Author Topic: Neo-segregation  (Read 1857 times)

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Neo-segregation
« on: May 21, 2019, 06:58:03 PM »
A study by the National Association of Scholars - link to pdf.. Here’s  the new form of segregation, referred to as neo-segregation.

Quote
What we found was that neo-segregation is widespread if not pervasive. About 46 percent (80 colleges out of 173 surveyed) segregate student orientation programs; 43 percent (75 colleges out of the total) offer segregated residential arrangements; and 72 percent (125 colleges out of the total) segregate graduation ceremonies. Though these arrangements are ostensibly voluntary, students can’t easily opt out. We tracked numerous indicators of neo-segregation, from “Diversity Fly-Ins,” (68 percent of the total) where colleges offer minority students an expense-paid segregated preview of the experience that awaits them should they enroll, to segregated alumni groups.

I looked but couldn’t find if neo-segregation extended to things like water fountains, bathrooms, and restaurants. Probably only a matter of time:

Quote
Manifestations of this policy include racially separate  student orientations, racially-identified student centers, racially-identi- fied student counseling, racially-identified academic programs, racially sep- arate student activities, racially-specific political agendas, racially-exclusive graduation ceremonies, and racially-organized alumni groups. In some cases, colleges also encourage racially exclusive student housing.

In a country where people are routinely reported for  sleeping while black in a dorm room (so I’m told) is this a good idea?
« Last Edit: May 21, 2019, 07:00:04 PM by Crunch »

D.W.

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #1 on: May 21, 2019, 07:18:22 PM »
It's a terrible idea.  But if students or incoming students choose to group together by race, that's up to them...  If the institution is mandating it, then it doesn't matter if it's a good idea or not, it's kinda already illegal.  :P

D.W.

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #2 on: May 21, 2019, 07:20:37 PM »
Just an aside, you ARE aware that "The Left" exists out side of campus life... right?

It seems the great preponderance of your gripes relate to the fun-house mirror view of your political opponents when viewed though the lens of campus life.  :P

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #3 on: May 22, 2019, 12:39:28 PM »
It doesn't surprise me that some are against organizations like united sisters and brothers. I'm sure it feels terrifying to such people.

Wayward Son

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #4 on: May 22, 2019, 02:41:49 PM »
It should be noted that the National Association of Scholars is "an American non-profit politically conservative advocacy group, with a particular interest in education.[2][3] It promotes free speech on college campuses for dissident political trends, a return to mid-20th-century curricular and scholarship norms, and an increase in conservative representation in faculty" and "opposes multiculturalism and affirmative action and seeks to counter what it considers a "liberal bias" in academia."

So this organization is not concerned with minority rights or the effects of segregation from the past.  It would appear that this is an attempt to broaden the meaning of "segregation" to include any voluntary, non-exclusionary separation of groups, for the likely purpose of negating affirmative action for minorities.

D.W.

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #5 on: May 22, 2019, 03:44:26 PM »
Shocking!  I am shocked to hear that Wayward.   ::)

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #6 on: May 22, 2019, 03:56:40 PM »
Incidentally, I see no direct evidence from the article linked that they're "not concerned with minority rights". There are detractors and members, both quoted in the article. Anyhow, I don't really know anything about them other than I'm wondering: are they supposed to be a counter-argument against Crunch's claim that neo-segregation is a thing?

Wayward Son

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #7 on: May 22, 2019, 04:00:35 PM »
It is an indication that it's a thing only to people who don't care about segregation per se and are more concerned with something else, like ending affirmative action (which was established to counteract the effects of past segregation).

IOW, it's something they want to make a thing, but it's only a thing to them.  It's no-thing to everyone else. :)

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #8 on: May 22, 2019, 04:10:20 PM »
It is an indication that it's a thing only to people who don't care about segregation per se and are more concerned with something else, like ending affirmative action (which was established to counteract the effects of past segregation).

