Bombshell BYU announcement

[smac97]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

How do think these opinions from the article dovetail with the treatment of standards in the "Report and Recommendations of the BYU Committee on Race, Equity, and Belonging"?

The opinions from the article pertain to primary education, not collegiate.  The race-based proposals pertain to collegiate education, not primary.

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

As to the article itself, it acknowledges a damaging racial hierarchy exists --

It does? 

It quotes Stanford as saying that there is a "racial heirarchy" in "our public education system," for which Stanford gives examples such as "state-sponsored racial segregation of schools to the more subtle, but no less insidious racially segregated academic placements (e.g., special education, advanced placement) to exclusionary school discipline policies to ostensibly 'meritocratic' testing and grading policies and beyond."

Stanford's statements are at once conclusory and belied by the "Success Academy" results.  The article was citing Stanford and the Baltimore schools to illustrate that the go-to "it's all about racism" excuse doesn't really explain the failures we are seeing, but that the "Success Academy" - which adopts the methods Stanford characterizes as racist - have yielded some spectacular results by underserved students.  

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

a good example of systemic racism, regardless of motive, cause and players --

I invite you to re-read the article.  I think you are not understanding what it is saying.  It is not attributing academic failures to "a damaging racial hierarchy" and "systemic racism."  The Baltimore "system" is heavily controlled by minorities and has plenty of funding.  Attributing Baltimore's massive failure to educate to "systemic racism" when members of racial minorities are running the very well-funded system that is supposedly "racist" doesn't quite pass the smell test.

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

and that multiple factors (i.e. individualized and systemic approaches) are required for success to breed success, individually and collectively.

Oh, I agree with this.  But Stanford and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio and his administration don't seem to agree with you.  They attribute these failures to vague notions of "racism."  

Thanks,

-Smac

[AtlanticMike]

1 hour ago, Meadowchik said:

Can you give a list of several of those many things?

I gave one this morning responding to blue dreams if you want to read it. Entrepreneurship and working for yourself is ultimate freedom. Listen to this black women, she knows what she's doing, if you can't listen to the entire video, start at 11:02, she changes the conversation totally by giving her opinion. She's a forward thinker, its everything I've been explaining on here.

https://youtu.be/

 

I'll answer your other questions later, going back to work. Thank you.

[CV75]

4 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

The definition of anecdotal evidence is relying heavily on personal testimony. As mormons, I guess you could say we've based a big part of our life philosophy on anecdotal evidence because we rely on faith, correct? 

Nope, didnt ignore them. You and I see it differently. I dont think skin color holds people back today. Thinking skin color holds you back, holds you back. Thinking white people need to change so people can get ahead holds people back. 

 

I'm not saying there's not problems, but the way people are going about them is absolutely ridiculous. You couldn't come up with a slower way to bring about change and I personally think that's by design. 

     Let me give you one example that in my opinion would change the black community faster than what is going on now. I think if we as a nation made it where every employee in the country became an independent contractor instead of an employee, meaning, instead of a W-2 you recieve a 1099 from a company, our country would change overnight. Why, because individuals would be in charge of their own benefits, vacation, insurance, taxes. Most people dont realize a $10 job is actually a $24 an hour job, with the employer paying all his overhead first and giving you the excess. This  would help black people by giving them a since of Independence, making them their own boss essentially. Increasing options by allowing not just black people, but everyone to choose insurance, write off expenses and etc. I'm fortunate where I live that I'm able to deal with people with different skin colors and cultures. In my experience, a larger majority of black people seem to feel like they're behind the curve while at the same time just about all white people I know don't care what color people are, they just want someone whose willing to work hard. I personally believe the victimization in the black community is the #1 reason a lot of black people feel like they cant get ahead. Personally, I think the black community needs to come together and get some real leaders that stand up and tell the community that black people are champions and stop telling them the white man is holding them back. Al Sharpton and people like him are a cancer that reinforce victimhood. He wouldn't know positivity if it bit him in the ***. 

     There are so many things that we could be doing to build up the black community but for some reason we spend 70% of the time looking backward and 30% forward. That's because the people influencing the black community cant find negativey in the future, they have to look in the past to find negativy and use it to make people feel less than, it's a psychological ploy. 99.9% of white people I know dont care about color. 

    I really like your post, thank you for taking the time to write me.

Anecdotal evidence is kind of an oxymoron since they are not corroborated by objective, independent or scientific evidence. In discussions like these, statistical evidence would establish the anecdote as representing the trend, norm, etc. But given a friendly, like-minded or tolerant audience like our congregations’ testimony meetings or this discussion board thread, verification depends strictly on the credibility of the person sharing it.

You maintain that skin color doesn’t hold people back, but that people hold themselves back, and/or let others hold them back, and one of the things they use as an excuse or a prop to do that is their skin color. Where did that destructive notion / sense of victimization come from, and who is designing the slow move away from to that and the psychological ploys (you do realize BlueDreams is a therapist), if not from others in their surroundings (i.e. the system in which they live) who benefit from the way things are?

Then you say that black people need to be given a sense of independence, by making everyone their own “boss” (really? independent contractor = boss?), and with this newfound freedom move from behind the curve and get ahead. By whom do they need to be given this sense of independence; who is their boss; and why? (I’ll answer): someone who wants to pay anyone desperate enough as an independent contractor (and acknowledged in your solution as Black) because it’s cheaper to do business that way! Then you say the Blacks need leaders even though they are independent contractors living the dream.

You are describing systemic racism perfectly!

[CV75]

27 minutes ago, smac97 said:

The opinions from the article pertain to primary education, not collegiate.  The race-based proposals pertain to collegiate education, not primary.

It does? 

