Pro
Related Posts
Bowl Leader
Pro
New opening: As a Senior Designer/Art Director, are you looking for client diversity? Spyglass consults with healthcare to travel, education to med tech, SaaS to CPG. And numerous nonprofits.
Show us your holistic view of the brand experience. Concept, direct, and design for digital and print, display and spaces. Let's talk today about this hybrid role in Minneapolis!
soladayolson.com/senior-designer-art-director.../
Apply to attend the Smithsonian Science Education Center STEM Education Summit to Increase Diversity Within the STEM Teacher Workforce (applicants who are selected will receive fully-sponsored access to the summit and 1 year of mentor support at no cost). https://ssec.si.edu/event/stem-education-summit-building-coalition-attracting-and-retaining-diverse-stem-teaching
Are you a diverse person? Are you an ally to DEI?
I’d love to speak with you for 10-20 mins about my LLC and Nonprofit and the work that I’ve been looking to do as it relates to education and diversity.
Please feel free to view the video on the homepage of my website:
https://www.bridginglegaciesacrosscampuses.org/mission
Should this be of interest to you, please feel free to use this link below to set up a meeting:
https://calendly.com/jleebridgingandbuilding/30-minute-meeting-over-the-phone
More Posts
Community Builder
Enthusiast
Something to brighten up your day 🤗
Conversation Starter
Additional Posts in Politics
It ain’t wrong...
Pro
Chief
Chief
Enthusiast
Do as I say, not as I do
Conversation Starter
Pro
Pro
Pro
Conversation Starter
Rising Star
Rising Star
Conversation Starter
Pro
New to Fishbowl?
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
I think a lot of people believe that (1) if there were equality of opportunity then (2) across population levels there would be equality of outcome. So any population level outcome inequality implies population level opportunity inequality.
Chief
The greatest thing about America I think is that it’s the best place for people to move across classes. I don’t think the idea that a population group’s values are to blame has weight when there is not equal opportunity but vice versa is also true. It has more weight the more equal the opportunity.
They're never going to say "we want equality of outcome."
What they're going to say is "the system is unfair so we're going to make it more fair." What they will do is engineer the change they need so that equality of outcome is achieved. Then they will say "look at the results, it looks more fair to us!" And equality of outcome will have been enacted while people like OP can continue to claim that nobody believes in equality of outcome except for right wing crazies. Just look at OP in another reply, "we didn't try to steal the election."
One of the most egregious examples I know of is NYC magnet schools. They admissions criteria weighted standardized testing heavily. For Asians in NYC (who, by the way, are the poorest ethnic group in NYC), it was their ticket out of poverty. They studied their asses off despite not having special resources targeting them (IIRC there are multimillion dollar social programs in NY providing school supplies, tutoring, etc for "BIPOC") and aced the tests. The result was the they were "overrepresented" in NYC.
To correct this gross crime against humanity of studying their asses off, getting into a great high school paid for by public tax dollars, becoming doctors and lawyers and exemplifying the American dream in every way (which many liberals ironically like to claim is dead), admissions criteria was changed for magnet schools. A cap was put on how many students could be admitted from each middle school. Since minorities tend to be heavily clustered in their own neighborhoods and thus zoned to the same school, this meant that they effectively put a cap on how many Asians could get into the magnet schools while reserving seats for BIPOC in other schools.
This meant someone could score in the 50th percentile of test scorers and still be one of the top candidates in their school and get a seat in what was supposed to be some of our nations top academic institutions.
I don't hate the BIPOCs that have since gotten into those magnet schools. It's not their fault. As a first generation immigration and a (former) fellow of low SES, you have to do whatever you can to survive, you take everything you can get.
But this was absolutely the result of ideologues who wanted to achieve results at any cost, even if it meant creating unequal opportunity.
So, people who are actually clued in know that there is no debate over whether people actually believe in equality of outcome. This is not a new concept invented in the last 5-10 years. It's an old ideological battle. The next question you should ask is what has happened in the past when humanity went down this path? The pendulum always swings back, and history will repeat itself.
Notice the lack of detractors or OP coming here to say that that wasn't an attempt to enforce equality of outcome. Weird how this always happens!