IOW, it's something they want to make a thing, but it's only a thing to them.  It's no-thing to everyone else. :)

I just don't see how this is on-topic regarding Crunch's claim that people are willingly segregating themselves, the result of which is new systems that eerily mirror old systems of segregation, other than that these are voluntary.

D.W.

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #9 on: May 22, 2019, 04:22:06 PM »
It's on topic, because it is being put forward the claim frivolous, and only being put forward by those with an ulterior motive, who don't care about "the problem" only in how the perception there IS a problem aids their own agenda.

Not sure how true that all is, but it's certainly on-topic.

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #10 on: May 22, 2019, 04:27:37 PM »
It's on topic, because it is being put forward the claim frivolous, and only being put forward by those with an ulterior motive, who don't care about "the problem" only in how the perception there IS a problem aids their own agenda.

Not sure how true that all is, but it's certainly on-topic.

Do you think it's on-topic when examining data for climate science to argue that the scientists presenting it do or don't "really care" about the planet's well-being?

D.W.

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #11 on: May 22, 2019, 04:40:14 PM »
Yep.  Who are they?  What methodology did they use?  Is this purely data presentation or an attempt to move forward a particular course of action or dissuade one?

That doesn't mean you ignore what they say.  Trust but verify.  And if you have reason to be distrustful, you "verify" even more aggressively.  :P

There is a fine line between entertaining all sources and being victim of distraction tactics.  Part of why I visit here is to benefit from multiple people's filtering efforts.  :)

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #12 on: May 22, 2019, 06:51:30 PM »
Incidentally, I see no direct evidence from the article linked that they're "not concerned with minority rights". There are detractors and members, both quoted in the article. Anyhow, I don't really know anything about them other than I'm wondering: are they supposed to be a counter-argument against Crunch's claim that neo-segregation is a thing?

It’s not my claim. It’s the NAS, who’ve done quite the study and documented this in considerable detail. It’s clearly a thing regardless of people’s concerns.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #13 on: May 22, 2019, 06:58:25 PM »
Just an aside, you ARE aware that "The Left" exists out side of campus life... right?

Of course. However, I am also aware that these people don’t stay in college forever. You ARE aware they eventually move on...right?

But, in case you weren’t, google “all black vacation”. It’s being called the “black travel movement” - you should google that as well.

It’s strange that 40 years after the civil rights movement that we’re seeing minorities roll it back voluntarily, embracing it even. And your reaction is taking a rather ill informed personal shot at me.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #14 on: May 22, 2019, 07:03:16 PM »
Shocking!  I am shocked to hear that Wayward.   ::)

I’m not. It’s the easy way to dismiss anything without a moments critical thought. Pretty standard procedure around here. He did not read the report, did not consider anything on its merit, just googled up enough to shoot the messenger. Facts take back seat (get it? Back of the bus?) to ideology with the left and this isa perfect example of that.

D.W.

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #15 on: May 23, 2019, 09:27:06 AM »
Quote
You ARE aware they eventually move on...right?
And grow up, and largely moderate a bit. 

...Or I suppose get a gig back in academia.  :D

Quote
And your reaction is taking a rather ill informed personal shot at me.
Observation.  And not just of you.  I find that as a rule the most outrageous / fringe things from the left come from a single setting.  Not much before, not much after. 
« Last Edit: May 23, 2019, 09:29:17 AM by D.W. »

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #16 on: May 23, 2019, 10:18:12 AM »
Oh yes. Quite the study. Of Yale, the part of the title that wasn't shared. As for the relevance of the publisher, they seem to think it's pretty important, since they print their mission on page 1. Most legitimate studies don't proclaim their bias so readily.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #17 on: May 23, 2019, 10:55:06 AM »
It's on topic, because it is being put forward the claim frivolous, and only being put forward by those with an ulterior motive, who don't care about "the problem" only in how the perception there IS a problem aids their own agenda.

There's a reason that there's a name for "poisoning the well" fallacy.  Attacking the speaker rather than the claim is far easier, all people are reprehensible on some measure after all, and it does nothing to address the actual concerns.

Ornery should be better than putting forward fallacies as if they were refutations in substance. 

If Wayward can not or will not make an argument on substance he should be ignored not supported.

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #18 on: May 23, 2019, 12:08:22 PM »
The author makes basically one claim, about Yale. That having any student group that involves race is equivalent to segregation. Except real segregation, like whites only drinking fountains were enforced by ordinance, ie the government. Use the wrong one, and you could get physically assaulted for it. The analogy fails immediately on its face.

Lloyd Perna

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #19 on: May 23, 2019, 12:11:33 PM »
So you would be ok with White only dorms, as long as they are voluntary and not enforced by ordinance?

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #20 on: May 23, 2019, 12:19:37 PM »
segregation. Except real segregation, like whites only drinking fountains were enforced by ordinance, ie the government.

This is an obsolete way of thinking. As we're seeing, dangers and threats can arise from both government and from the public. An analogous topic would be free speech, where even if government itself doesn't ban certain speech one may find fellow citizens making it functionally impossible to exercise it.

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #21 on: May 23, 2019, 12:23:42 PM »
Quote
Some are calling it segregation and a step backwards, while others say it’s a boost for the black student population. At Cal State Los Angeles, a new housing program opens up dorms for black students who want to be separated from the rest of the campus.

The housing option is generating criticism on social media. The campus is setting aside 20 spots in their 192 unit dorm complex for African-American students and others who share similar interests or concerns.

A similar housing option is available at UC Davis.

Segregation Or Sanctuary? Black-Only University Housing Draws Criticism

It isn't anything like segregation to have 20 spots for people who are in this housing.

Quote
UC Davis has offered this housing option for two decades now, and university officials say they do not shut anyone out.

“Many of our students who live in this community identify as African or African-Americans, but we also have a number of students who do not, and they want to be there to learn from other students,” says Brenden Petitt, director of the Office of Student Development.

Similar to UC Davis, a Cal State LA spokesperson says they too allow all students to apply for the housing, even if they’re not of African-American descent.

So that's even less like segregation.

I'd prefer if we had a society where black students wouldn't have to gather together to discuss what to do when somebody calls campus police because they saw someone suspicious. In lieu of that, I don't think it is unconscionable to let them gather to address their issues.

What exactly would a caucasian issues dorm be trying to address? People love to draw an equivalence, except there isn't one. A majority, by definition, doesn't need a special place or group to help defend their issues. There's a reason why the United Negro College Fund had to exist, but a white version didn't.

Wayward Son

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #22 on: May 23, 2019, 03:52:21 PM »
Shocking!  I am shocked to hear that Wayward.   ::)

I’m not. It’s the easy way to dismiss anything without a moments critical thought. Pretty standard procedure around here. He did not read the report, did not consider anything on its merit, just googled up enough to shoot the messenger. Facts take back seat (get it? Back of the bus?) to ideology with the left and this is a perfect example of that.

What makes you think I'm disputing any "facts?"  People self-segregate.  I don't dispute that.  You see it in where people live and vote.

What I am disputing is the unstated implication that there is no difference between neo-(self)segregation and Segregation.  That they are both evil, that both should be fought against, and that the Left are hypocrites because they support one and condemn the other.  Which are not facts, but opinions.

Now, since you did read the report, you can make me look foolish and tell me that none of those things are implied by the report.  That this organization, which goals are to end affirmative action and multiculturalism, published this report with no intention, implicit or otherwise, to use it as proof that their opinions are right.  But then you have to answer why they call it "neo-segregation" rather than something more neutral.

If they did not try to do those things, please explain what they were trying to do.  But if they were trying to do them, please don't waste all our time by sniping at me for "shooting the messenger," when I got the message loud and clear without even needing to hear him. ;) 

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #23 on: May 23, 2019, 04:31:49 PM »
Quote
What we found was that neo-segregation is widespread if not pervasive. About 46 percent (80 colleges out of 173 surveyed) segregate student orientation programs; 43 percent (75 colleges out of the total) offer segregated residential arrangements; and 72 percent (125 colleges out of the total) segregate graduation ceremonies. Though these arrangements are ostensibly voluntary, students can’t easily opt out. We tracked numerous indicators of neo-segregation, from “Diversity Fly-Ins,” (68 percent of the total) where colleges offer minority students an expense-paid segregated preview of the experience that awaits them should they enroll, to segregated alumni groups.

Quote
Black Commencement is open to ALL students regardless of race, color or creed. This is not about segregation, but a celebration of the African Diaspora at Harvard. All students attending Black Commencement will also attend other commencement ceremonies.

article[/quote]

They include tons of these types of optional, non exclusionary events, clubs, and organizations as evidence of segregation. Similarly:

Quote
Acting Assistant Dean & Advisor to Latinx Students:
[url]http://www.dartmouth.edu/~opal/latino/[/url]
Dean Renata Baptista (she, her, hers) joined the OPAL team in June
2015, hailing most recently from Columbus, Ohio. During her time at
Dartmouth, Renata has worked across the communities in OPAL to
support community-wide Heritage and History Month celebrations
and directed the leadership for social change program, OPAL
IMPACT.

They include this as evidence of "Segregated Advisors". Note that these are not their academic advisors, as you might naturally think when invoking the idea of segregation.

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #24 on: May 23, 2019, 04:53:10 PM »
Quote
The public should care because neo-segregation is the breeding ground
of racial conflict in American society. Neo-segregation inculcates in young
people the readiness to cling to a victim identity at the expense of becoming
a positive member of the larger community. No doubt a large portion of the
racial grievance politics we see in society at large these days is the carefully
nurtured product of campus neo-segregation.

Yeah, these student groups cause racial outcry against injustice. They're just getting minorities all riled up.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #25 on: May 23, 2019, 05:35:32 PM »
So you support neo-segregation then?

TheDrake

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #26 on: May 23, 2019, 06:09:19 PM »
I support ethnic student groups, yes. It is intellectually dishonest to call it segregation.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #27 on: May 23, 2019, 06:22:04 PM »
OK, so a yes on neo-segregation. I get you want to qualify it as just a student group thing but it goes well beyond that as I mentioned above and as the study details. Separate but equal, mmkay.

Wayward Son

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #28 on: May 23, 2019, 06:31:19 PM »
Crunch, can you summarize the differences between neo-segregation, classic segregation, peer-pressure and club membership?  Just so that we're all clear...

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #29 on: May 23, 2019, 07:06:18 PM »
Please start with your definitions. I expect footnotes.

Seriati

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #30 on: May 23, 2019, 07:26:01 PM »
What I am disputing is the unstated implication that there is no difference between neo-(self)segregation and Segregation.

What makes one "self" segregation?  In the first instance, white persons wanted to be "self" segregated from black persons and created areas that were exclusively for white persons, in the new one black persons want to be "self" segregated from whites and to create areas that are exclusively for black persons.

I think you're somehow pretending that segregation originally was "put on others" and that the current version is put on oneself.  That's a read that only acknowledges the view point of the black person involved, and not the reciprocal view points of the white person.

In any event, the idea of segregation on campus completely undermines the heavily relied on belief that diversity is vital in creating a college class, so much so that colleges should be able to consider race (which is otherwise strictly prohibited under our laws) in admission decisions.  If diversity is vital to the college experience creating segregation dorms specifically undermines what has been labelled as critical.

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #31 on: May 24, 2019, 12:14:41 PM »
Just an aside, you ARE aware that "The Left" exists out side of campus life... right?

Of course. However, I am also aware that these people don’t stay in college forever. You ARE aware they eventually move on...right?

But, in case you weren’t, google “all black vacation”. It’s being called the “black travel movement” - you should google that as well.

It’s strange that 40 years after the civil rights movement that we’re seeing minorities roll it back voluntarily, embracing it even. And your reaction is taking a rather ill informed personal shot at me.

Well, we also know, by way of Pew, that it isn't just happening along racial lines. Left-wits are congregating with other left-wits in ever increasing numbers. They cannot handle being in the presence of people who don't comply with their personal preferences.