It quotes Stanford as saying that there is a "racial heirarchy" in "our public education system," for which Stanford gives examples such as "state-sponsored racial segregation of schools to the more subtle, but no less insidious racially segregated academic placements (e.g., special education, advanced placement) to exclusionary school discipline policies to ostensibly 'meritocratic' testing and grading policies and beyond."

Stanford's statements are at once conclusory and belied by the "Success Academy" results.  The article was citing Stanford and the Baltimore schools to illustrate that the go-to "it's all about racism" excuse doesn't really explain the failures we are seeing, but that the "Success Academy" - which adopts the methods Stanford characterizes as racist - have yielded some spectacular results by underserved students.  

I invite you to re-read the article.  I think you are not understanding what it is saying.  It is not attributing academic failures to "a damaging racial hierarchy" and "systemic racism."  The Baltimore "system" is heavily controlled by minorities and has plenty of funding.  Attributing Baltimore's massive failure to educate to "systemic racism" when members of racial minorities are running the very well-funded system that is supposedly "racist" doesn't quite pass the smell test.

Oh, I agree with this.  But Stanford and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio and his administration don't seem to agree with you.  They attribute these failures to vague notions of "racism."  

Thanks,

-Smac

The article's title is: "Trump Was Right: Stanford Law Says Public Schools Create Racial Hierarchy." So there's the recognition of racial hierarchy. The rest reflects differences in opinion on how to address it with the author's and publisher's own ideological bent.

But if your point wasn't meant to tie in to the OP, we can leave it at that.

[CV75]

12 minutes ago, AtlanticMike said:

she changes the conversation totally by giving her opinion

This is typically why people share opinions in a conversation and broadcast clips like this -- it's a psychological ploy!

[smac97]

15 minutes ago, CV75 said:

The article's title is: "Trump Was Right: Stanford Law Says Public Schools Create Racial Hierarchy."  So there's the recognition of racial hierarchy.

But if you read the article, I think you'll find that the "racial hierarchy" is attributed to bad policy and inept administrators, no some nebulous and neverending racial animus that infects America everywhere.

15 minutes ago, CV75 said:

The rest reflects differences in opinion on how to address it with the author's and publisher's own ideological bent.

Yes.  But the "racial hierarchy" is attributed to bad policy by the local Powers-that-Be, not because American society is "systemically racist."

15 minutes ago, CV75 said:

But if your point wasn't meant to tie in to the OP, we can leave it at that.

Okay.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

6 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

First, to answer your example question. Let's say im an infirtile white dude, adopted a black kid with really dark skin and as soon as you looked at us standing side by side you new we weren't biologically father and son. Well, the first thing I would do to strengthen my relationship with m

That doesn’t answer my question though.  I asked about a man whose version of success was to have a biological son.

You appear to think the solution is he has to change his definition of success. Is that correct?

If he is not approved to adopt (the infertility is a result of significant health issues), then he should just change his definition of success to helping kids of other families perhaps.

So it is not that anyone can find actual success for any goal they desire, but if they settled for something less than what they really want and talk themselves into it, then they can find success. 
 

Is this what you actually believe?

Edited March 10, 2021 by Calm

[CV75]

13 minutes ago, smac97 said:

But if you read the article, I think you'll find that the "racial hierarchy" is attributed to bad policy and inept administrators, no some nebulous and neverending racial animus that infects America everywhere.

Yes.  But the "racial hierarchy" is attributed to bad policy by the local Powers-that-Be, not because American society is "systemically racist."

Okay.

Thanks,

-Smac

I don't know how I left you with the impression that I did not read the article. What I posted had nothing to do with attribution (I pointed that out in my post), but with acknowledgement of racial hierarchy or systemic racism (policy).

Edited March 10, 2021 by CV75

[CV75]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

That doesn’t answer my question though. 

It's a psychological ploy!

[AtlanticMike]

40 minutes ago, Calm said:

That doesn’t answer my question though.  I asked about a man whose version of success was to have a biological son.

You appear to think the solution is he has to change his definition of success. Is that correct?

If he is not approved to adopt (the infertility is a result of significant health issues), then he should just change his definition of success to helping kids of other families perhaps.

So it is not that anyone can find actual success for any goal they desire, but if they settled for something less than what they really want and talk themselves into it, then they can find success. 
 

Is this what you actually believe?

Ok, I went back and read your example, I think I didnt understand your question. Are you asking if a man who is infertile has a chosen measure of success of having a son to carry on his name, understands he cant do that, so he turns to trying to make himself happy through another method by working hard and trying to be successful? Will that hard work give him success or a deeper sense of failure? 

Is that what you mean? Sorry.

[smac97]

55 minutes ago, CV75 said:

I don't know how I left you with the impression that I did not read the article. What I posted had nothing to do with attribution (I pointed that out in my post), but with acknowledgement of racial hierarchy or systemic racism (policy).

I guess I'm not following.  "Systemic racism" is your view means what?  What is the "system?"

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

11 minutes ago, AtlanticMike said:

Ok, I went back and read your example, I think I didnt understand your question. Are you asking if a man who is infertile has a chosen measure of success of having a son to carry on his name, understands he cant do that, so he turns to trying to make himself happy through another method by working hard and trying to be successful? Will that hard work give him success or a deeper sense of failure? 

Is that what you mean? Sorry.

1) You stated previously that anyone can be successful with hard work and determination.  I happen to believe that as written that is false.  My question is to determine whether there is actually more nuance to your comment in your thought as opposed to how it is written (no conditions attached).

2) You stated people choose what success means for them.  I agree with that.  You put no limits on how they should choose.

3) I gave an example of a man who defines success for himself as having a biological son to carry on the family name.  This is in the face of it a reasonable measure of success that many men have had over the centuries if you look at the lengths some went to in order to breed an heir. I actually know a man whose list of goals included a son who would bear his name and his firstborn was the IV with it, iirc.
 