Chief
Classic leftist response to stupid leftist initiatives. Crazy lefties take it too far and get all the attention while normal lefties assure us that the crazy ones aren’t in charge and that they’re goal isn’t the real goal. Let me just say this: I don’t believe you.
Pro
Don’t forget the sextape. That’s important too.
Rising Star
There’s absolutely people who believe in equality of outcome.
Absolutely there are people who want equality of outcome. If you don't think so you're not paying attention.
The problem I’m seeing on this thread is conflating the inputs vs. outputs of racism.
BIPOC are still the most marginalized groups due to residual outcomes from old policies like redlining, 2nd class legal status just ONE generation ago and the resulting (and ongoing) impacts of racism and colorism (among many many others).
What we are left with are the inputs of racism and the outcomes of racism. Any party that tries to fix one without the other is wasting effort. Since we can’t seem to create fair inputs ourselves, the government has the impossible task of trying to fix the errors of the past - racist outcomes (which continue to oppress BIPOC) while eradicating racist inputs.
There have been so many resume studies that show people don’t admit, hire, etc etc BIPOC if they can find any evidence of their color on their resume. College at HBCU? Screwed. Address from a neighborhood of color? Screwed. Showing up BIPOC to an interview? Screwed.
We have an input/output problem that has rippling impacts. Racism is a massive drain on the entire economy so it’s in everyone’s interest that both the inputs and outcomes are addressed.
Even if we found a magic equal opportunity button and pushed it, that wouldn’t fix the current and existing harm and impacts from the past playing out today. The longer this country has continued without creating equal opportunities for all, the longer term the impact.
Equal opportunity can absolutely be measured without outcomes. We can and have always have been able to measure ACCESS. That’s where you see the most disparity. Access to quality education, access to food, access to jobs, access to healthcare, access to representation in government. If we can measure and address issues of access, the future generations will benefit. But that still leaves us with current generations saddled with unjust outcomes which we need to figure out how to handle appropriately.
Fair enough, I think we can agree to disagree on the feasibility of proving a net benefit to the class of society with an upper hand in “access” in a way that will be compelling.
Anyway, it’s been nice to have a good back and forth in the bowl and kudos for tagging your name. If you have any articles or books that go deeper on your views, would appreciate you posting them.
Is communism making a comeback? Everyone got the same outcome there.
What if we remove gender and race from all applications to schools, jobs, etc? Maybe even anonymous interviews based only on skills and qualifications. Only after acceptance will personal info be revealed.
This one is going to get conservatives in a tizzy
Rising Star
I’m sure you’ll find people who believe in equality of outcomes as well as people who get believe in the equality of access/opportunity.
Honest question - how do you measure equality of opportunity? Is there any way to do it that isn't just looking at outcomes? In which case, you would only ever be able to infer equal opportunity by demonstrating equal outcomes.
Sure there are metrics around equality of opportunity, including things like whether STEM courses are offered at all schools or only schools in certain areas. Are poorer school districts offered technology, tools and money to pay teachers similar to those in richer districts, or is transportation offered to attend a school aligned with their interests (where they exist). Did the college or university offer similar clubs, sports and activities for all students or just a subset. Did the candidate pool for a job include representation from a diverse group of individuals. All of these could suggest equality of opportunity.
The issue is many people self-select for reasons discussed elsewhere, so if you offer a Girls Who Code club and no girls sign up (lack of interest, family doesn't think it's important, girl thinks she isn't good at tech, pick a reason), that could very well be equality of opportunity but not equality of outcome (girls were as encouraged to get into tech as much as boys). If those girls don't sign up that could mean fewer girls interested in coding, leading to fewer girls getting tech education and applying for tech roles, resulting in fewer girls in that industry. Saying we need an equitable number of women in technology assumes a higher percentage of women want to be in tech but they are not being considered for or are able to get those jobs. That certainly might be the case but it could also be a matter of the opportunity being available to everyone equally, but more people in a certain group took advantage of it versus others which skews the applicant pool and thus skews the results.
The how and why is as if not more important than the what in this instance, and it assumes we all want to be in a group but that opportunity was made easier for some than others. I'm not saying that couldn't be the case, I'm saying one shouldn't assume that is always the case.