Tagged: bias Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • just a conservative girl 2:46 PM on 05/23/2014 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: bias, cuban, , personal growth, prejudices, race relations, , , truth   

    From The You Can’t Handle the Truth Files – Mark Cuban Edition 

    “In this day and age, this country has really come a long way putting any type of bigotry behind us, regardless of who it’s toward. We’ve come a long way, and with that progress comes a price. We’re a lot more vigilant and we’re a lot less tolerant of different views, and it’s not necessarily easy for everybody to adapt or evolve.

    I mean, we’re all prejudiced in one way or another. If I see a black kid in a hoodie and it’s late at night, I’m walking to the other side of the street. And if on that side of the street, there’s a guy that has tattoos all over his face — white guy, bald head, tattoos everywhere — I’m walking back to the other side of the street. And the list goes on of stereotypes that we all live up to and are fearful of. So in my businesses, I try not to be hypocritical. I know that I’m not perfect. I know that I live in a glass house, and it’s not appropriate for me to throw stones.”

    So says Mark Cuban to Inc. Magazine in an answer to question about his upcoming vote in the NBA and the Sterling saga.

    Of course yet another firestorm has emerged from these statements.  Somehow this is becoming about Trayvon Martin. I suppose the Martin family have some sort trademark on the word Hoodie now.   To the point that Cuban has issued an apology to the Martin Family:

    “In hindsight, I should have used different examples.  I didn’t consider the Trayvon Martin family and I apologize to them for that. Beyond apologizing to the Martin family, I stand by the words and the substance of the interview.”

     

    There is nothing that Cuban said that is untrue.  The problem is that in today’s society the truth is no longer valued.  What a sad state of affairs that is.

    We are human beings.  As such we all have frailties.  We all make judgements every single day about people we see out in public.  We do that for safety purposes.  If you are on a first date and that person rubs you the wrong way due to any number of reasons, you are making a judgement not to have a second date.  How you dress for a job interview can, and likely will, make a difference in if you are going to get a job offer or not.  Do you honestly believe that a law firm is going to hire someone who shows up in flip-flops and cut off jeans shorts?  Not likely.  Fair or not fair, it is the way it is.

    I will be the first to admit that if I was walking down the street in the dark and I saw someone with a hoodie on, I would think twice.  It has nothing to do with the color of their skin, but the fact that they are trying to hide their face from view.  I would wonder why.  If I saw some big burly man that had wild tattoos all over I would also feel a little fearful.  The same way a black person would feel fearful if they saw a person walking down the road in a KKK hood.  Heck, in fact I would be fearful if I saw someone in a KKK garb and I am not black.  In my mind someone wearing that is someone worth being fearful of.  It is going to set off red flags in my mind.  A swastika is another fearful sign to me.  Does that make me a racist?

    Another thing that I am fearful of is neighborhoods with high crime rates.  I lived just outside of DC for almost two decades.  I didn’t go to certain neighborhoods unless it was absolutely necessary.  To me that is common sense and has nothing to do with skin color.   I would feel the same way regardless of skin color of the majority of people living in that neighborhood.

    We must talk about these issues instead of labeling someone a racist.  Which of course is exactly what happened to Mark Cuban once this interview went viral:

    From twitter:

    Mark Cuban is racist. If I see him walking down the street I’m walking on the other side [because] I’m scared of him.”

     

    This from Michelle Obama:

    No matter what you do, the point is to never be afraid to talk about these issues, particularly the issue of race, because even today, we still struggle to do that. This issue is so sensitive, so complicated, so bound up with a painful history.

     And we need your generation to help us break through – we need all of you to ask the hard questions and have the honest conversations because that is the only way we will heal the wounds of the past and move forward to a better future.

    She may have said it a little differently, but ultimately the context is the same.  We must talk about these issues.  We must face our own biases and prejudices in order to deal with them and overcome them.  We all have them.  Even if it is as simple as our political views.  Many in this country put the democrat in a certain box, put the republican in certain box.  Very few people fit neatly in the boxes that they get stuffed in.