And that is going to be a huge hurdle for the Dems to clear in 2020 when contending with their (strengthening) echo-chamber while trying to get enough of middle-America to vote Democrat to oust Trump.

Crunch

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #32 on: May 24, 2019, 03:59:42 PM »
 
What I am disputing is the unstated implication that there is no difference between neo-(self)segregation and Segregation.

What makes one "self" segregation?  In the first instance, white persons wanted to be "self" segregated from black persons and created areas that were exclusively for white persons, in the new one black persons want to be "self" segregated from whites and to create areas that are exclusively for black persons.

I think you're somehow pretending that segregation originally was "put on others" and that the current version is put on oneself.  That's a read that only acknowledges the view point of the black person involved, and not the reciprocal view points of the white person.

In any event, the idea of segregation on campus completely undermines the heavily relied on belief that diversity is vital in creating a college class, so much so that colleges should be able to consider race (which is otherwise strictly prohibited under our laws) in admission decisions.  If diversity is vital to the college experience creating segregation dorms specifically undermines what has been labelled as critical.

If white people wanted to self segregate at public events and have whites only ceremonies, designed and hosted by educational institutions or if they wanted to go to resorts that only allowed white people, there would be a meltdown of epic proportions from the left. Student groups organizing along racial lines for whites only would be banned without question.

It's strange how this breaks down on ideological lines with many on the left supporting segregation. I'd honestly not have believed it but there it is, right in this thread.

Wayward Son

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #33 on: May 24, 2019, 06:17:03 PM »
What I am disputing is the unstated implication that there is no difference between neo-(self)segregation and Segregation.

What makes one "self" segregation?  In the first instance, white persons wanted to be "self" segregated from black persons and created areas that were exclusively for white persons, in the new one black persons want to be "self" segregated from whites and to create areas that are exclusively for black persons.

I think you're somehow pretending that segregation originally was "put on others" and that the current version is put on oneself.  That's a read that only acknowledges the view point of the black person involved, and not the reciprocal view points of the white person.

In any event, the idea of segregation on campus completely undermines the heavily relied on belief that diversity is vital in creating a college class, so much so that colleges should be able to consider race (which is otherwise strictly prohibited under our laws) in admission decisions.  If diversity is vital to the college experience creating segregation dorms specifically undermines what has been labelled as critical.

I'm not sure which part I am supposedly "pretending"-- that segregation originally was "put on others" (an obvious truth) or that the "current" version is put on oneself.  Let me expand on this.

"Classic" segregation was imposed on others.  If you were black, there was no choice about where you could live, work, go to school, etc.  It was prescribed by law.  You were jailed or worse if you broke it.

This "segregation" seems to be more like a club.  It is not imposed by law.  Even these segregated dorms are not "exclusive" as in the old sense.  I would bet that, if there were no enough students to fill the dorms, whites and others would be housed there.  They would not be left empty because whites were "not allowed."

And even with these segregated dorms, the students themselves are not segregated.  They attend the same classes, eat at the same cafeterias, interact in all other ways.  This is a far cry from entire colleges that were segregated.

And a segregated dorm for white students would be rather silly in a college that is predominantly white.  When most of the dorms are predominantly white, what would be the need to have one exclusively for whites?  Would they feel isolated in regular dorms?  Would they find it difficult to find others like them to associate with?  These are the purposes of these minority-segregated dorms, not to keep "those people" away from them as in "classic" segregation.  (Now, in a black college, I could see the need for such a segregated dorm, and I doubt there would be much hue-and-cry about it. :) )

This supposed "neo-segregation" seems to me to be more about helping students feel comfortable in situations where they are the minority, to help with diversity overall on the campus, rather than "classic" segregation which was to keep races separated.  I see this as the vital difference, and one which cuts the legs off of the reverse-discrimination claims of organizations like the National Association of Scholars.

Please start with your definitions. I expect footnotes.

I ask my questions because I'm not certain you see any difference between classic segregation and neo-segregation, or any similarities between neo-segregation and clubs or peer-pressure behavior.

