RedditRuleViolator t1_iydqbgz wrote
I'm confused about why white and male is spelled out?
EcstatMec t1_iyduzea wrote
Because attacking a demographic is always a good way to get people all riled up (like how nazis constantly claim the world is run by nefarious jews), and "white males" is the one demographic that is universally accepted as okay to attack.
JohnCavil01 t1_iyetpo7 wrote
Or you could instead try reading the article.
I agree the headline is exploiting clickbait tactics - but it makes some valid points if you could be bothered to take a few minutes to read it before getting up on your internet soapbox.
EcstatMec t1_iyeufny wrote
>I agree the headline is exploiting clickbait tactics
Ok, so I'm right? Or are you saying I should not be allowed to judge them for their very deliberate title? Joke
JohnCavil01 t1_iyex3q1 wrote
The article isn’t attacking a particular race like your comment and defensive irritation are implying.
EcstatMec t1_iyexw3u wrote
Is the title doing that? Is the title not part of the article? Give up mate.
LarryPer123 t1_iye3oit wrote
Problem Solved :
The race and Hispanic origin distribution of the people with the name MIKE is 78.3% White, 6.2% Hispanic origin, 10.6% Black, 2.8% Asian or Pacific Islander, 1.5% Two or More Races, and 0.6% American Indian or Alaskan Native. These figures should be considered only as a rough estimate. The purpose of this graph is to compare the name's specific race and Hispanic origin distribution to the distribution in the general population of the US.
On this basis, the people with the name MIKE have a higher likelyhood of being White and a lower likelyhood of being Hispanic origin.
RedditRuleViolator t1_iye7k72 wrote
Is it ok to make those assumptions, though, still? Statistically speaking violent crime is committed at a higher rate by African Americans, but it's wrong to assume every African American is a criminal.
dashrendar t1_iyel5ks wrote
No you can't. Kanye got in trouble for pointing out statistical facts as he did it in a horrible way. Chappelle pointed out those same facts and the facts about the demographics of people in said groups, but that it is wrong to make judgements about those groups that the facts fit. Like, you can think that this country has been ran by essentially all white males who are protestants, but it would be wrong to say that white males that are protestants run the country.
gleaming-the-cubicle t1_iydr9pc wrote
From the text:
>Nor does Shark Week accurately represent experts in this field. One issue is ethnicity: Three of the five most-featured locations on Shark Week are Mexico, South Africa and the Bahamas, but we could count on one hand the number of non-white scientists who we saw featured in shows about their own countries. It was far more common for Discovery to fly a white male halfway around the world than to feature a local scientist.
>Moreover, while more than half of U.S. shark scientists are female, you wouldn’t know this from watching Shark Week. Among people who we saw featured in more than one episode, there were more white male non-scientists named Mike than women of any profession or name.
RedditRuleViolator t1_iydtnt1 wrote
It's still racist.
gleaming-the-cubicle t1_iydufxa wrote
RedditRuleViolator t1_iye7o9x wrote
It's horrifically wrong. That was my point.
HardlineMike t1_iyegxmm wrote
How are you going to point out racism or a lack of diversity without mentioning race?
JohnCavil01 t1_iyetkrg wrote
You could try reading the article to dispel some of that mystery.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments