en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/3076160 Comments by cferryboat http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/30/week-8-%e2%80%93-lesson-14-affirmative-action/#IDComment170308072 I agree that someone getting a job because of nepotism is easier to understand than someone getting a job because of affirmative action; however, I actually believe nepotism is more harmful than affirmative action. When used effectively affirmative action really just evens out the playing field. I do not believe affirmative action holds or pulls those on top down; rather, it allows groups that were once marginalized have a chance to catch up to the group that has always been on top. I feel that nepotism is more damaging because it creates a sense of entitlement much more so than affirmative action. Although I cannot be sure, I would think people who have benefitted from nepotism would also be more likely to do subpar work because they believe they have greater job security. Of course it would be wonderful if everyone was judged solely based on his or her own merits, but this society is just too dependent on inequality. This country was made on inequality, and it continues to run on inequality. Wed, 6 Jul 2011 15:03:17 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/30/week-8-%e2%80%93-lesson-14-affirmative-action/#IDComment170308072 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/30/week-8-%e2%80%93-lesson-14-affirmative-action/#IDComment170302324 Part III My father works at a non-profit for adults with disabilities. One of his tasks is to go out into the community and look for jobs for these adults with disabilities. There are employers who set aside jobs for these kinds of individuals. This is affirmative action, but people with disabilities would most likely not be able to receive employment without it. I am glad Dr. Richards brought up the great similarities between nepotism and affirmative action. People never complain about nepotism until they have been passed over for a job or promotion because of it, but I always hear people complain about affirmative action even if they do not believe it did affect them directly. I thought Dr. Richards did a great job in discussing the different kinds of affirmative action and those that have benefitted from it (not usually people of color most commonly believed). Bottom line, affirmative action does not hold people down; it just evens out the playing field so others who have been historically marginalized have a chance to catch up. Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:39:25 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/30/week-8-%e2%80%93-lesson-14-affirmative-action/#IDComment170302324 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/30/week-8-%e2%80%93-lesson-14-affirmative-action/#IDComment170302101 Part II This is similar to the very loud complaints people have regarding welfare. Instead of the people who complain about welfare (typically middle class) going after the very wealthy who have created the huge economic gap between rich and poor, they go after the people who receive social benefits. Some in the middle class seem to think the working poor are pulling them down, and very few seem to see it is the wealthy that are really pushing them down. I believe the saying “don’t hate the player, hate the game” is totally applicable to these situations. The reason why we still need affirmative action is a structural one. As Dr. Richards mentioned, our society is inherently unequal. When people see an opportunity to move ahead of others, they will take advantage of it. Who is actually going to turn down an offer for a really decent job even if they know they did not earn it on merits alone? We have all benefitted from affirmative action, directly or indirectly, and anyone who does not believe that is in denial. Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:38:45 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/30/week-8-%e2%80%93-lesson-14-affirmative-action/#IDComment170302101 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/30/week-8-%e2%80%93-lesson-14-affirmative-action/#IDComment170301807 Part I From the time I had a very basic understanding of what affirmative action was, I supported it, and I definitely still do. I can absolutely understand people’s problem with the idea of affirmative action. I can understand that many people believe it is racism or sexism, and I do not think those that believe this are completely wrong; however, to say affirmative action is unfair is like saying it is not necessary because there is no prejudice. I do not know if the people who believe this are naïve or just bitter that someone who does not look like them got the job. This country was built on inequality, and it continues to run on inequality. White men have been at the top for the entire history of the United States, and I do not fully understand why so many of them choose to turn a blind eye to this fact. I suppose they believe that since they are not the ones responsible for the deep, deep racism or sexism that plagued the United States in the past that they should not be punished for their ancestors’ deeds. White men continue to be on top and continue to get jobs because of their race and gender, and I cannot imagine that stopping anytime soon. No one, people of color and women included, is taking away their jobs. Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:37:33 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/30/week-8-%e2%80%93-lesson-14-affirmative-action/#IDComment170301807 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-13-immigration/#IDComment169330585 Part III Hazleton is a fairly depressed area so I do know people who did not qualify for certain benefits, but some illegal immigrants did qualify and were able to receive benefits. Some of these immigrants do not pay taxes (they most likely get paid under the table for work), so this is a fair argument in some cases. However, I am glad Dr. Richards brought up an example of an illegal immigrant who received a (legally) legitimate paycheck where taxes were taken out yet will never be able to benefit from this because he is undocumented; he cannot receive social security when he gets older. Illegal immigrants are being exploited by corporations. Corporations want illegal immigrants because they are willing to work long hours with very poor conditions in exchange for very little pay. Workers are the only commodity in which a corporation can save money. They can add hours to the workday and cut wages, but they can only cut the costs of raw materials, machinery or utilities to run the corporation by so much; raw materials and such cannot be as easily negotiated with as workers can. Politicians are primarily on corporations’ payrolls so of course there is a stalemate regarding illegal immigrants. Citizens are fighting the wrong force. Sun, 3 Jul 2011 16:45:20 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-13-immigration/#IDComment169330585 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-13-immigration/#IDComment169330307 Part II I also think it is worth mentioning the mayor who proposed these laws, Lou Barletta, is now a congressman in Washington, D.C. His campaign was undoubtedly successful because of the donations that came from private citizens across the country. Although I cannot say this with great certainty, I would imagine that if a politician is running for office, particularly for the House of Representatives as Barletta was, this politician will not see too many donations from private citizens living in different states than the one the politician will be representing. It was documented, though, that a great portion of Barletta’s donations did in fact come from private citizens from all different states. This signals to me that illegal immigration is such a huge national concern, even to those who are probably not directly affected (but feel that they are somehow). The biggest (or at least loudest) attack on illegal immigrants that I hear either on the news or in line at a store in Hazleton is that they do not pay taxes yet still reap the benefits of the United States’ social programs. Sun, 3 Jul 2011 16:44:22 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-13-immigration/#IDComment169330307 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-13-immigration/#IDComment169328472 Part I I would be lying if I said I deeply understand the issue of immigration, particularly illegal immigration; however, I do have first-hand exposure to the great tension illegal immigration has caused, and continues to cause. I am from Hazleton. Truly the only reason why Hazleton might be on the map is due to our then-mayor’s staunch stand against illegal immigration. The mayor really took it upon himself to set up English-only laws and imposition of heavy fines to any landlords or business owners who rented to or hired illegal immigrants. These were all declared unconstitutional. There was such backlash at this declaration. The editorial section of the local newspaper was littered with letters regarding illegal immigrants, and none of them were even remotely positive. The issue was on the minds of people so much so that when I worked in retail, the (non-Hispanic) customers in the store would make random comments to me about Hispanics that were completely uncalled for. I never responded; I did not know how. I did not want to agree with them (because I don’t), nor did I want to disagree with them and start a debate with a customer. Sun, 3 Jul 2011 16:38:22 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-13-immigration/#IDComment169328472 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-13-immigration/#IDComment169313258 It is amazing at how much the entire world is run by less than 1 percent of its population. Corporations rule essentially every society. They have the money and the power. This is why there is such a legal stalemate regarding this issue. Corporations want illegal immigrants because they are willing to work long hours with very poor conditions in exchange for very little pay. Labor (i.e. humans) is the only commodity in which a corporation can save money. They can add hours to the workday and cut wages, but they can't really cut the costs of raw materials, machinery or utilities to run the corporation. Capitalism exploits workers, documented or undocumented, and they're getting away with it. People need work and wages, and the employers know this. Sun, 3 Jul 2011 15:28:06 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-13-immigration/#IDComment169313258 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-12-multiculturalism-lgbt/#IDComment167985539 Part I Although I genuinely liked every lecture thus far, I have to say my favorite was the one dealing with LGBT issues and rights. This is a subject in which I am personally interested. It never ceases to amaze me how there are still so many people who believe being gay is a choice and has nothing to do with biology. Being gay is the same as being straight, and no one seems to believe being straight is a choice. People cannot choose to whom they are attracted. Certainly people can sit down and make a list of preferable qualities they want in a partner, but they cannot sit down and think about to whom they are going to be attracted. It is absolutely true an individual can choose to be in a same-sex or different-sex relationship, but this is only a lifestyle choice, not a biological one. Dr. Richards explained that engaging in a sexual activity with someone of the same sex does not make a person gay, and he’s completely right. Wed, 29 Jun 2011 16:03:16 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-12-multiculturalism-lgbt/#IDComment167985539 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-12-multiculturalism-lgbt/#IDComment167985362 Part II As a straight woman, I could sleep with a woman, but I know I would not consider myself a lesbian; I am still straight. I have never met a woman to whom I am sexually attracted, and I certainly have not met a woman to with whom I could fall in love. I believe this is a similar experience to sleeping with a man to whom I am not attracted. It is possible, of course, to have sexual experiences with people with whom a person could never see themselves falling in love. I think this is key to being able to understand human sexuality and its complexities and fluidity. There are so many different kinds of relationships in existence: deep friendships, married straight couples, unmarried straight couples, couples in love, couples together for a green card, couples together for economic reasons, arranged marriages, deeply committed, casual etc. I just add gay couples to this list. It is just another form of relationship. I do not understand the big deal, at least to individuals who would not describe themselves as deeply religious. That is another important facet of the “gay debate.” Wed, 29 Jun 2011 16:02:46 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-12-multiculturalism-lgbt/#IDComment167985362 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-12-multiculturalism-lgbt/#IDComment167985045 Part III I wholly agree with Dr. Richards that the people who are very religious and very genuine about it are much less frightening and much more sympathetic figures than those who are probably less religious yet more fanatical. The genuinely religious follow exactly what their religion tells them to follow. There are no negotiations or compromises. If most believe an act is no longer sinful because it has become common practice, the genuinely religious will be the people who find this irrelevant. It won’t matter if it’s now acceptable by man; if God still finds it unacceptable, it is unacceptable. Being drunk is still sinful. Sex outside of marriage is still sinful. Adultery is still damnable. And they also believe homosexuality is sinful. That’s fine; that is their business, their beliefs. The people who are incredibly fanatical and judgmental are the people who believe God will forgive them for their sins, but He won’t forgive others for their sins. And it seems that homosexuals have been the chosen target for most sinful of all the sins. It seems, though, a sin is a sin, and God should be willing to forgive. Wed, 29 Jun 2011 16:01:57 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-12-multiculturalism-lgbt/#IDComment167985045 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-12-multiculturalism-lgbt/#IDComment167984744 Part IV There should not be any kind of picking and choosing what is worse; it seems that should not be for man. Let God decide what is unforgivable or damnable. I don’t know; it seems pretty egomaniacal for certain people to give themselves the power to damn others. People have to understand if they have a problem with gay people or any other group they find offensive it is their problem to deal with, not the problem of the hated group. Most people are living their lives not in defiance; they are not trying to anger or offend people. They just want to quietly exist and be recognized as legitimate humans who deserve the same rights afforded to others. To put it bluntly, gay people are not going out of their way to destroy this planet with their “immorality” or “overall grossness” (which I’ve actually heard as a legitimate reason to not grant gay people equal rights). If you believe they are then you need to ask yourself why you believe this and, most importantly, why you just can’t let go of the fact that they do indeed exist. Wed, 29 Jun 2011 16:01:13 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-12-multiculturalism-lgbt/#IDComment167984744 