# Resumes with a female name were 41% more likely to receive a callback than resumes with a male name for software engineering jobs



## City (Sep 19, 2022)

https://economics.yale.edu/sites/default/files/marley_finley.senior_essay.pdf


I wonder what are the feminists going to say about this.

Imagine working your ass off and then getting turned down because you don't have a vagigia.


----------



## lokomelo (Sep 19, 2022)

City said:


> https://economics.yale.edu/sites/default/files/marley_finley.senior_essay.pdf
> 
> 
> I wonder what are the feminists going to say about this.
> ...


I hope to see more and more men crying for being discriminated, as women have been exploited by men since 4000 bc (maybe it is even more, much more). So we own them like 6000 years of privileges to make things even.

That said, I'll not even bother in reading the paper, as man still gets much more money in most (if not all) nations on this fucking world. Loose examples of the opposite will appear, the big picture still remains the same sadly.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Sep 19, 2022)

City said:


> https://economics.yale.edu/sites/default/files/marley_finley.senior_essay.pdf
> 
> 
> I wonder what are the feminists going to say about this.


We've always said this was bad? Feminism, contrary to what insecure MRAs have convinced you, is not about woman supremacy or any nonsense like that. It's about gender equality. Situations like this are bad. It's the same reason why it's also bad that white sounding names get callbacks more than ethnic sounding names are.


----------



## RAHelllord (Sep 19, 2022)

From a quick read that's a pretty well executed essay and fairly solid experiment to boot, kudos for that. However, there a few point to criticize before the conclusion can be generalized more broadly.

The biggest point would be that the experiment focused on younger firms (Start-ups to be precise) and doesn't include more, longer established companies. The experiment itself found that any additional year since the founding decreases the positive discrimination for woman, up to the point where the author estimates that it will turn to negative discrimination near the 10 year anniversary of the company.
One of the reasons this skew may be the case is the possibility that younger companies are spearheaded by younger people that are aware of the existing problems with woman in STEM fields and are thus subconsciously biased to be more willing to hire some of the arguably rare woman in the field. Whether out of being "woke" or knowing that it'll be great optics is another can of worms.

Second, this is an essay with an experiment, it's not a peer reviewed paper with a proper study conducted. While the author had guidance by a professor when performing the experiment it's veracity would still need to be proven with a more robust study that accounts for more variables, and hopefully more diversity in companies. Just going for startups and only sending one application to every company doesn't account for errors within the companies themselves.


----------



## The Catboy (Sep 19, 2022)

Honestly, I am glad people with female-sounding names are actually getting called back in the tech field.


----------



## RAHelllord (Sep 19, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> Honestly, I am glad people with female-sounding names are actually getting called back in the tech field.


Unless it's EA or Blizzard Activision.


----------



## The Catboy (Sep 19, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> Unless it's EA or Blizzard Activision.


That’s for true


----------



## DinohScene (Sep 19, 2022)

Alright time to stop this now.
Next person who continues this will get a time out.


----------



## CraddaPoosta (Sep 19, 2022)

DinohScene said:


> Alright time to stop this now.
> Next person who continues this will get a time out.


Thank you for proving that you can be fair. That was a pleasant surprise. Good form.


----------



## tabzer (Sep 19, 2022)

City said:


> https://economics.yale.edu/sites/default/files/marley_finley.senior_essay.pdf



There is a simple explanation for this.  Besides the idea that women are generally less intimidating to talk to, they end up having to pay less.  Men are more likely to negotiate for a higher salary where women are more likely willing to settle for the "social status".  I like to putting "Tabzera" on my resume because it sounds more attractive and increases the chance for a callbacks.  When they find out that I am sexy, smart, and easy to get along with, I get the job.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Sep 19, 2022)

So wait, if the study isn't even peer reviewed, what's the point in it being published like this?


----------



## CraddaPoosta (Sep 19, 2022)

I wonder how much of this is due to the increased focus on women in STEM industries. 

I have never believed that gender has anything to do with a person's potential or capacity. But, this is the society we live in, today. I would hate to be reduced to my gender, whether it was for an advantage or as a form of discrimination.


----------



## RAHelllord (Sep 19, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> So wait, if the study isn't even peer reviewed, what's the point in it being published like this?


It's not a study, it's an essay. Likely done as an assignment for a semester, under guidance of a professor. The essay was published by the university as it got a university internal award.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Sep 19, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> It's not a study, it's an essay. Likely done as an assignment for a semester, under guidance of a professor. The essay was published by the university as it got a university internal award.


That would explain everything.