4) Hard work and determination in most cases would first mean finding a woman willing to bear him a son, hopefully also willing to marry him and raise the son with him, but that part would not be essential.  Then he would need to work to care for his son so the son lives to an age he can also reproduce and desires to do so to also pass on the family name to a biological grandson of the original man. 
 

5) However, in this case of a success or not story, the man must first be capable of producing a biological son, which being infertile in my example he cannot.
 

6). Therefore there is no possible way at this point for him to be successful according to his own definition.  (In time there may be cloning and possibly using DNA itself to create biological connected offspring).  He has failed. 

This is what my question  is:  do you agree that sometimes work and determination are not enough, sometimes failure is inevitable given the chosen measure of success?
 

 I am not asking how the man should adapt. That is the next stage that at this point I am not interested in.  I am referring back to 1) where you said anyone can be successful and showing this is false in this case given this man’s chosen success goal.

7) Your solution is to remove “biological” from his definition of success. But that is your definition, not his.  Changing what success is defined as is not demonstrating that anyone can be successful with hard work and determination. 
 

8 ) Which leaves us with two conclusions, the first is mine and if I understand you correctly the second is yours  

a) your original comment anyone can be successful is actually false, there are cases where hard work and determination are not enough for anyone to reach their goals.  This is reality.  Not everyone will be able to get what they desire out of life  

b) that he cannot reach his definition of success means he just needs to change his definition of success to match realistic parameters and then he will be successful 

What you actually appear to believe is that anyone can be successful with hard work and determination if they are willing to change their goals for more realistic ones.

Is that a correct summation of your opinion?

[CV75]

39 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I guess I'm not following.  "Systemic racism" is your view means what?  What is the "system?"

Thanks,

-Smac

Borrowing from the first paragraph of the article: In my view, systemic racism is policy that systematically oppresses individuals demographically identifiable by race as measured by disparate outcomes among those individuals in a particular system (in this case, the school system). Attribution has nothing to do with it.

“Congrats to Stanford Law and Policy Lab. They have identified the problem but are pursuing an epic failure with their solution. It seems the top-tier school has finally figured out that tying children to failing schools by their zip codes systematically oppresses black and brown children. President Trump knew that when he called school choice the civil rights issue of our time. However, Stanford is taking the standard approach of over-educated leftists. As is typical, they detected disparate outcomes in a system they are evaluating, they blamed it on racism and their first instinct was to lower the standards.”

Borrowing from your post, “bad policy” (systemic racism) is not the same as “some nebulous and never-ending racial animus that infects America everywhere.” I read this stuff from the left and the right quite a bit, and the rhetoric from either side is very evident to me.

There are many kinds of racism, and systemic racism is but one.

[smac97]

25 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Quote

I guess I'm not following.  "Systemic racism" is your view means what?  What is the "system?"

Borrowing from the first paragraph of the article: In my view, systemic racism is policy that systematically oppresses individuals demographically identifiable by race as measured by disparate outcomes among those individuals in a particular system (in this case, the school system). Attribution has nothing to do with it.

Okay.  But I still don't understand.  What is the "system" you are referencing in "systemic racism?"

25 minutes ago, CV75 said:

“Congrats to Stanford Law and Policy Lab. They have identified the problem but are pursuing an epic failure with their solution. It seems the top-tier school has finally figured out that tying children to failing schools by their zip codes systematically oppresses black and brown children. President Trump knew that when he called school choice the civil rights issue of our time. However, Stanford is taking the standard approach of over-educated leftists. As is typical, they detected disparate outcomes in a system they are evaluating, they blamed it on racism and their first instinct was to lower the standards.”

I note that you bolded for emphasis some items, but not the actual "problem" as seen by the author of the piece: "It seems the top-tier school has finally figured out that tying children to failing schools by their zip codes systematically oppresses black and brown children."

Per the article, there are some jurisdictions that prohibit, discourage or otherwise make things very difficult for families who do not want their children tied to "failing schools."  It is the policies in these jurisdictions that are "systematically opppress{ing} black and brown children" (per the author).

A Google search for the phrase "systemic racism" yields 9.59 million results.  Wikipedia doesn't have an entry for it, but does have a re-direct to "Institutional Racism":

Quote

Institutional racism, also known as systemic racism, is a form of racism that is embedded as normal practice within society or an organization. It can lead to such issues as discrimination in criminal justice, employment, housing, health care, political power, and education, among other issues.

The term institutional racism was first coined in 1967 by Stokely Carmichael and Charles V. Hamilton in Black Power: The Politics of Liberation. Carmichael and Hamilton wrote that while individual racism is often identifiable because of its overt nature, institutional racism is less perceptible because of its "less overt, far more subtle" nature. Institutional racism "originates in the operation of established and respected forces in the society, and thus receives far less public condemnation than [individual racism]".

Institutional racism was defined by Sir William Macpherson in the UK's Lawrence report (1999) as: "The collective failure of an organization to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin. It can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour that amount to discrimination through prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness, and racist stereotyping which disadvantage minority ethnic people."

Let's put aside, for the moment, personal opinions about whether this phenomenon actually exists, and assume that it does.  The article I quoted has some things to say about improving the education of minority kids, but it doesn't actually use the phrase "systemic racism."  The author of the piece also didn't use the phrase "racial hierarchy" except as a quotation from Stanford.  The author of the piece states that "tying children to failing schools by their zip codes systematically oppresses black and brown children," and then proceeds to point to a jurisdiction (NYC) that tie children to failing schools by their zip codes, that enacts policies to make things difficult or impossible for parents to use alternatives to those failing schools.  

The author of the piece also faults Stanford for complaining about a "racial hierarchy" while simultaneously excoriating proposed solutions (the "Success Academy" stuff) that have done wonders for overcoming those problems.  

So again, what is the "system" or "institution" that you have in mind?  Is it local school districts that make things difficult for charter schools?  Or is it an "America in its entirety, soup to nuts, is indelibly and systemically and incorrigibly racist" kind of thing?  I've assuming the former.

25 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Borrowing from your post, “bad policy” (systemic racism) is not the same as “some nebulous and never-ending racial animus that infects America everywhere.”

I agree.  But "systemic racism" is usually utilized as rhetoric meaning “some nebulous and never-ending racial animus that infects America everywhere.”  And since you introduced the phrase into the discussion, I thought some clarification as to your meaning would help things.

25 minutes ago, CV75 said:

I read this stuff from the left and the right quite a bit, and the rhetoric from either side is very evident to me.

Yes.  The partisan rhetoric is unfortunate.  I the policy-based content of the article was good, though.

Thanks,

-Smac  

[CV75]

47 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Okay.  But I still don't understand.  What is the "system" you are referencing in "systemic racism?"

I note that you bolded for emphasis some items, but not the actual "problem" as seen by the author of the piece: "It seems the top-tier school has finally figured out that tying children to failing schools by their zip codes systematically oppresses black and brown children."

Per the article, there are some jurisdictions that prohibit, discourage or otherwise make things very difficult for families who do not want their children tied to "failing schools."  It is the policies in these jurisdictions that are "systematically opppress{ing} black and brown children" (per the author).

A Google search for the phrase "systemic racism" yields 9.59 million results.  Wikipedia doesn't have an entry for it, but does have a re-direct to "Institutional Racism":

Let's put aside, for the moment, personal opinions about whether this phenomenon actually exists, and assume that it does.  The article I quoted has some things to say about improving the education of minority kids, but it doesn't actually use the phrase "systemic racism."  The author of the piece also didn't use the phrase "racial hierarchy" except as a quotation from Stanford.  The author of the piece states that "tying children to failing schools by their zip codes systematically oppresses black and brown children," and then proceeds to point to a jurisdiction (NYC) that tie children to failing schools by their zip codes, that enacts policies to make things difficult or impossible for parents to use alternatives to those failing schools.  

The author of the piece also faults Stanford for complaining about a "racial hierarchy" while simultaneously excoriating proposed solutions (the "Success Academy" stuff) that have done wonders for overcoming those problems.  

So again, what is the "system" or "institution" that you have in mind?  Is it local school districts that make things difficult for charter schools?  Or is it an "America in its entirety, soup to nuts, is indelibly and systemically and incorrigibly racist" kind of thing?  I've assuming the former.

I agree.  But "systemic racism" is usually utilized as rhetoric meaning “some nebulous and never-ending racial animus that infects America everywhere.”  And since you introduced the phrase into the discussion, I thought some clarification as to your meaning would help things.

Yes.  The partisan rhetoric is unfortunate.  I the policy-based content of the article was good, though.

Thanks,

-Smac  

I think you do understand my view, given that you point out that systemic racism refers to policy (as I described it) in an institutional jurisdiction (such as the schools you are using in your example). I’m OK with your preferring to hear it from yourself rather than me! 😊

Partisan opinion pieces always contain, and are always utilized, as rhetoric. which is why I simply filter out that aspect when reading posts.

[smac97]

5 minutes ago, CV75 said:

I think you do understand my view, given that you point out that systemic racism refers to policy (as I described it) in an institutional jurisdiction (such as the schools you are using in your example). I’m OK with your preferring to hear it from yourself rather than me! 😊

Partisan opinion pieces always contain, and are always utilized, as rhetoric. which is why I simply filter out that aspect when reading posts.

Sure.  I think "systemic racism" as a phrase and concept is itself susceptible to being used in a highly partisan and/or ideosyncratic way, and is actually pretty darn vague.

I also think that there is some confusion about "systemic racism" as a de jure thing versus "systemic racism" as a de facto thing.  

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited March 10, 2021 by smac97

[CV75]

18 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Sure.  I think "systemic racism" as a phrase and concept is itself susceptible to being used in a highly partisan and/or ideosyncratic way, and is actually pretty darn vague.

I also think that there is some confusion about "systemic racism" as a de jure thing versus "systemic racism" as a de facto thing.  

Thanks,

-Smac

What do you think is being addressed in the BYU report?

[smac97]

48 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Quote

Sure.  I think "systemic racism" as a phrase and concept is itself susceptible to being used in a highly partisan and/or ideosyncratic way, and is actually pretty darn vague.

I also think that there is some confusion about "systemic racism" as a de jure thing versus "systemic racism" as a de facto thing.  

What do you think is being addressed in the BYU report?

From the report I see anecdotal allegations of de facto racism.  Not much in the way of de jure racism, let alone de jure systemic racism.

I also see allegations that BYU is not doing enough to "adequately prepare students to navigate cultural and racial complexities."

Page 4 references " heartbreaking stories from individuals who have felt the pain of racism at BYU." 

Page 6 says that "students articulate{d} their experiences with poignant clarity," whose "hearts have been broken by their fellow students and others, whether by ignorance or hostility."  There are also references to "marginalizing comments, otherizing questions, and exhausting racial slights ... from roommates, classmates, church congregations, and faculty members."  That "BIPOC students often feel isolated and unsafe at BYU due to racism."  The examples given here (pp 6-7) are:

• "{O}ne student from the Hispanos Unidos club said it is 'very hard to find other Latino students at BYU.'"
• "A student from the Tribe of Many Feathers club recounted that she wanted to transfer out of BYU after her first year because of the lack of other Native American students."
• "A member of the Black Student Union reported, 'My experience as a Black student at BYU is not equal to other students on campus because I don’t feel safe.'"
• "A student from the Tribe of Many Feathers stated that during one Halloween there were White students who dressed up as 'savages' in Helaman Halls."
• "Another student from Hispanos Unidos said that a faculty member chastised her and a friend for speaking Spanish before class."
• "A member of the Black Student Union recounted an incident where a classmate used the n-word multiple times in response to a professor’s question, leaving the room in shock."

Page 12 is long on feelings and vague references and conclusory statements, and short on factual allegations:

• Many BIPOC students feel unsafe and isolated at BYU.
• BIPOC students describe harmful and isolating interactions with fellow students on the issue of race, stemming both from ignorance and animus.
• BIPOC students describe detrimental interactions with faculty whom they perceive to have ignored or even facilitated racially insensitive class discussions or who seemed unprepared or unwilling to address hurtful comments in class.
• BIPOC students have experienced discriminatory or racially stereotypical treatment in university-sponsored classroom instruction, campus events, and campus housing.
• BIPOC students have experienced discriminatory application of Dress and Grooming Standards on campus, especially hairstyles for Black students.

I had hoped to see more substance.  More facts.  More objective explanation of what has happened in specific instances, instead of conclusory declarations about motives, neglect, feelings and so on.  A paucity of Latino or Native American students is not, in my view, per se evidence of "racism" in admissions, and certainly not evidence of de facto racism by the student body, faculty, employees, etc.

The complaint about students dressing up as "savages" could be elaborated on.  Did they call themselves "savages?"  Or did they just dress up as Native Americans?  Was there any brownface/blackface (which seems to happen a lot in other contexts, with white folks not realizing the offensive baggage that comes with it)?  

A faculty member "chastised" a Hispanic student for speaking Spanish?  That seems really weird.  BYU is one of the most linguistically diverse places in the United States.  Shoot, I chatted up friends on campus in Mandarin all the time.  Speaking a foreign language there is as about as noteworthy as wearing shoes.  

The incident with a Black student hearing a classmate using the n-word multiple times in class is very unfortunate.  No justification for that.  

The stuff on page 12 is largely too vague to allow for meaningful analysis.  Phrases like "harmful and isolating interactions with fellow students on the issue of race" and "racially insensitive class discussions" and "hurtful comments" and "discriminatory or racially stereotypical treatment" and "discriminatory application of Dress and Grooming Standards" don't really tell us much.

Do is there de jure racism at BYU?  I don't see much in the way of evidence for that in the report.

Is there de facto racism at BYU?  Yes, but the report doesn't do much to establish its prevalence.   Nevertheless, this is unfortunate and merits attention.

Is there race-based violence at BYU?  Apparently not.  The report doesn't mention any, and I would think it would have had there been instances of it.

Is there race-based verbal harassment at BYU?  Verbal taunts?  Racial slurs?  Racist jokes?  

Is there evidence of race-based discrimination in hiring of faculty and employees?  In advancement?  

Again, the report doesn't illuminate much about this stuff.  I am curious as to why.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited March 11, 2021 by smac97

[Hamba Tuhan]

6 hours ago, smac97 said:

Okay.  But I still don't understand.  What is the "system" you are referencing in "systemic racism?"

You didn't ask me, but I recently drafted a parliamentary motion calling on our proudly 'progressive' government to agree to an independent review into claims of systemic racism at our hellhole of a gaol. For the sake of clarity, the term 'systemic' in this case is used to distinguish the racism from 'personal racism'. Personal racism is when individual people actually discriminate based on race. Systemic racism is when practices, policies and/or procedures produce inequitable outcomes. (Note that I specifically did not write, 'unequal outcomes'.)

I can give a simple, practical example from my area. We have a 'race' that is heavily overrepresented in our corrections system. Careful academic studies have shown that people of this race are arrested at a much higher rate for the exact same crimes than other people are. One option is to conclude that cops are racist (personal racism) and try to educate this out of them, but though a few are, again the research suggests that most aren't.

So what's the explanation if it's not about individual cops? We're still trying to figure that one out fully, but we have one piece of the puzzle. For genetic reasons, people of the race in question have a much higher incidence of hearing impairment, this often occurs at much younger ages than in the population at large, and for economic and cultural reasons, it often remains undiagnosed for many years. We also know from research that people with hearing impairment are statistically more likely to be arrested, in large part because difficulty hearing instructions or responding coherently to questions is often misunderstood as being uncooperative or even resistant.

This means that the 'system' -- i.e. the policies, practices and procedures -- produces unfair outcomes specifically tied to race unless compensation is made for this racial difference. And compensation in this case requires police to treat members of one race differently in order to remove this potential inequity. This can be as simple as making it a practice when speaking with members of the race in question to use the same kinds of techniques we teach other frontline workers to use when communicating with people who may have hearing impairment -- for example, always facing the person when speaking.

To be clear, I'm in no position to comment on the possibility of systemic racism at BYU, and I have no interest in reading reports about it, but it's probably useful to know what the phrase at the centre of the discussion actually designates.

Edited March 11, 2021 by Hamba Tuhan

[BlueDreams]

12 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

The definition of anecdotal evidence is relying heavily on personal testimony. As mormons, I guess you could say we've based a big part of our life philosophy on anecdotal evidence because we rely on faith, correct? 

I wouldn’t say that, no. Even one of the most commonly referenced passages about faith still balances with seeking out evidence of the goodness or fruitfulness of something. Recently I’ve been intrigued by the balance between what we know or don’t know found in scriptures. I would say there is a balance between seeking, exploring, questioning, recognizing the limits in our knowledge sources, and growing on and adjusting what we’ve come to know in the process. 

Quote

Nope, didnt ignore them. You and I see it differently. I dont think skin color holds people back today. Thinking skin color holds you back, holds you back. Thinking white people need to change so people can get ahead holds people back. 

 

Skin color to me is an oversimplification of what race or ethnicity actually is in society. And I would never say my skin color holds me back, but people’s interpretation of physical features can be hindrances or problems. 

Quote

I'm not saying there's not problems, but the way people are going about them is absolutely ridiculous. You couldn't come up with a slower way to bring about change and I personally think that's by design. 

     Let me give you one example that in my opinion would change the black community faster than what is going on now. I think if we as a nation made it where every employee in the country became an independent contractor instead of an employee, meaning, instead of a W-2 you recieve a 1099 from a company, our country would change overnight. Why, because individuals would be in charge of their own benefits, vacation, insurance, taxes. Most people dont realize a $10 job is actually a $24 an hour job, with the employer paying all his overhead first and giving you the excess. This  would help black people by giving them a since of Independence, making them their own boss essentially. Increasing options by allowing not just black people, but everyone to choose insurance, write off expenses and etc. I'm fortunate where I live that I'm able to deal with people with different skin colors and cultures. In my experience, a larger majority of black people seem to feel like they're behind the curve while at the same time just about all white people I know don't care what color people are, they just want someone whose willing to work hard. I personally believe the victimization in the black community is the #1 reason a lot of black people feel like they cant get ahead. Personally, I think the black community needs to come together and get some real leaders that stand up and tell the community that black people are champions and stop telling them the white man is holding them back. Al Sharpton and people like him are a cancer that reinforce victimhood. He wouldn't know positivity if it bit him in the ***. 

     There are so many things that we could be doing to build up the black community but for some reason we spend 70% of the time looking backward and 30% forward. That's because the people influencing the black community cant find negativey in the future, they have to look in the past to find negativy and use it to make people feel less than, it's a psychological ploy. 99.9% of white people I know dont care about color. 

    I really like your post, thank you for taking the time to write me.

There are several problems with this IMO. For one most people do not want to be independent contractors. I and my husband personally have no urge for that. On my part the idea of the work it take to run one’s own company does not appeal to me. In my definition of “success,” overworking myself is definitely not apart of it and to get a solid independent therapy practice going is work and a learning curve I prefer to not do. I did that for my masters and it would lead to week long migraines where my world would become a fog. Count me out. 
 

For my husband, it’s a big mix of it not making sense in his career (he’s a software engineer) and that it would likely lead to a heavy loss in our benefits, including solid health insurance. We cannot afford that. Our daughter has a rare genetic disorder that thankfully is manageable with diet, monitoring, and medication, similar to how diabetes can be managed. Due to our overly unregulated pharmaceutical industry the drug that keeps my daughter stable currently costs 500k a year. We don’t pay that largely because of insurance. Our specific occurance may be rare, but the general idea behind it isn’t. People have unique circumstances that make your plan maybe good for some, but not a universal or even expansive fix all. 
 
My other problem with this is though you write this as potentially empowering these messages often play off as somewhat patronizing and with a poor view of the black community. I know you and others don’t mean it as such, but it entails a couple problematic concerns. 1) it’s assumptions about the black community, those in it, and their views 2) it reduces their concerns to little more than victimization speech 3) it is obviously ignorant of what happens and the movements within black communities 4) it unfairly criticizes and stereotypes current leaders within black communities 5) it doesn’t fully represent concerns that happen in black communities. 
 

also I would note that most white people I know, at least on the surface will say the right thing (they don’t care about color). But their actions, assumptions, and desires will often go against the proclamation. Lip-service doesn’t equal true conversion, in other words. I’ve seen this in my own family that is vastly white on my mom’s side...including from my mom. I would point out that very very rarely is it overt hatred. Far more often it’s stereotypes, suspicion, warnings about who to date, flash assumptions, obvious discomfort, fears, etc. I will give you two very tiny examples. When I told my mom that my daughter had a rare genetic disorder her first reaction was to assume that it was because she was  mixed race...even though she is literally the mother of several mixed kids. The other, also with my mom, (who generally is a worrier particularly when there is change) was to assume my now husband was marrying me for a green card. Even though she had dated multiple immigrants. Racism is complicated and common beliefs are hard to kill. Just because one has familiarity with Xyz folk doesn’t necessarily insist that one doesn’t hold racist assumptions and beliefs. My experiences with my family alone has made me well aware of that. 
 

with luv, 

BD 

[Glenn101]

2 hours ago, BlueDreams said:

with luv, 

BD 

BD, I think your signature sums up the situation very well. "We do not see things as they are, we see them as we are."

It can be an emotionally and spiritually painful experience to look into the mirror and see ourselves as we really are. People are naturally biased and reflexive and those characteristics are often made more acute by culture, environment, nationality, etc. Two people can look at the same data, or whatever and come away with maybe diametrically opposed opinions. I think that maybe applying Christlike love in our responses, mental, verbal, emotional, spiritual will go a long ways in helping smooth out the differences, but then, not everyone believes in Christ.

Glenn

[CV75]

12 hours ago, smac97 said:

From the report I see anecdotal allegations of de facto racism.  Not much in the way of de jure racism, let alone de jure systemic racism.

I also see allegations that BYU is not doing enough to "adequately prepare students to navigate cultural and racial complexities."

Page 4 references " heartbreaking stories from individuals who have felt the pain of racism at BYU." 

Page 6 says that "students articulate{d} their experiences with poignant clarity," whose "hearts have been broken by their fellow students and others, whether by ignorance or hostility."  There are also references to "marginalizing comments, otherizing questions, and exhausting racial slights ... from roommates, classmates, church congregations, and faculty members."  That "BIPOC students often feel isolated and unsafe at BYU due to racism."  The examples given here (pp 6-7) are:

• "{O}ne student from the Hispanos Unidos club said it is 'very hard to find other Latino students at BYU.'"
• "A student from the Tribe of Many Feathers club recounted that she wanted to transfer out of BYU after her first year because of the lack of other Native American students."
• "A member of the Black Student Union reported, 'My experience as a Black student at BYU is not equal to other students on campus because I don’t feel safe.'"
• "A student from the Tribe of Many Feathers stated that during one Halloween there were White students who dressed up as 'savages' in Helaman Halls."
• "Another student from Hispanos Unidos said that a faculty member chastised her and a friend for speaking Spanish before class."
• "A member of the Black Student Union recounted an incident where a classmate used the n-word multiple times in response to a professor’s question, leaving the room in shock."

Page 12 is long on feelings and vague references and conclusory statements, and short on factual allegations:

• Many BIPOC students feel unsafe and isolated at BYU.
• BIPOC students describe harmful and isolating interactions with fellow students on the issue of race, stemming both from ignorance and animus.
• BIPOC students describe detrimental interactions with faculty whom they perceive to have ignored or even facilitated racially insensitive class discussions or who seemed unprepared or unwilling to address hurtful comments in class.
• BIPOC students have experienced discriminatory or racially stereotypical treatment in university-sponsored classroom instruction, campus events, and campus housing.
• BIPOC students have experienced discriminatory application of Dress and Grooming Standards on campus, especially hairstyles for Black students.

I had hoped to see more substance.  More facts.  More objective explanation of what has happened in specific instances, instead of conclusory declarations about motives, neglect, feelings and so on.  A paucity of Latino or Native American students is not, in my view, per se evidence of "racism" in admissions, and certainly not evidence of de facto racism by the student body, faculty, employees, etc.

The complaint about students dressing up as "savages" could be elaborated on.  Did they call themselves "savages?"  Or did they just dress up as Native Americans?  Was there any brownface/blackface (which seems to happen a lot in other contexts, with white folks not realizing the offensive baggage that comes with it)?  

A faculty member "chastised" a Hispanic student for speaking Spanish?  That seems really weird.  BYU is one of the most linguistically diverse places in the United States.  Shoot, I chatted up friends on campus in Mandarin all the time.  Speaking a foreign language there is as about as noteworthy as wearing shoes.  

The incident with a Black student hearing a classmate using the n-word multiple times in class is very unfortunate.  No justification for that.  

The stuff on page 12 is largely too vague to allow for meaningful analysis.  Phrases like "harmful and isolating interactions with fellow students on the issue of race" and "racially insensitive class discussions" and "hurtful comments" and "discriminatory or racially stereotypical treatment" and "discriminatory application of Dress and Grooming Standards" don't really tell us much.

Do is there de jure racism at BYU?  I don't see much in the way of evidence for that in the report.

Is there de facto racism at BYU?  Yes, but the report doesn't do much to establish its prevalence.   Nevertheless, this is unfortunate and merits attention.

Is there race-based violence at BYU?  Apparently not.  The report doesn't mention any, and I would think it would have had there been instances of it.

Is there race-based verbal harassment at BYU?  Verbal taunts?  Racial slurs?  Racist jokes?  

Is there evidence of race-based discrimination in hiring of faculty and employees?  In advancement?  

Again, the report doesn't illuminate much about this stuff.  I am curious as to why.

Thanks,

-Smac

These are anecdotes, not anecdotal evidence.

The anecdotes are illustrative, “case study” examples of the data which is shared in the tables that are provided and discussed in report. These anecdotes are considered to be within the scope of scientific/statistical method as they are consistent with the findings of the larger empirical and verifiable study (see the tables and related discussion).

The tables and related discussion are where you will find the substance and illumination on racial disparity at BYU.

The report also calls for continued surveys to help identify the reasons for these racial disparities and also other types of racism at BYU.

PS Good point on "systemic" vs "institutional" but as I thought more about my conceptualization of the terms, "systemic" to me addresses the interplay between multiple institutions (e.g. banks, companies, zoning boards, etc.) -- more like a complex of institutions than a single entity, which is where I think BYU is primarily coming from.

Edited March 11, 2021 by CV75

[AtlanticMike]

On 3/2/2021 at 12:39 PM, CV75 said:

When I say "from around the world" I'm including minorities in the USA, who now that you mention it are often treated as if they are from another country/planet. But "Multicultural Student Services, International Student and Scholar Services and the Office of Student Success and Inclusion" are included in the recommendations listed in the article. A good deal of the article's emphasis is placed on issues common to racism in the USA, and the survey does highlight the inequitable treatment of women and non-White students and employees, but that does not diminish the positive effects for international students and employees.

Are you actually serious when you say minorities are treated like they're from a different planet? I waited till this morning to respond to you so I could gather some real world data, I understand that doesn't mean much to you, but oh well. I asked 10 "BIPOC" people if they felt like they are treated like they're from a different planet. My wife said no, my kids said no, My mother in law said she felt that way in the Philippines because of classism, that's why they moved here, and she loves the Philippines, she is still a part owner in a business there. I pick up a black guy who works with me every morning and showed him what you said, I cant tell you what he actually said  because I would get kicked off the board, but he said he has never felt that way and he has seen racism. I just asked a couple latino guys, one wasn't born here. They also said no, and the guy who wasn't born here sends money back to help his family in hopes that one day more can come live with him. Now I'm on the job site and asked two more guys if people make them feel like they're from a different planet. Again, they said no. 

