Do you believe in privilege? White privilege, etc?
- Thread starter Jenesis
- Start date
It's amazing how much time you've spent in this thread without reading what people post and instead strawmanning it.
There are overtly racist people but much of the institutional kind is based on subconscious views. the stats back the claim up. Toronto (the good) has number showing black students make up 11% of the population but 35% of suspensions. Meanwhile white kids are suspended at a lower rate than their proportion of the population.
We can also look at the jail population where White/Caucasian people make up only 54% of prisoners despite being 73% of the population.
This argument is not science at all. It proves nothing other than stating the data and then making a political statement.
An over representation of black students being suspended COULD be as a result of racism OR it could be as a result of more Black students doing really bad things at school that deserve detentions.
Why do we always assume racism?
If we are being intellectually honest, we need to start with the data and then dig deeper to understand it. To simply call it racism is intellectually lazy and leads to terrible policy decisions.
OISE and the TDSB prove their intellectual laziness over and over again or maybe it is just their politics. Sometimes kids deserve to be suspended - imagine that.
What's your thesis here?
Do you really believe that Black kids do more bad things because of their skin colour or race?
Or do you think socio-economic conditions, which could be part of systematic racism, could be at play?
Where's your scientific evidence back up your claim?
I didn’t state a thesis or a claim. That is exactly my point.
The data shown doesn’t provide any reason to have a thesis or a claim.
Maybe it is systemic racism or maybe it is socio-economic, or maybe it is a cultural group with higher behavioural problems, or a combination of the above.
My questions would be:
1) Is our goal to lower suspension rates?
2) Is our goal to enforce rules?
3) Is our goal to make up for past racism?
4) Is our goal to treat everyone equally?
5) Is our goal to treat everyone unequally by giving more benefits to those who break rules?
6) Is our goal to treat everyone unequally by giving more benefits to those who don’t break rules?
My view is that at the moment the TDSB answers the above questions as:
1) Yes for certain racial groups
2) Not necessarily
3) Yes
4) Yes, in theory
5) Yes
6) No
My fear is that the end result is that good students are receiving an increasingly inferior education today, while weaker students and troublemakers receive extra resources and focus.
Funny, I'm ok with giving kids extra help if they need it, whether from socio economic or perceived 'race' or cultural group.
The board should do their best to educate and pass all of our kids.
I hear you. There is definitely systemic racism and it is something that requires ongoing change and education to improve the situation.
What I am saying is that as an individual that is a person of colour, it is more important that they move on to the next 9, than to spend all their energy complaining about the racism of employer number 1. It will help change their situation and improve society at the same time, if they are successfully employed, and can educate their children and inspire others.
I recognize that not all would agree with me, but in Toronto in 2021, I believe that is the much smarter course of action.
The board has to make decisions on prioritizing resources. The problem is that in their efforts to help the weakest, they are certainly not doing their best to educate a large percentage of our kids.
Btw - shouldn’t they only pass the kids that actually demonstrated a proficiency high enough to earn a pass?
Its not really a question of choosing to help kids that are doing fine do a bit better or helping kids that are having a hard time, is it?
And of course they should have to pass, the question is whether a bit of extra help will help them pass.
I mean, fewer kids as high school dropouts or failures is just generally good for society, isn't it?
I think you live in a bit of a dream world.
Yes there are choices to be made. The school board is not capable of focusing on 50 things and doing them all well. It is not possible with limited resources. You can claim success all you want but they are not achieving it.
As for HS dropouts…if people graduate just because they were pushed through without earning it, it is worthless. To point to better graduation rates and pat ourselves on the back is typical of the school boards today, and is a complete joke.
You're sounding like a loony far left liberal. Canada is not racist and whites are now not majority in GTA so stop with the white privilege claims.
The predudice for South Asian kids appear off the charts - they are 20 times less likely to supended as opposed to 3 time more for blacks, Souh Asians are over 6 times more prejudice in favour of them. Ridiculous of course.
Of the dozen or so times I have know of someone I know being mugged or attempted to be mugged the stats favoured minorities. In Toronto schools there is a lot of pressure among some communities to be pro school and get good marks, in others, there is presure to disobey the teacher cause trouble and good marks make you look weak among your peers - you buy into "racism" by playing the game.
This is not saying take any chld, place them in a good environment and they wont do well -race does not matter - but culturally it can matter for good and ill. Certainly I was shocked my a family friend who took their kid out of school for a family birthday party despite it being their final exam - the child of course failed there course and the parents where surprised - as in there home country where education was a bit of joke this would never had happened. Other parents come from countries where school is 6 days a year, with no summer brake to speak off and find our system soft.
OF course your going to get different results of suspension - the racism if it exists is not recognizing there cultures are defective from a Canadian point of view - thinking that cultures that do not allow women to fully educated, or do not value education can be treated the same as any other is the reason we have the mess we have now - well ad to the fact that people call it racism. Another family there child was clearly being passed (unable to read or write) because teachers where scared to fail a minority child for fears of being called racist. Not doing the child any favours in the long run.
The chart does show some realities however. While racism may not have anything to do with these numbers something does - and copying /learning the South Asian way to other groups may be useful. There has been an attempt to have black FOCUSED (corrected) schools in Toronto for a few years now and if that is successful perhaps that is a model to follow - thought it might have been a failure I do not know.
It seems to be doing well but they can not get black students to do to the thing:
Personally I thought the concept was pretty racist but you can not argue with success (or failure)
As a final note, kids of certain groups might be more aware that school at many levels is a scam. Less than 10% of kids will get a career from school., many wasting money on university with no pay off. In England 25% of college girls have done sex work at some tme - a huge increase. Many proably wold prefer not to but its by far the best economic choice. You don't need formal school for sex work (it can help of course) nor do you need it for gig work, internet business or a host of other jobs of the new economy. Minorities often live in less shetered communities and can see the real world and thus could come in conflict with an outdated system more. I certainly came in conflict with my school system for its failings thought I was not self aware enough to realize it at the time.