----------



## RAHelllord (Sep 19, 2022)

Found the page again where it was nominated for a price: https://economics.yale.edu/undergraduate/senior-essays-nominated-prizes


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 19, 2022)

The big takeaway from this is that employers seem to just be reading names instead of entire resumes. The results of this should be interesting to watch. I can see the first time somebody hires a woman with a gender studies degree with zero programming experience because as far as they got was the name.

Interviewer: So your name suggests that you are a woman.

Interviewee: Yes, that is correct.

Interviewer: But I can see your dick.

Interviewee: Don't be a bigot!!


----------



## JuanBaNaNa (Sep 19, 2022)

lokomelo said:


> I hope to see more and more men crying for being discriminated, as women have been exploited by men since 4000 bc (maybe it is even more, much more). So we own them like 6000 years of privileges to make things even.
> 
> That said, I'll not even bother in reading the paper, as man still gets much more money in most (if not all) nations on this fucking world. Loose examples of the opposite will appear, the big picture still remains the same sadly.


Bonus points if said programmer girls knows how to make sandwiches and bring the coffee.


----------



## sombrerosonic (Sep 19, 2022)

JuanBaNaNa said:


> Bonus points if said programmer girls knows how to make sandwiches and bring the coffee.


So... can you make me a chilli dog pretty plz


----------



## JuanBaNaNa (Sep 19, 2022)

sombrerosonic said:


> So... can you make me a chilli dog pretty plz


Oof, so tempted to reply that with EOF quality post, but I'm affraid that would cause this thread to get it moved to EOF...

So... I'm not a programmer, so I'm not in any position to bring the sandwiches. But feel free to ask for a weenie.


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

DinohScene said:


> Alright time to stop this now.
> Next person who continues this will get a time out.


Can't read it so this means what.


----------



## sombrerosonic (Sep 19, 2022)

JuanBaNaNa said:


> Oof, so tempted to reply that with EOF quality post, but I'm affraid that would cause this thread to get it moved to EOF...
> 
> So... I'm not a programmer, so I'm not in any position to bring the sandwiches. But feel free to ask for a weenie.


i wanna weenie..... and not the one in your pants.... thats gross


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

So take away give Women name to get job and know nothing about what you have to do. Got it.


----------



## The Catboy (Sep 19, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> The big takeaway from this is that employers seem to just be reading names instead of entire resumes. The results of this should be interesting to watch. I can see the first time somebody hires a woman with a gender studies degree with zero programming experience because as far as they got was the name.
> 
> Interviewer: So your name suggests that you are a woman.
> 
> ...


Or they are reading resumes and accepting based on skill and stopped rejecting based on name. 
Equally, no one would be called a bigot for asking for see someone’s gentiles. They would be called a creep and be reported for sexual harassment. No one should be reduced down to their junk and no one should be questioned about it.


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> Or they are reading resumes and accepting based on skill and stopped rejecting based on name.
> Equally, no one would be called a bigot for asking for see someone’s gentiles. They would be called a creep and be reported for sexual harassment. No one should be reduced down to their junk and no one should be questioned about it.


True but if junk is missing should you be more qualified? Or even with out. Should be bassed on brain not neither region unless hirer wants what is below or filling underprivileged.


----------



## MasterJ360 (Sep 19, 2022)

I think it goes deeper than just a gender name on a resume. Thats just 1 barrier men have to go through, then you have race, and the years worked at previous jobs. This can allude the recruiter with personal standards that goes against any form of employment diversity on whether your even worth their time to keep despite the experience you have.


----------



## erikas (Sep 19, 2022)

City said:


> https://economics.yale.edu/sites/default/files/marley_finley.senior_essay.pdf
> 
> 
> I wonder what are the feminists going to say about this.
> ...


looks like they are going to justify present discrimination with past discrimination.


----------



## The Catboy (Sep 19, 2022)

Randqalan said:


> True but if junk is missing should you be more qualified? Or even with out. Should be bassed on brain not neither region unless hirer wants what is below or filling underprivileged.


I think you as actually approaching the point of my post, which is that maybe employers are hiring based on qualifications and no longer just stopping at the name. I think the rise in women in the tech field isn’t something suspicious but probably progress


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

So fyi 55 Year male white man is f up no call back can not get job. Go figure how 30 Year &+ always gets the shit jobs


----------



## RAHelllord (Sep 19, 2022)

Apparently I'm the only person that actually read the thing.


Randqalan said:


> True but if junk is missing should you be more qualified? Or even with out. Should be bassed on brain not neither region unless hirer wants what is below or filling underprivileged.


One of the biggest hurdles for any job application to go anywhere is to get noticed. Anything that sticks out is more likely to get attention over the other sea of resumes, and dramatically increases chances of a reply unless there's a deal breaker in there. The resumes the experiment drafted were entirely identical except for the name, email, and cover letter.