    I personally have never treated anyone like they're from a different planet. I have never seen someone treat someone else like they're from a different planet. Is there racism, yes, racism is everywhere, including countries that are majority POC. Ehat I disagree with is the way people are going about dealing with it. To say everything is " Whiteys" fault is a step backwards. To make people out as victims is a step backwards and also hurts the generations that are growing up in a country that is now in love with labeling people as victims. Its really simple, if you let someone label you as a victim, your more likely to except what they tell you the cure is. Never taking the time to step back and actually question if what they're selling you is helpful.

 

Edited March 11, 2021 by AtlanticMike

[AtlanticMike]

9 hours ago, BlueDreams said:

So I would note that most white people I know, at least on the surface will say the right thing (they don’t care about color). But their actions, assumptions, and desires will often go against the proclamation. Lip-service doesn’t equal true conversion, in other words

You have a very dim view of white people. 

 

9 hours ago, BlueDreams said:

I’ve seen this in my own family that is vastly white on my mom’s side...including from my mom. I would point out that very very rarely is it overt hatred. Far more often it’s stereotypes, suspicion, warnings about who to date, flash assumptions, obvious discomfort, fears, etc. I will give you two very tiny examples.

You are looking way to hard to find faults in people. It's almost as if someone has to be perfectly perfect to meet your criteria to not be "somekind" of racist. Your judging people for being human. Look at what you use to judge people. Read what you said above, you look at their actions, assumptions and desires, you seem upset because they use suspicion, warnings, flash assumptions, obvious discomfort, fears, etc. Is this how you judge people to tell if they meet your expectations?

       

10 hours ago, BlueDreams said:

The other, also with my mom, (who generally is a worrier particularly when there is change) was to assume my now husband was marrying me for a green card. Even though she had dated multiple immigrants. Racism is complicated and common beliefs are hard to kill. Just because one has familiarity with Xyz folk doesn’t necessarily insist that one doesn’t hold racist assumptions and beliefs. My experiences with my family alone has made me well aware of that. 

To me, it seems you are looking for racism wherever you can find it. Life doesn't have to be difficult. 

[BlueDreams]

2 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

Are you actually serious when you say minorities are treated like they're from a different planet? I waited till this morning to respond to you so I could gather some real world data, I understand that doesn't mean much to you, but oh well. I asked 10 "BIPOC" people if they felt like they are treated like they're from a different planet. My wife said no, my kids said no, My mother in law said she felt that way in the Philippines because of classism, that's why they moved here, and she loves the Philippines, she is still a part owner in a business there. I pick up a black guy who works with me every morning and showed him what you said, I cant tell you what he actually said  because I would get kicked off the board, but he said he has never felt that way and he has seen racism. I just asked a couple latino guys, one wasn't born here. They also said no, and the guy who wasn't born here sends money back to help his family in hopes that one day more can come live with him. Now I'm on the job site and asked two more guys if people make them feel like they're from a different planet. Again, they said no. 

 

I have. The most uncomfortable experience was a cabin Trip I took with a friend and all of her friends who were all white ...mainly because it wasn’t short lived. The parents in another room very obviously did a double take with shock in their face when they saw me enter. And one of their college aged kids used several awkward and uncomfortable stereotypes about black people to try and jovially connect with me. Definitely fell flat. My father definitely has. He at some points in the past used it a little. He has a funny story of playing up his foreignness and assumptions of Africans to keep potential roomates from moving into their apartment. You’ve mentioned several times that you live in a diverse area and I’m assuming out east, from your name. That is a very different environment than UT, where the population is still vastly white. I have a friend from small town Idaho who talked about the first time she saw a black person. She was an adult at the time. Those experiences breed unfamiliarity where their exposure to the cultural experiences and black people in general are extremely limited and sometimes based more on TV or word of mouth than regular interactions. 
 

1 hour ago, AtlanticMike said:

You have a very dim view of white people. 

 

No I don’t. I’m half white and hold no shame in being such. There’s limits and faults in all groups of people. racism is one I’ve seen and had my large group of brown friends tell experiences of more than once. 
 

Quote

You are looking way to hard to find faults in people. It's almost as if someone has to be perfectly perfect to meet your criteria to not be "somekind" of racist. Your judging people for being human. Look at what you use to judge people. Read what you said above, you look at their actions, assumptions and desires, you seem upset because they use suspicion, warnings, flash assumptions, obvious discomfort, fears, etc. Is this how you judge people to tell if they meet your expectations?

 Racism is not a limited, isolated and extreme experience.. extreme racism is. Kinda like how chronic liars are rare but lying isn’t. And again I’m not expecting perfection. This isn’t an all-or-nothing scenario where you’re either not racist or you’re not good enough to me. We all have poorly formed beliefs,blindspots, and assumptions about people/our world that are likely wrong or some degree of racist.  Early on in our marriage my husband pointed out one that I flippantly mentioned. I took note and changed my outlook and that was the end of it. I’m expecting nothing more from others. That we pause, listen, take note, and learn and change over time. 

Quote

To me, it seems you are looking for racism wherever you can find it. Life doesn't have to be difficult. 

 

I don’t believe in blinding myself to problems to make life “easy.” I’m quite okay with complicated, i strongly believe in working through and with problems, and I find better health and relationships in acknowledging complexity. I mentioned my mom twice in examples. Some of the things she’s said or done have been uncomfortable or even painful in the past. Some of those are racist things, most have nothing to do with race. I still love her and can do so healthily by acknowledging and naming her limits, at least to myself. When I didn’t that was when I struggled the most with her and with my sense of self. Denial is not freedom. 
I noted she assumed a genetic problem because of some poor notions about health and mixed kids. I should also note that she adores her grand baby and would spoil her silly if I let her. People are complex. I don’t need them to be perfect. I don’t need them to be without faults in order for me to then care for them. I would expect them to just to try to be a little better. And if they can’t then to allow me the privilege to set healthy boundaries.
 

With luv, 

BD