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-12-multiculturalism-lgbt/#IDComment167963735 In response to your belief that being gay is a choice, I can understand your argument. However, the choice you are describing a person making is more of a lifestyle choice, not a biological choice. People can't help who they are physically attracted to; they just naturally feel an attraction to someone. So while it is true they are choosing to be in a gay or straight relationship, they are not choosing to be biologically gay and attracted to people of the same sex. Just as Dr. Richards said having sex with a person of the same sex does not make you gay. As a straight woman, I can have a sexual relationship with a woman, but I'm still straight, just as I can have a sexual relationship with a man and not be attracted to him. People choose to enter relationships for many reasons: have kids, economic security, a green card, familial or religious pressure (which is why, I believe, a lot of gay people enter into straight relationships--denial because of religion or family). Being in love is not a prerequisite to get married or have sex. Wed, 29 Jun 2011 15:00:05 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/26/week-7-%e2%80%93-lesson-12-multiculturalism-lgbt/#IDComment167963735 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/22/week-6-%e2%80%93-lesson-10-stages-of-racial-identity-%e2%80%93-people-of-color-stages-1-4/#IDComment165972091 (Part III) I mean, if an individual consistently makes disparaging remarks against another group or believes another group is inherently inferior to them, can that be, and should that be, justified, or at least tolerated, because this individual may be in a certain stage? When is it truly fair to believe someone is a racist? Certainly there are racists out there that do not belong to an actual supremacy or hate group. And I absolutely include people of all races in this, not just whites and not just people of color. Again, I do not condone the quick labeling of someone as a racist (or homophobe or any other negative label), but I also do not believe in giving an individual a free pass for consistently treating others in an inferior manner just because this individual seemingly chooses to be ignorant. Thu, 23 Jun 2011 23:42:20 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/22/week-6-%e2%80%93-lesson-10-stages-of-racial-identity-%e2%80%93-people-of-color-stages-1-4/#IDComment165972091 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/22/week-6-%e2%80%93-lesson-10-stages-of-racial-identity-%e2%80%93-people-of-color-stages-1-4/#IDComment165971970 (Part II) The only point I take issue with is Dr. Richards’ hesitation in labeling something an act of racism. Now, I am a firm believer that political correctness has become such an obsessive concern and is entirely too prevalent in today’s society (and this is coming from a sensitive liberal who is in no way anti-political correctness), particularly when it comes to essentially labeling individuals as members of hate groups. Certainly some comments may be considered to be in poor taste or insensitive, and fairly too, but some people are just entirely too quick to place such a negative, damaging label on the people who were responsible for the comments. The reason I take issue with the hesitation on the labeling on Dr. Richards’ part, though, is there does not seem to be a line drawn between remarks made or actions done because an individual is in a particular stage or an individual really may be a racist. Thu, 23 Jun 2011 23:41:44 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/22/week-6-%e2%80%93-lesson-10-stages-of-racial-identity-%e2%80%93-people-of-color-stages-1-4/#IDComment165971970 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/22/week-6-%e2%80%93-lesson-10-stages-of-racial-identity-%e2%80%93-people-of-color-stages-1-4/#IDComment165971734 Every lecture I am amazed at how little I knew about myself and others, particularly on an issue as organic as race. I am white, and until last week, I do not believe I had truly considered my “whiteness” in relation to others in any deep way. Certainly I have been well aware I am white and have noticed quite some time ago that others are not white; however, I never really thought about the possibility of people of different races viewing and experiencing the world in a different way, which I now recognize as just so naïve. If individuals know they are not the majority, that they are the “them,” it will naturally influence the way they experience the world and move between the stages Dr. Richards mentioned. I thought his analogies of the fish and the amphibian were very effective in making my—and I’m sure others’—comprehension of the differences and the reasons for these differences between white people and people of color’s experiences and movement within the stages that much more clear and total. Thu, 23 Jun 2011 23:40:38 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/22/week-6-%e2%80%93-lesson-10-stages-of-racial-identity-%e2%80%93-people-of-color-stages-1-4/#IDComment165971734 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/22/week-6-%e2%80%93-lesson-10-stages-of-racial-identity-%e2%80%93-people-of-color-stages-1-4/#IDComment165801732 I totally agree about