Chances are a good amount of bias came from just the novelty of a woman's name sticking out like a sore thumb from swathes of male applicants. Women in IT are still rare after all, thus catching the eye just because it's less expected to see one.
If there is an algorithm that sorts things before a human ever sees any application that bias may not be there, helping explain why longer established companies didn't have that bias as much, or even opposite bias.


----------



## SG854 (Sep 19, 2022)

In the Metaverse I would not have allowed this to happen. Everyone is treated equal here.


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

SG854 said:


> In the Metaverse I would not have allowed this to happen. Everyone is treated equal here.


I don't like it but I live in reality. Ok my illusion of reality. I can confirm that this crap even happens at low level like  Dollar general a Assistant manager that can't do less then cashier getting 29% more getting overtime not doing any truck all because she is a 5.2 inch and girl and same sex lover. Almost any employee could and do more than her but get less do more and are not  allowed above 35 hours a week. Go ss go woman right. F that were is equal rights anymore. Gone that's were.


----------



## The Real Jdbye (Sep 19, 2022)

lokomelo said:


> I hope to see more and more men crying for being discriminated, as women have been exploited by men since 4000 bc (maybe it is even more, much more). So we own them like 6000 years of privileges to make things even.
> 
> That said, I'll not even bother in reading the paper, as man still gets much more money in most (if not all) nations on this fucking world. Loose examples of the opposite will appear, the big picture still remains the same sadly.


That's not how it works, you can't just punish people for something that happened 6000 years ago. Also, what happened to gender equality?


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

The Real Jdbye said:


> That's not how it works, you can't just punish people for something that happened 6000 years ago. Also, what happened to gender equality?


Lost cause me too old to white boy male no kids.


----------



## SG854 (Sep 19, 2022)

The Real Jdbye said:


> That's not how it works, you can't just punish people for something that happened 6000 years ago. Also, what happened to gender equality?


The man is crazy. Supporting gender Inequality. Good thing no one supports him besides crazy people. Meta out.


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

SG854 said:


> The man is crazy. Supporting gender Inequality. Good thing no one supports him besides crazy people. Meta out.


When at what time has gender equality ever worked. Hell woman has always owned us. 
You guys know why!


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 19, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> Or they are reading resumes and accepting based on skill and stopped rejecting based on name.
> Equally, no one would be called a bigot for asking for see someone’s gentiles. They would be called a creep and be reported for sexual harassment. No one should be reduced down to their junk and no one should be questioned about it.


I'll be more than happy to explain the joke to you.


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> I'll be more than happy to explain the joke to you.


The real joke is on Man! Truly we always bow down to our women! Either she she or he she.(DAMN I am abad boy)


----------



## LainaGabranth (Sep 19, 2022)

This study is just proof women are based and redpilled


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> This study is just proof women are based and redpilled


No they just have what real guys want. So they own them. Did I just reviel our secret.(No they knw)


----------



## The Catboy (Sep 19, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> I'll be more than happy to explain the joke to you.


I don’t need your poorly worded joke explained to me. I get what you going for and it just wasn’t funny. Try being a less shit person


----------



## LainaGabranth (Sep 19, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> I don’t need your poorly worded joke explained to me. I get what you going for and it just wasn’t funny. Try being a less shit person


Right wing humor is kinda boring tbh. It's just "hehe, minorities bad!" and then you go "oh, that's dumb"


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Right wing humor is kinda boring tbh. It's just "hehe, minorities bad!" and then you go "oh, that's dumb"


LR both stupid really. I don't really understand why anyone believe there BS but I do believe in to each there rights so always I am looked down on old male white single no kids. I even bore myself. Me


----------



## LainaGabranth (Sep 19, 2022)

Randqalan said:


> LR both stupid really. I don't really understand why anyone believe there BS but I do believe in to each there rights so always I am looked down on old male white single no kids. I even bore myself. Me


idk man Steven Colbert was fucking funny


----------



## The Catboy (Sep 19, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Right wing humor is kinda boring tbh. It's just "hehe, minorities bad!" and then you go "oh, that's dumb"


Women bad! Minorities bad! Men good! -Right Wing “jokes”


----------



## LainaGabranth (Sep 19, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> Women bad! Minorities bad! Men good! -Right Wing “jokes”


Imagine some totally fucked up goober walking up on stage, burping in mic and going "MAN, WOMEN, AM I RIGHT FELLAS??"


----------



## LainaGabranth (Sep 19, 2022)

Wait no, I take that back, that sounds fucking hilarious.


