Wow. I consider you a pretty damn smart dude, Brow, but you whiffed so bad on this one I don't even know where to start.
Black non-criminals almost as good as white criminals
- Thread starter One Brow
- Start date
Wow. I consider you a pretty damn smart dude, Brow, but you whiffed so bad on this one I don't even know where to start.
I do whiff them sometimes. I'm not sure why you think so here. Care to elucidate?
It seemed that, in Trout's scenario, his primary concern was this gentleman's ability to speak clearly - which would be critical to the position offered up in that situation. To me, it didn't appear that Trout was making any correlation between the man's speaking ability and his race. Race was mentioned, but only to give context to the question, "Would I be racist for not hiring him?"
You responded "Yes". Perhaps you feel it was unnecessary to acknowledge race at all, but in that case this hypothetical is pretty much moot. I felt like Trout's question was something along the lines of, "Am I racist if I didn't hire an under-qualified applicant who also just happened to be black." Seems simple enough, but apparently not.
I am also open to the possibility that I completely missed something that you did not, or that I might just be an idiot.
Nothing to miss. If you do not hire because of inability to do an adequate job... has nothing to do with race.
If you do not hire because of race, then it's an issue.
This seems more like a reading comprehension issue with Brow, than anything else.
I agree that using the ability to speak intelligible English as a criterion for hiring for telephone is valid, and is not in and of itself racist. The notion that race would be even margianlly connected to that could come from a few of different places that I can see; all those places are basically racist (e.g., notions that minorities go around regularly making frivolous complaints, notions that having minority status makes being unintelligible more like, notions that one person hiring another person for phone work would be subjedcted to strict legal scrutiny on the basis of race, etc.). That's why I said the racist part was thinking these notions were connected.
I think, having very different life experiences, we interpret this differently, and we each occasionally will see things the other misses. That doesn't make either of us an idiot, and I have no reason to think you are an idiot generally.
My best answer to the question would be that it is not racism to refuse to hire an underqualified employee, but it is racism to say that this person is not qualified based on that context, and it would be racism to not consider hiring the person without evaluting them based on an actual trial run in the interviewing process. It's also prejudice (not always racial) to think that certain USA-made-dialects make one an inferior phone representative simply because you have them.
Bronco70,
I would agree that if one harbors some deeply-buried prejudices that have absolutley no part in one's actions, reactions, interactions, etc., that it does not qualify as racism. However, if one does harbor some deeply-buried prejudices, I find basic human nature is such that, while one may not see where one's actions, etc., have been affected, one's actions are nonetheless affected in ways one does not see. Prejudices are just another form of cognitive shortcut, and the existence of cognitive shortcuts is essential to human functioning. It's just these particular shortcuts (among others) that I see as detrimental and deserving of removal.
I would agree that if one harbors some deeply-buried prejudices that have absolutley no part in one's actions, reactions, interactions, etc., that it does not qualify as racism. However, if one does harbor some deeply-buried prejudices, I find basic human nature is such that, while one may not see where one's actions, etc., have been affected, one's actions are nonetheless affected in ways one does not see. Prejudices are just another form of cognitive shortcut, and the existence of cognitive shortcuts is essential to human functioning. It's just these particular shortcuts (among others) that I see as detrimental and deserving of removal.
Discussing racism with One Brow? You have much higher tolerance for certain things than I.
It's one of the perks of being dumb. I'm not going to understand, and I'm not going to change anybody's mind, so the mental investment is minimal.
What didn't you understand? I don't expect you to agree, but I at least like to be clear.
This whole thread is black on white crime.