the effectiveness of the fish and amphibian analogies Dr. Richards used to begin his lectures. Looking at the characteristics of the stages and their progression, I believe I could have understood what Dr. Richards meant when he discussed the differences and the reasons for these differences between white people and people of color’s experiences and movement within the stages. However, the analogies made my comprehension of these issues come that much quicker and total. It is rare that I take a class that motivates me enough to share its curriculum with my friends and family, but this course has proven to be one of those rarities. Discussing these lectures with others who are not in the class, lectures that I truly believe contained some of the most invaluable information of a course that sets forth a great amount of incredibly relevant information, was aided a great deal by these analogies; they were able to understand as quickly as I was the reasons for the differences in experiences among people of various races. Thu, 23 Jun 2011 13:51:06 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/22/week-6-%e2%80%93-lesson-10-stages-of-racial-identity-%e2%80%93-people-of-color-stages-1-4/#IDComment165801732 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/07/week-5-%e2%80%93-lesson-9-stages-of-racial-identity-%e2%80%93-white-people-stages-3-4/#IDComment164280900 I totally agree that this country should have social programs that attempt to correct social injustices of the past, yet after watching the last two lectures, I am now believing that maybe these programs should not exist. I know the largest program that I personally agree with, yet many others do not, is affirmative action. Knowing the history of the United States, I believe this is a reasonable program that gives opportunities to individuals that may not have had them in the past, or do not have them now. However, affirmative action is fundamentally racist. It excludes people because of their race. I really am torn. On one hand, it does not seem fair to just ignore the grave injustices of the past. On the other hand, though, some of these programs are just continuously pointing out the fact that certain groups are not as resilient or self-reliant as other groups; they could never survive on their own. I do agree with Dr. Richards' assessment on white guilt: it is patronizing. Even after watching these lectures, I know I will still feel this guilt and support programs like affirmative action, but do these programs truly do more good than harm? I honestly do not know. Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:57:58 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/07/week-5-%e2%80%93-lesson-9-stages-of-racial-identity-%e2%80%93-white-people-stages-3-4/#IDComment164280900 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/07/week-5-%e2%80%93-lesson-9-stages-of-racial-identity-%e2%80%93-white-people-stages-3-4/#IDComment164277394 (cont.) When I actually write down the evident reasons I act this way, I see that I am being, in my own way, racist. I have predetermined feelings about those of other races, and I basically act upon those feelings in a way I must believe is appropriate and justified. This is the fundamental core of racism. I do not know why I feel I have to prove that I am not a bigot. The way I act is probably not even an effective way to do this. At the very least this overcompensation of friendliness most likely comes across as insincere. These lectures, especially the last two, have been invaluable for me regarding self-reflection. I suppose the first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem, and I think I definitely have a problem. Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:41:12 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/07/week-5-%e2%80%93-lesson-9-stages-of-racial-identity-%e2%80%93-white-people-stages-3-4/#IDComment164277394 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/07/week-5-%e2%80%93-lesson-9-stages-of-racial-identity-%e2%80%93-white-people-stages-3-4/#IDComment164277264 (cont.) Work is really where I started to become aware that there was some unconscious motivations for this extra amiability; however, it has not just affected me at work. I find myself acting friendlier with people of color than I do with white people no matter where I am. And Dr. Richards is right: it is patronizing. Of course this is not my intention. I do not want to judge anyone on the color of their skin, and that is essentially want I am doing. As Dr. Richards mentioned in his lecture, I really am not seeing people of color as whole human beings. And this just is not fair. If I truly think about it, I am saying that the individuals I am “nicer” to should not be treated as others should and should not be judged on their own merits. These individuals have clearly suffered because of the color of their skin. They have been incapable of making their own decisions because they have been oppressed and continue to be oppressed and “the man” is preventing them from succeeding. Sun, 19 Jun 2011 13:40:38 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/06/07/week-5-%e2%80%93-lesson-9-stages-of-racial-identity-%e2%80%93-white-people-stages-3-4/#IDComment164277264