----------



## sombrerosonic (Sep 19, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> This study is just proof women are based and redpilled


The word redpill reminds me of a yt video called "Mario gets redpill"


----------



## The Catboy (Sep 19, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Imagine some totally fucked up goober walking up on stage, burping in mic and going "MAN, WOMEN, AM I RIGHT FELLAS??"


Honestly, that could legit be a satire if done right. So obviously it wouldn’t be any on the right because they would still find a means of shoving in transphobia and racism


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> Honestly, that could legit be a satire if done right. So obviously it wouldn’t be any on the right because they would still find a means of shoving in transphobia and racism


O shit don't forget left lie steal repeat and screw over mid and low income. They both don't give a shit about USA.


----------



## sombrerosonic (Sep 19, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> Women bad! Minorities bad! Men good! -Right Wing “jokes”


So any offencive joke are bad unless its to white straight guys?


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

sombrerosonic said:


> So any offencive joke are bad unless its to white straight guys?


Well just the opposite now afaik. Last I looked at my life almost anything is better than me.


----------



## The Catboy (Sep 19, 2022)

Randqalan said:


> O shit don't forget left lie steal repeat and screw over mid and low income. They both don't give a shit about USA.


Excuse me, what? Care to provide some examples? There’s not much of Leftist movements in the States, but the few that we did see helped provide all of the workers’ rights and a base for many of the protective measures and rights for marginalized groups.


sombrerosonic said:


> So any offencive joke are bad unless its to white straight guys?


No, the jokes just need to be actual jokes. Most of the time they aren’t “jokes,” they are just shallow attempts at being edgy.


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> Excuse me, what? Care to provide some examples? There’s not much of Leftist movements in the States, but the few that we did see helped provide all of the workers’ rights and a base for many of the protective measures and rights for marginalized groups.
> 
> No, the jokes just need to be actual jokes. Most of the time they aren’t “jokes,” they are just shallow attempts at being edgy.


So just like I figured a Trump save your speech. I don't believe either buy act not wordsTrump or Bidon. I really believe both are full of crap to appeal to there lackeies.


----------



## sombrerosonic (Sep 19, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> No, the jokes just need to be actual jokes. Most of the time they aren’t “jokes,” they are just shallow attempts at being edgy.


So, what by your standerts is a OK joke. cause i think everyone should at least be joked at cause if not you'ill end up with people who can't take a joke (Unless its a assholeish joke(I get really pissed on those)).


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

sombrerosonic said:


> So, what by your standerts is a OK joke. cause i think everyone should at least be joked at cause if not you'ill end up with people who can't take a joke (Unless its a assholeish joke(I get really pissed on those)).


So jk ass jk is a jk that is a jk so is what was I saying.


----------



## The Catboy (Sep 19, 2022)

sombrerosonic said:


> So, what by your standerts is a OK joke. cause i think everyone should at least be joked at cause if not you'ill end up with people who can't take a joke (Unless its a assholeish joke(I get really pissed on those)).


¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Humor is subjective but I would say that a joke shouldn’t need to be explained to be funny.


Randqalan said:


> So just like I figured a Trump save your speech. I don't believe either buy act not wordsTrump or Bidon. I really believe both are full of crap to appeal to there lackeies.


Bruh, I am an actual Anarchist, I want both of them to be yeeted into the sun. I didn’t vote for either them, I voted for Vermin Supreme.


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> Humor is subjective but I would say that a joke shouldn’t need to be explained to be funny.
> 
> Bruh, I am an actual Anarchist, I want both of them to be yeeted into the sun. I didn’t vote for either them, I voted for Vermin Supreme.


----------



## sombrerosonic (Sep 19, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> Humor is subjective but I would say that a joke shouldn’t need to be explained to be funny.


Eh, your right about that.... Can you see the new one, isnt broken on my end


----------



## The Catboy (Sep 19, 2022)

sombrerosonic said:


> Eh, your right about that.... Can you see the new one, isnt broken on my end


I can see your avatar now.


----------



## Randqalan (Sep 19, 2022)

sombrerosonic said:


> Eh, your right about that.... Can you see the new one, isnt broken on my end


Can you see all life is broken it counters itself and is self lothing wants always more than needed trashes anything that it doesn't respect. Human is really wrong name matrix had it correctly. Pleage of planet orvviral conscience or Just a damn nusince.


----------



## TraderPatTX (Sep 20, 2022)

The Catboy said:


> I don’t need your poorly worded joke explained to me. I get what you going for and it just wasn’t funny. Try being a less shit person


If you are offended, then it was good comedy. You could have never lived thru the 70's or 80's with that attitude.


----------



## CraddaPoosta (Sep 20, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> If you are offended, then it was good comedy. You could have never lived thru the 70's or 80's with that attitude.