    Telling the truth shouldn’t be as controversial as it has become these days.  At this point in history we should be able to handle the truth that people carry stereotypes with them in life.  That virtually all people see certain things in their life and respond in ways that can be conceived as negative.  We make judgements based on how one is dressed.  We make judgements based on the neighborhoods that one lives in.  We make judgements on what type of work someone does.  It is only when we acknowledge these judgements and yes talk about them openly that we can finally break through the barriers of our preconceived notions that we all carry.

    In 2014 we should be able to handle the truth.

    Advertisements
     
  • backyardconservative 7:51 PM on 02/07/2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: academia, bias, ,   

    A Statistically Impossible Lack of Diversity. Conservative Profs 

    Of Social Psychology. A sadly amusing column by John Tierney in the NY Times:

    A sea of hands appeared, and Dr. Haidt estimated that liberals made up 80 percent of the 1,000 psychologists in the ballroom. When he asked for centrists and libertarians, he spotted fewer than three dozen hands. And then, when he asked for conservatives, he counted a grand total of three.

    “This is a statistically impossible lack of diversity,” Dr. Haidt concluded, noting polls showing that 40 percent of Americans are conservative and 20 percent are liberal. In his speech and in an interview, Dr. Haidt argued that social psychologists are a “tribal-moral community” united by “sacred values” that hinder research and damage their credibility — and blind them to the hostile climate they’ve created for non-liberals.

    There may well have been some closeted conservatives among the group. How many more didn’t enter the field at all, sensing the futility of open inquiry?

    I remember the Larry Summers incident cited in the article. And the attack on Daniel Patrick Moynihan was ruinous to our society, as Pundette notes today.

    Add to this the media bias we know is there, and confirmation that lawyers and judges double-team us, it’s a wonder we win any elections or make any advances at all.

    Ah, but it’s the power of our ideas. In the real world.

     
  • Sherry 7:30 PM on 03/28/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: bias, , , ,   

    and I know it’s Frank Rich but the idea that the only reason anyone is upset at anything in the healthcare bill is either 1) they want to gin up support for their political campaign (machiavellian Rove type maneuvers of the political class) or 2) they are hayseed rednecks who have a visceral hatred of anyone different than them is a destructive and frankly terribly limited way to think about the American people. It’s dismissive of all criticism as motivated by the very worst of human emotions.

    People take offense and rightly so to being called bigots and racists because they oppose healthcare.

    The 2,700 page bill has many things one should oppose: funding abortion, mandatory enrollment, IRS being given an expanded role of power to enforce. These are troubling things that deserve some reflection and consideration and maybe even criticism. Some of us think a bill with such unseemly large pork payoffs to Democratic friends and allies is a bad thing, an escalation in the pay for votes method of making law that corrupts the representative process by making the most powerful legislator not the most ethical but the one that holds out and then flips to get the biggest piece of pork pie. People also worry that a 1.3 Trillion dollar deficit might not be something we could overcome as a nation and the Democratic hegemony that is in charge is running forward writing checks as if nothing has happened or will happen. These are all legitimate reasons to be upset with the government that have nothing at all to do with the President’s race or Barney Frank’s proclivities or Nancy Pelosi’s gender. They don’t come up. They’re irrelevant.

    To be dismissed by the writers of the media and the political ruling class as idiots because we don’t entirely agree….well that should make us mad. It is meant to insult and to silence. Shut up or you are a racist. Shut up or you are a bigot. Shut up or you are declared an idiot. Shut up or you will be eviscerated publicly as we did Sarah Palin and her family. Shut up or we will destroy you with words and make the world hate you.