So before I answer the affirmative about supporting "neo-segregation," I want to be sure that we agree that they are not identical, and both recognize the differences between them.  Because I don't want you coming back saying that I must be a proponent of Jim Crow because I don't see this "neo-segregation" as a horrible thing.  ::)

Fenring

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #34 on: May 24, 2019, 06:34:21 PM »
What always strikes me about these arguments is that the bottom line for the liberal/inclusive side is that the comfort of the students is paramount, which can include the comfort of not being offended, not being challenged, and in this case I suppose not being surrounded by people of a different skin color in a dorm. What I'd like to know is why any argument predicated upon making people more comfortable could be called a philosophical position when it's actually the opposite: it's literally the creation of policy that favors gut feeling and emotion over philosophy. I don't advocate for ignoring the gut feelings and emotion of people, but on the other hand there's no 'principle' to be found there any more than in choosing between which is more comfortable between eating ice cream or brussel sprouts (both of which I incidentally like). For a child to eat only what they're comfortable with is obviously ridiculous, so why it should be in more grown people escapes me other than as a luxury (I'm grown so I don't have to eat brussel sprouts, hah!).

In matters of safety there is of course an argument to be made of providing services and an environment favoring that. In matters of oppression we of course want to open up rather than close down avenues of advancement. However the issue comes when discomfort becomes equated with an unsafe environment, and this equivocation seems to be the basis of creating conditions of comfort but calling them necessary features.

Crunch, where you're going terribly wrong is in trying to call out a double standard. Duh, of course it's a double standard: in fact, the literal claim of the liberals on this topic is that there's already a double standard in place along racial lines, and that steps need to be taken to correct it. Those corrective steps will necessarily involve a double standard. If you look at it like numbers, imagine there are 4 on the left-hand side and 3 on the right, the right-hand side being behind by one and therefore in an unfair position. The corrective suggestion is to add one to the right side and nothing to the left, to equalize them. Your pointing a finger and arguing "aha! they're not being treated equally!" isn't a revelation, just a truism. It's the stated intent of the program, whose purpose is to create unequal favors for those on the underside of things. You can disagree in a variety of ways, but pointing out that it's a double standard is a bit behind the game...

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #35 on: May 25, 2019, 12:33:58 AM »
I just find it interesting that a group of people who are claiming to be proponents of integration think it is going to be achieved by permitting policies that in just about conceivable way, serve to prevent integration from happening in the first place.

cherrypoptart

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #36 on: May 25, 2019, 05:37:19 AM »
I have to wonder if it would be okay for the situation to happen in reverse, for the white students to express an interest in maybe self segregating at certain times and places. I have a feeling they'd get an earful, and worse, if they ever suggested it. Of course that would be a totally different thing. No similarity to this at all. Not even remotely. That would be downright racist.

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #37 on: May 25, 2019, 10:39:36 AM »
I have to wonder if it would be okay for the situation to happen in reverse, for the white students to express an interest in maybe self segregating at certain times and places. I have a feeling they'd get an earful, and worse, if they ever suggested it. Of course that would be a totally different thing. No similarity to this at all. Not even remotely. That would be downright racist.

That is disallowed because it "obviously" prevents minority from being able to "integrate with whites." Evidently integration plans do not likewise make allowances for whites to seek integration/understanding in the other direction, if (insert group here) doesn't want them there.

NobleHunter

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #38 on: May 25, 2019, 10:56:25 AM »
I think this thread is a pretty good explanation of why some black people prefer to have spaces without white people in them.

ScottF

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #39 on: May 25, 2019, 11:12:18 AM »
I think this thread is a pretty good explanation of why some black people prefer to have spaces without white people in them.

Ugh. This whole line of thought is as repulsive as it is hypocritical.

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #40 on: May 25, 2019, 11:22:20 AM »
I think this thread is a pretty good explanation of why some black people prefer to have spaces without white people in them.

Having been in the position of being the white person asked the leave so a group of "black people" could have "their space" back in the more innocent days of early 2001. I've increasingly shifted into the category of significant indifference. I honored the request at the time because I didn't want to be "the white guy lording it over them." At least until it happened a second time(in a different venue), at which point I didregister a complaint.

This one is something of a hot button for me, this is a place where I was on the receiving end of that mythical "Reverse discrimination" that many people claim doesn't exist. And I can 100% tell you that the experience was very directly harmful in respect to integration, as that forced me into having to re-evaluate my views on a number of things up to then.

Luckily, I knew a lot of other awesome people who also were black, so it didn't impact things much that way. But when it comes to blacks (not personally known to me) trying to pull "the race card" after that? Yeah, they get a huge amount of skepticism after that.

NobleHunter

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #41 on: May 25, 2019, 11:24:38 AM »
"I was asked to leave twice so I became more prejudiced against black people" is probably not the winning anecdote you think it is. Especially when combined with "I have awesome black fiends."

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #42 on: May 25, 2019, 11:26:57 AM »
"I was asked to leave twice so I became more prejudiced against black people" is probably not the winning anecdote you think it is. Especially when combined with "I have awesome black fiends."

That isn't how I said it, and you're re-phrasing of it is deeply offensive.

NobleHunter

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #43 on: May 25, 2019, 11:31:35 AM »
But that's what you said means. If it isn't what you meant, you shouldn't have said it.

Also, if you're a straight guy in a place for gay people, don't be surprised if you're asked to leave. If you get offended that you've been asked to leave, then at least recognize what kind of straight guy you're being.

ScottF

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #44 on: May 25, 2019, 11:33:18 AM »
Also, if you're a gay guy in a place for straight people, don't be surprised if you're asked to leave. If you get offended that you've been asked to leave, then at least recognize what kind of gay guy you're being.

Straight up homophobic.

TheDeamon

  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #45 on: May 25, 2019, 11:35:36 AM »
But that's what you said means. If it isn't what you meant, you shouldn't have said it.

Part of this is, I guess you're missing out on some other "PC speak" that exists out there.

I didn't say "I have black friends." I said "I have friends who happen to be black." Very different connotation. They're friends because I'd be friends with them regardless of what their skin coloration was. They just happen to be black. But whatever floats your boat man, obviously you're wokeness trumps everything else.

NobleHunter

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #46 on: May 25, 2019, 11:37:42 AM »
Also, if you're a gay guy in a place for straight people, don't be surprised if you're asked to leave. If you get offended that you've been asked to leave, then at least recognize what kind of gay guy you're being.

Straight up homophobic.

Lemme guess, you're one of those people who "don't see race?"

ETA: To be fair, the gay guy is probably being, at best, a drama queen. The straight guy in the same situation is at best a homophobic *censored*.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2019, 11:41:53 AM by NobleHunter »

NobleHunter

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #47 on: May 25, 2019, 11:39:02 AM »
Part of this is, I guess you're missing out on some other "PC speak" that exists out there.

I didn't say "I have black friends." I said "I have friends who happen to be black." Very different connotation. They're friends because I'd be friends with them regardless of what their skin coloration was. They just happen to be black. But whatever floats your boat man, obviously you're wokeness trumps everything else.

"I'm not racist, I have friends who happen to be black."

You're right. That means something completely different from "I'm not racist, I have black friends."

ScottF

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #48 on: May 25, 2019, 11:41:27 AM »
Also, if you're a gay guy in a place for straight people, don't be surprised if you're asked to leave. If you get offended that you've been asked to leave, then at least recognize what kind of gay guy you're being.

Straight up homophobic.

Lemme guess, you're one of those people who "don't see race?"

I’m as tribal as we all are, just not (as big) a hypocrite.

NobleHunter

  • Member
  • All Members
    • View Profile
Re: Neo-segregation
« Reply #49 on: May 25, 2019, 11:45:02 AM »
I’m as tribal as we all are, just not (as big) a hypocrite.

Do you not understand why gay people self-segregate? And why it doesn't have the same meaning as segregation created by straight people?