No one who thinks that people can choose their gender could have survived in any other decade. Period. 

Tail wagging the dog, this is.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Sep 20, 2022)

TraderPatTX said:


> If you are offended, then it was good comedy. You could have never lived thru the 70's or 80's with that attitude.


But I did, and I still think your joke was boring.


----------



## sombrerosonic (Sep 20, 2022)

This is a kinda off-topic but...... Dose it make it harder for a guy to get a tech job? and what if your trans? dose it make it easier or harder


----------



## SG854 (Sep 20, 2022)

Randqalan said:


> When at what time has gender equality ever worked. Hell woman has always owned us.
> You guys know why!


That is true Women do own us


----------



## SG854 (Sep 20, 2022)

Oh forgot to make a metaverse reference 

Damn myself 

Meta out


----------



## CraddaPoosta (Sep 20, 2022)

SG854 said:


> That is true Women do own us



I'm still over here trying to figure out what a woman is. 

I mean, if a Supreme Court Justice can't pin it down, and is responsible for interpreting the Constitution, I don't know where else to turn.


----------



## deinonychus71 (Sep 20, 2022)

lokomelo said:


> I hope to see more and more men crying for being discriminated, as women have been exploited by men since 4000 bc


This represents the main reason why people have come to hate ''woke'' politics.
Even though it is rooted in a strong desire for equality and justice, some people -such as yourself- corrupt this noble idea and turns equality into a desire for revenge, or payback.

You want children to pay for the shortcomings of their parents. And you're not even subtle about it.

Gosh I miss old school socialism. Why fight for universal healthcare and free/fair education when you can just point fingers all day and actually achieve nothing.


----------



## CraddaPoosta (Sep 20, 2022)

deinonychus71 said:


> This represents the main reason why people have come to hate ''woke'' politics.
> Even though it is rooted in a strong desire for equality and justice, some people -such as yourself- corrupt this noble idea and turns equality into a desire for revenge, or payback.
> 
> You want children to pay for the shortcomings of their parents. And you're not even subtle about it.
> ...


Out of all of the people I have ever seen on this page, I want to smoke a bowl with you the most.


----------



## RAHelllord (Sep 20, 2022)

deinonychus71 said:


> This represents the main reason why people have come to hate ''woke'' politics.
> Even though it is rooted in a strong desire for equality and justice, some people -such as yourself- corrupt this noble idea and turns equality into a desire for revenge, or payback.
> 
> You want children to pay for the shortcomings of their parents. And you're not even subtle about it.
> ...


True equality requires unequal treatment for at least some time.

Image two people, like a woman and a men, or a black person and a white person. The woman / black person make 80% of the income of the men / white person for 40 years. At 40 years time all people get the same income for another 20 years. To make the math easier we'll just assume $20k per year is 100%.

The woman / black person have a wealth of $640,000 and the man / white person have $800,000 after 40 years. After 60 years we're at $1,040,000 for the former and $1,400,00 for the latter. Is this disparity in wealth equality to you?

This is a real problem that discrimination and "equality" currently have, whoever was ahead before things were equalized will still continue to lead forever, and whoever was behind will continue to lag behind.
A great example in the US is the wealth disparity between families that were enslaved and families that weren't. Since emancipated slaves often had nothing but the shirts on their back and were still heavily discriminated against they had it harder to build wealth than their white counterparts at the time. This directly affected their children who were also poorer. In general, the generational wealth has grown much slower for black people in the US than for white people, so even if we now have full equality somehow, they will forever lag behind assuming the wealth will continue to grow at equal rates for everyone.
This is in part why the late Martin Luther King Jr advocated for reparations for the black people, to ensure they can actually catch up at some point, instead of perpetually lagging behind.


----------



## CraddaPoosta (Sep 20, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> True equality requires unequal treatment for at least some time.
> 
> Image two people, like a woman and a men, or a black person and a white person. The woman / black person make 80% of the income of the men / white person for 40 years. At 40 years time all people get the same income for another 20 years. To make the math easier we'll just assume $20k per year is 100%.
> 
> ...


Let's discuss WHY the falsified wage gap exists, since you want to lean on that.

What are the moving parts involved, here? Remember, you have a better education, by virtue of being educated outside of the US, than anyone here. Please flex that. Since you understand economics so well, I would love to hear you elocute your reasoning as to why the "pay gap" exists, when comparing men and women in the United States.

I ESPECIALLY SPECIALLY SUPER CEREALLY want to hear why you think a wealth gap exists between black Americans and white Americans. This is the one I am most excited to be educated by you on. 83 million people in Germany. One million Afrodeutsche. I'd love to hear all you have to tell about your close, personal experiences with "POC" in your Fatherland. 