    I guess the best we can say in response is, we’ve been warned.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/opinion/28rich.html?ref=opinion

     
    • fuzislippers 12:30 AM on 03/29/2010 Permalink | Reply

      The Alinsky-style demonization and ridicule tactic isn’t working as they intended. With every attack, our numbers grow. The world does not hate us, and in fact, is fast-realizing that BO is an absolute disaster who is undermining world peace, including that in his own country. He’s fast becoming an object of global ridicule, except by tyrants like Castro and Chavez (and this, of course, causes many an eyebrow to raise the world over).

      The crazy left here at home, however, do believe all the lies spewed, but how long will that go on? How long will our fellow countrymen and women willfully ignore their own two eyes and ears?

  • nosheepleshere 1:57 PM on 02/27/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: atheist, bias, , liberal   

    The Science is Settled: Liberals And Atheists Are Brilliant. 

    Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics and Political Science, will publish the findings of his study in the March 2010 issue of Social Psychology Quarterly.

    The data “indicates” that political, religious and sexual behaviors may be reflections of intelligence.  Kanazawa has determined that people who identified themselves as liberal and atheist had higher IQs

    James Bailey, a George Washington University leadership professor who was not involved in the study, said that these preferences may stem from a desire to show superiority or elitism, which also has to do with IQ. In fact, aligning oneself with “unconventional” philosophies such as liberalism or atheism may be “ways to communicate to everyone that you’re pretty smart,” he said.

    “More intelligent people don’t have more children, so moving away from the trajectory is not going to happen,” said Kanazawa.

    Ladies, gentlemen, and distinguished others, I give you Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa of the London School of Economics, the Fenimore Cooper of sociobiology, a man who has leveraged an inability to do data analysis or understand psychometrics into an official blog at Psychology Today, where he gets to advocate genocidal nuclear war as revenge for 9/11. He seems to mean it, rather than be fukayaming. He’s like the poster boy for the stupidity and groundlessness of freakishly fact-free evolutionary psychology. Just ignore anything with Kanazawa’s name on it.

    So to all you evolutionary intellectual superiors, you can stop patting yourselves on the back.

    Read more at No Sheeples Here.

     
    • Jill 2:07 PM on 02/27/2010 Permalink | Reply

      “More intelligent people don’t have more children, so moving away from the trajectory is not going to happen,” said Kanazawa.

      Someone should have told this to my brainiac husband before we had our large family.

    • richard mcenroe 4:03 PM on 02/27/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Ladies, I give you Congressman Henry Waxman,California Democrat and sponsor of the cap and trade bill. How much smarter than us is he?

      When he entered Congress,there was a tradition among lobbyists to invite freshman congressmen to poker games where the lobbyists would contrive to lose,so they could slip the froshes cash. Not ony was Waxman so dumb that they couldn’t cheat enough to lose to him, he was so dumb he didn’t realise they were trying.Eventually they had to cancel th games rather than come out and tell the fool what they were trying to do.

    • Robert Waldmann 6:06 PM on 03/07/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Thanks for the link (to the definition of Fukayaming). I was puzzled that you linked to my personal blog until I read the post. I would have expected that you would link to my post at a group blog entitled “Why does IQ halve when people write about IQ”
      http://www.angrybearblog.com/2010/03/why-does-iq-halve-when-people-write.html
      in which I discussed a discussion of, you guessed it, the fact that atheists and extreme liberals have higher scores on IQ tests on average. Really.

      I think that Bailey’s critique of Kanazawa is much weaker than it could be. Bailey doesn’t explicitly challange Kanazawa’s apparent assumption that IQ is purely hereditary. This is very odd. R Herrnstein (who is not famously hostile to the idea that IQ is hereditary to put it very very mildly) would argue that about half of the variance in IQ is genetic and the other half isn’t. For that he was widely denounced. I think we can take it to be agreed by everyone who knows anything about IQ that it is not purely genetic (I mean the IQs of identical twins are not identical — case closed).

      I think it is obvious that the same experiences which cause high measured IQ cause liberalism and atheism. There is no mystery there. There is certainly no need to discuss evolution which, you know, works through genetics.

      I should note that I am an extremely liberal atheist.

c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel