doesn't graduate, she just wasted resources and time that could have been used for someone more capable that can graduate and can become a doctor.

[–]Yayme 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I don't see how the doctor argument is invalid at all. So if that person is admitted and doesn't graduate, she just wasted resources and time that could have been used for someone more capable that can graduate and can become a doctor.

is not the same thing as

I don't want my doctor to have been admitted to medical school only thanks to to his ethnicity, with lower scores than others that were not admitted.

I don't have the interests of low performers at heart when I want high performers to get the privilege they're applying for and that they deserve.

And maybe AA is outdated, maybe we have made enough progress where it's unnecessary. But it doesn't really seem like it from where I'm sitting.

And I think there's a difference between forcing people to give the chronically overlooked a chance, and forcing them to keep incompetent students/contractors/musicians. Except I guess maybe in Europe where they pretty much can't get rid of people for any reason.

[–]Realwoman 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I don't think we will agree, especially since you have a vested interest in affirmative action. The same way rich kids have a vested interest in college admissions taking donations into account when admitting students.

I don't understand your remark about Europe.

[–]Yayme 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don't think we will agree

Probably not fully. I can see where you're coming from - I get frustrated when an RFP in my wheelhouse is put out, but 100% set aside for disable veterans. But not frustrated enough to want to do away with AA altogether.

Can I ask - have you ever been impacted by AA at all? Either negative or positive, or do you just dislike it in theory?

[–]Realwoman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No, I haven't been impacted by it directly but I have the potential to benefit from it.

[–]ThisSiteIsUnusable 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You don't know what affirmative action is, do you?

[–]Realwoman 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Enlighten me