Please, my German, non-American friend, elucidate and enlighten us with your wisdom and close, personal relativity to the subject matter as it relates to AMERICAN workers and your idea of a wage gap in a country you are not a citizen of.

I hunger for your guidance.


----------



## RAHelllord (Sep 20, 2022)

Neo Draven said:


> Let's discuss WHY the falsified wage gap exists, since you want to lean on that.
> 
> What are the moving parts involved, here? Remember, you have a better education, by virtue of being educated outside of the US, than anyone here. Please flex that. Since you understand economics so well, I would love to hear you elocute your reasoning as to why the "pay gap" exists, when comparing men and women in the United States.
> 
> ...


You're trying too hard little boy.


----------



## CraddaPoosta (Sep 20, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> You're trying too hard little boy.


I accept your capitulation. 

Thanks for stopping by. 

Stay classy.


----------



## CraddaPoosta (Sep 20, 2022)

Directed at anyone who cares to engage; what is the impact of the unwed birth rate in America as it relates to generational wealth? Do we have anyone here who has an informed opinion to offer? I feel as if this particular statistic is often not addressed enough when it comes to economic disparity, and am eager to engage in civil debate.


----------



## SG854 (Sep 20, 2022)

deinonychus71 said:


> This represents the main reason why people have come to hate ''woke'' politics.
> Even though it is rooted in a strong desire for equality and justice, some people -such as yourself- corrupt this noble idea and turns equality into a desire for revenge, or payback.
> 
> You want children to pay for the shortcomings of their parents. And you're not even subtle about it.
> ...


It was pretty stupid what he said. Why should men currently have to be discrimated against just because of what their ancestors did? Instead of treating them as individuals like how they should be treated. And be treated based on their own actions not the actions of someone else.  

It's like my dad committing a robbery and people hate me and throw me in jail for what he did. I could live my life as a good person treating people nice but fuck me you are going to jail. 


I'm pretty sure that same person will say it's racist to treat all black people as criminals just because the actions of a few and yet will hypocritically say to mistreat all men because of the actions of other men.


----------



## deinonychus71 (Sep 20, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> True equality requires unequal treatment for at least some time.
> 
> Image two people, like a woman and a men, or a black person and a white person. The woman / black person make 80% of the income of the men / white person for 40 years. At 40 years time all people get the same income for another 20 years. To make the math easier we'll just assume $20k per year is 100%.
> 
> ...



To answer your question: no it isn't. And yes that is a problem, and yes it's been going on for a very long time, especially in the US that loathes socialism.
In fact I agree with pretty much everything you said, save for the conclusion.

Suggesting correction through discrimination is not equality.

Let me give you an example. I have a friend who worked all his adult life at Walmart. He has no parents, no family to rely on.
Is he, or was he, at a personal level, "ahead of the curve". No of course not.
Yet the current politics would have you discriminate against him regardless, whether he's actually done something to deserve it.

Also comes the question: When will "enough" counter discrimination be "enough"? How long will the children have to pay the consequences for that? How many generations?

There are already more universalist answers to that if you look at most European countries. Someone who unfortunately has a more fragile health doesn't get to live in fear because we collectively handle the cost of healthcare. There are measures in place for all kids to access the same level of education to promote equality of chance to succeed in your studies and career. There are laws against inequalities of incomes, and companies that discriminate during the hiring process get severely punished, as it is (I believe?) the same in the US now.
The US are just so ridiculously behind when it comes to these questions, especially when it comes to healthcare and education, that I'm not surprised that more drastic solutions become more popular, but they aren't more just, they're just reversing the problem.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Sep 21, 2022)

deinonychus71 said:


> Let me give you an example. I have a friend who worked all his adult life at Walmart. He has no parents, no family to rely on.
> Is he, or was he, at a personal level, "ahead of the curve". No of course not.
> Yet the current politics would have you discriminate against him regardless, whether he's actually done something to deserve it.


Yep, that's what I was waiting on. This is the "There are people from privileged classes who have bad lives, so we can't try to mitigate inequality!" non-argument conservatives put out all the time. The undeniable fact of the matter is that there is a deeply rooted systemic inequality to the system and we need to start taking measures to fix it. The bandaid has to come off sooner or later, especially in a culture where anything other than the unobstructed continuation of the status quo like everything is perfectly fine is considered "communist" by people who think communism is when the government does anything. Do you have a better solution to affirmative action programs?



RAHelllord said:


> You're trying too hard little boy.


Literally the best way to reply to this shit LMAO


----------



## deinonychus71 (Sep 21, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Yep, that's what I was waiting on. This is the "There are people from privileged classes who have bad lives, so we can't try to mitigate inequality!" non-argument conservatives put out all the time. The undeniable fact of the matter is that there is a deeply rooted systemic inequality to the system and we need to start taking measures to fix it. The bandaid has to come off sooner or later, especially in a culture where anything other than the unobstructed continuation of the status quo like everything is perfectly fine is considered "communist" by people who think communism is when the government does anything. Do you have a better solution to affirmative action programs?


Nothing I said was conservative. Unless of course you believe that discrimination on the basis of social class and its many solutions to address it has somehow become a conservative take (hint: The working class, or proletariat is Marxist term).

But then again, given how you misrepresented what I said I'm not sure you took the time to understand my post.
"We can't try to mitigate inequality". Yes we can. Literally 95% of my post was agreeing to that.

Only, rather than arbitrarily picking what or who is discriminated against, I'd rather see the problem more globally. It's as RAHellord said it. Poors stay poor, people that were behind continue to lag behind.

-How- do you fix that? I've already provided some answers. Enforce consistent, free education for all kids regardless or where they live (get rid of the GPA non-sense). Provide universal healthcare regardless of your financial situation (taxes). Anonymize and/or punish discrimination during the hiring process, enforce transparency of salary for each employee.
How to finance that? Taxes. Income taxes (with brackets that increasingly impact the rich) + inheritance taxes so properties aren't just being passed around by the same people.

Your solution, which has unfortunately become so popular that people think that anyone who disagree with it isn't on the left, just fight discrimination with discrimination. It hurts the wrong people while actually solving none of the systemic issues resulting from unchecked capitalism. It will hurt some people who are already hurting AND It will do nothing to rich people, who are more than happy to throw money away so people can keep pointing fingers at each other for generations to come.


----------



## Gamemaster1379 (Sep 21, 2022)

RAHelllord said:


> True equality requires unequal treatment for at least some time.
> 
> Image two people, like a woman and a men, or a black person and a white person. The woman / black person make 80% of the income of the men / white person for 40 years. At 40 years time all people get the same income for another 20 years. To make the math easier we'll just assume $20k per year is 100%.
> 
> ...


Your entire argument works on the premise that wealth is guaranteed intergenerational. 

Let's take your take your theoretical structure is in fact true. But now, let's say that the (white) man ends up with cancer and spends his life's fortune fighting it.  Or, let's just say he's an asshole and decides to spend the family fortune living out the golden years. What advantage does the white child now have? In this scenario, nothing.

You could extrapolate this. What if the white family was never good with money in the first place? What if one of these white children are orphans whose parents never wanted them and left them no wealth?

The idea of affirmative action policies makes a preconceived notion that white (male) = wealth and non-white (woman) = poor. For the latter, if the white (male) comes from no wealth, he is now disenfranchised because he has to work against diversity metrics to get into a workforce where he needs the income because he is not privileged. The latter is also racist/sexism as it makes a prejudice that the vast majority of women and blacks are always poor and/or uneducated.

In doing this, it only serves to create a generation of white (male)s that will become disenfranchised and struggle to get ahead (unless you believe being white is just SO amazing it'll somehow work itself out through the cosmos) -- and arguably, you create a generation of white families that now arguably suffer the same intergenerational wealth disenfranchisement that you argue blacks/women continue to suffer from.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Sep 21, 2022)

deinonychus71 said:


> Nothing I said was conservative. Unless of course you believe that discrimination on the basis of social class and its many solutions to address it has somehow become a conservative take (hint: The working class, or proletariat is Marxist term).
> 
> But then again, given how you misrepresented what I said I'm not sure you took the time to understand my post.
> "We can't try to mitigate inequality". Yes we can. Literally 95% of my post was agreeing to that.
> ...


I'm going to assume English isn't your first language because I did not say you were a conservative, I said that pointing to people who are disenfranchised in a system as if the privilege they hold in other scenarios magically disappears because they're disenfranchised in one way is something conservatives do. It is also a very stupid thing to do.

The solutions offered are a good start, but then what do you say to people who are the result of generational inequalities and disenfranchisement that's been codified into law since the nation's inception? Black people haven't equal civil rights for even 100 years. There are people in this very thread who could have been alive at the time, that's how young our so-called equality is, and that's just for one group of people. We have a LONG fucking way to go beyond that. The elevation of various qualified people who are ignored in favor of in-group preferences that are culturally sourced is a good thing. It feels like virtue signalling to the psychotic right at this point when people say affirmative action is a bad thing from a "leftist" perspective. 

Affirmative action is not the only solution I want, it's just one of many that I think are net positives for society as a whole in the long run.


----------



## smf (Sep 21, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> Feminism, contrary to what insecure MRAs have convinced you, is not about woman supremacy or any nonsense like that.


You speak for all feminist? That is kinda patronizing.


----------



## LainaGabranth (Sep 21, 2022)

smf said:


> You speak for all feminist? That is kinda patronizing.


Make a real objection.


----------



## deinonychus71 (Sep 21, 2022)

LainaGabranth said:


> I'm going to assume English isn't your first language because I did not say you were a conservative, I said that pointing to people who are disenfranchised in a system as if the privilege they hold in other scenarios magically disappears because they're disenfranchised in one way is something conservatives do. It is also a very stupid thing to do.
> 
> The solutions offered are a good start, but then what do you say to people who are the result of generational inequalities and disenfranchisement that's been codified into law since the nation's inception? Black people haven't equal civil rights for even 100 years. There are people in this very thread who could have been alive at the time, that's how young our so-called equality is, and that's just for one group of people. We have a LONG fucking way to go beyond that. The elevation of various qualified people who are ignored in favor of in-group preferences that are culturally sourced is a good thing. It feels like virtue signalling to the psychotic right at this point when people say affirmative action is a bad thing from a "leftist" perspective.
> 
> Affirmative action is not the only solution I want, it's just one of many that I think are net positives for society as a whole in the long run.


It's not my first language, but I've also learned to read the subtext of a message. Apologies if the assumption was wrong. Call it a trauma from Twitter lol.

The solutions I proposed, which are also applied in many European countries (more or less successfully), would primarily impact the population that's been sitting on money made by their parents or profiting from it. Inheritance is one big contributor is maintaining the status quo and inheritance taxes are way too lax/generous in the US. 
On top of that insisting on the importance of education. Whether someone comes from a school from a poor or rich neighborhood shouldn't impact their chances at life. That's a good place to dump federal money too, plus you never lose by financing the brains of tomorrow.
It will do what you want, by redirecting the money to people who need it the most.

That's of course only addressing the economic aspect. This isn't a way to say "that's the only problem" as if suddenly all sexism and racism would be gone once addressed. There's so many other aspects of the current society that need to be addressed. 
As an example more representation in media to me is a definite net positive because it teaches the young (or well, confront the old) with the idea that we all live together and there's really nothing more normal than that.


----------



## RAHelllord (Sep 21, 2022)

deinonychus71 said:


> To answer your question: no it isn't. And yes that is a problem, and yes it's been going on for a very long time, especially in the US that loathes socialism.
> In fact I agree with pretty much everything you said, save for the conclusion.
> 
> Suggesting correction through discrimination is not equality.
> ...


In a perfect world the discernment between people that need aid and people that can give aid would be done on a personal level, and in fact that would be pretty easy to implement with nothing more than properly scaling taxes. MLK Jr advocated that the black people be given special treatment because those were the people he was speaking for, but he also wanted to get rid of all classes either way, for everyone.

The people who need help will come in all shapes and from all backgrounds, and it's going to be a long process with many small adjustments along the way to get everyone up to the same level. But it's going to be a faster process if we start with the broad strokes while also directly looking out for other outliers.
Your friend as an example could be put into a new tax category as well as receive additional funding for medical help to offset or prevent additional burdens. But at the bigger scale schools in black communities are severely underfunded and the money has to come from taking funding from schools in predominantly rich white communities, or by increasing taxes for everyone, preferably based on their income.
If you want to make a painting both broad strokes and smaller ones will get you there further and quicker than just worrying about how to place every pigment manually. And you habe to watch and gently adjust your brushes and colors as you go along, just closing your eyes and slapping the canvas ain't getting you very far.



Gamemaster1379 said:


> Your entire argument works on the premise that wealth is guaranteed intergenerational.
> 
> Let's take your take your theoretical structure is in fact true. But now, let's say that the (white) man ends up with cancer and spends his life's fortune fighting it.  Or, let's just say he's an asshole and decides to spend the family fortune living out the golden years. What advantage does the white child now have? In this scenario, nothing.
> 
> ...


Intergenerational wealth is more than just inheritances, but in cases of freak accidents or freak occurrences like that different social programs should immediately kick in and provide a high quality safety net for everyone, it's just that this same safety net will likely more often be used with minorities due them statically being more susceptible to fall behind on the metric thanks to past systemic discrimination.

In a perfect world with competent law makers everyone would get the help they need according to their personal circumstances, but that also means that some people won't need help at all and thus can't profit from those things. But again, that in turn should already mean they don't need them to get ahead. If anyone falls between the cracks the help needs to be adjusted to account for them, this needs to be a constant process that is being watched and reevaluated as we go along through the decades.


----------



## Qismat (Oct 29, 2022)

Agree with your idea 70% but not 30 %


----------