Last edited:
I'm curious as to which aspects you disagree with:
- That discrimination can be subtle, subconscious and/or unintentional?
- That discrimination can occur without anyone actually realizing it occurred?
- That choice of language in describing these concepts is important?
- That factors of this nature are probabilistic?
- That the broader experience of a class of people will not necessarily reflect the experience of an individual belonging to that class?
- That rules which (in principle) treat everyone equally do not necessarily treat everyone equitably, and hence can be discriminatory?
Saying that a group of people is not in the majority is not a compelling argument that group privilege doesn't exist.
A country cannot so easily be labelled "racist" or "not racist." Reality is much more complicated than that. Neither can a person for that matter. And remember that discussion of privilege is not just about race.
If you really stop to think about it, can you honestly claim that you have never, on any level, treated someone better or worse because of some notion you had about a group identifier you associated with that person?
Discrimination is not a bad thing. Therefore its general nature is irrelevant. Without discrimination no human being would be alive.
But yes, I suppose moving away from sloppy language (mixing bias/discrimination /racism /preference/circumstance as one concept) is important so I do not disagree with that.
As for the rest, I have to think on it. As the floating statements as is they typify magical thinking and double bind scenarios. We both agree I am sure that violence is both necessary and yet needs to be trained and controlled. Violence is necessary to save countless lives. While true, the statement without qualifiers is a apt to be a double bind.
Your premises seem sound, back your argument or lack of argument does not appear to be valid, at least beyond the core statement which we agree. There is lots implied by your statements but little spelled out so its a bit of chimera to agree with and we are left with the default - just as my hanging premises which are self evidently true imply several invalid arguments.
My answer is nebulous. I might have misstated . You make good points, but your arguments such as the are are weak in view of valid vs invalid. Privilege exists because of x y and z. X points out that maybe privilege does not exist, since that's the wrong word - there is a vocabulary problem. Sure I agree with that privilege does not exist, since that's the wrong word for what is described, like arguing for Sumerian capalism when capalism had yet to be invented. Sure, I kind of get the idea of what is meant but its off. . .
My counter augmentation general that must of this is magical thinking. The whole privilege thing exists from one paper from the imagination of one person (https://psychology.umbc.edu/files/2016/10/White-Privilege_McIntosh-1989.pdf- )- much as my friend has claimed that everyone is cannibal eating meat and vetabables that where once Plato Jesus et al. Everyone has living pprivlage, that is we breath and live vs the millions dead before us, and the dead have dead privlage. Everyone is also unique like everyone else so no one is unique. Somepeople have 48 degree privlage those who have been near or on the48 latitude to gain the butterfly effect to there advantage. The wording, the concept trivializes the debate - packing your good points in a intellectual mind game which as your own agruments hint - creates false binaries. So I guess again your affirmative statement which your points clain to support, A therefore B , A (and B and C) is good, but B seems not be to me, so thearguement as a whole is invalid.
Last edited:
Discrimination has multiple meanings. One meaning is to recognize the difference between things. This meaning is value neutral, and yes it's true that it's a basic cognitive ability for survival. But another meaning is the unjust/prejudicial treatment of people based on group identifiers. Its general nature is entirely relevant. By understanding that discrimination does not have to be born out of malice and that it can be difficult to recognize, it is much more difficult to simply dismiss. Realistically, everyone acts in a discriminatory way to some extent.
I didn't say privilege doesn't exist because it's the wrong word. Indeed, I said my answer is an unequivocal yes. I said the choice of wording matters for an argument on this topic, because the choices tend to yield different results. Opinions on the issue are often visceral, and there is the potential for guilt, blame, anger, defensiveness and denial to override the issues in a way that is not constructive. Frankly, I don't think one has to look any further than this thread for examples.
Recognizing the complexity of these issues does not mean I'm giving conflicting messages. I'm not making a single argument; I'm making several closely related arguments on this topic. There's no double bind here.
Well I disagree - that maybe your intent - which is all that matters for this forum - so I will take your clarification as a given. However, I unequivocally do say that privilege is the wrong word - circumstantial potential advantage has baggage that privilege does not - including that basic human rights are special and rare and are granted rather than are innate. The state gave him the privilege of not being executed for being his religion today is word play I rather not get involved with.
The intent of the orginl article and title and use of the word was to be inflammatory - an extracorporal shock wave to the body politic to sell a paper akin to Freedom fries. The term causes far more harm than is solves.
You do realize this is sociology, not science right?
And the stats are stats but when there is a significant difference in outcomes between two identifiable groups, there must be something going on. It means that you either go with some good ol' racist statement like blacks are dumber and more violent or you realize there must be something else going on that is driving black (and indigenous) people to get suspended from school more often, end up in jail more often, and make less money on average. Based on your argument, you seem to be suggesting the former.
There definitely is some overlap with economic status that ends up in a vicious cycle and may be some other factors at play as well but when we are considering between 1 and 2 million Canadians and more than 40 million in the US, the excuse of "maybe they're just bad" doesn't cut it.
Last edited:
Your point is that you have no point? If you do want to investigate on a scientific basis, that means you need to come with a testable hypothesis that better explains the evidence. Without that you're simply expressing discomfort because you don't like what's being said.
So why are you so resistant to acknowledging that there is an imbalance that POC have to deal with?
p.s. According to the news and the study I quoted, it seems the board IS interested in creating a more level playing field.
