Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Norvig-Generis t1_j5fzcsb wrote

Reply to comment by st4n13l in Racial diversity in top tech & biotech companies [OC] by teamongered

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/apr/18/more-universities-holding-segregated-graduation-ev/

There ya go, next time just ask nicely.

Btw I'm just highlighting how America is on a path towards being more centered around race and even separating people based on it, this is not a discussion on identity politics or left/right, plz

13

st4n13l t1_j5g1nlt wrote

The vast majority of those they referred to have additional, optional graduation events for smaller communities in addition to the main ceremony. This is not ethnic segregation like what that the US enforced for the first 200 years of our existence.

22

Bard_Bromance_Club t1_j5j9ysu wrote

so it's not forced segregation but optional segregation. How is that distinction any better in response to his comment?

5

st4n13l t1_j5jgkfx wrote

The same way forcing religion is bad but allowing people to practice their own faiths is not bad

−4

Bard_Bromance_Club t1_j5jwzii wrote

That is the biggest misnomer for lack of a better word. To expand on your analogy, I can talk about the islamic faith and consider converting to it from a christian background. I can talk about the flaws in christanity compared to judaism compared to islam and so on. Everyone has the free will to engage in these conversations or beliefs. In segregation you are preventing anyone from engaging who doesn't fit a racial profile.

​

I have gone into a mosque to talk with an Imam about Islam and was welcomed and encouraged. Would that be the same in this scenario of segregation?

8

tabrisangel t1_j5g60cp wrote

Oh damn you got him! (By making an absurd strawman argument

−2

st4n13l t1_j5g9w8i wrote

They said the US was consciously and legally headed toward segregation. The "evidence" they presented doesn't support that when considered in the context of what those universities are actually doing. And even if it did, it doesn't support anything about moving legally towards segregation.

Where's the strawman?

3

Rraen_ t1_j5kinw8 wrote

I think they were trying to say that we are choosing to segregate ourselves more publicly, not that there is a return to government mandated segregation. Which is somewhat true, but not necessarily dysfunctional or unhealthy. There's a really interesting study by Robert Putnam from Harvard. Here's part of the abstract relevant to this topic:

In the long run immigration and diversity are likely to have important cultural, economic, fiscal, and developmental benefits. In the short run, however, immigration and ethnic diversity tend to reduce social solidarity and social capital.

I'm not going to use silly words like good and bad, some of us do choose to segregate ourselves, but we appear to do it more typically because of the desire for community and safety, as opposed to hate for the other.

4

MarioKartWiii t1_j5gvauc wrote

Some people think additional optional events is the same as forcing people to segregate and there’s no educating them. Our only hope is that they leave or die

3

vonRoeff t1_j5ib1cp wrote

I'm curious, would you accept a "whites only" additional optional event?

10