Does true equality Exist??

[Synnerman]

Does true equality Exist??

What is the level of equality today? Is profiling a reality? Does being black get you
stopped by the police more often? Are there some states more than others where it would
be better to not be black?
Ladies, do you receive equal pay for equal work? Do promotions go to the most qualified
or to the guy down the hall with the big smile?
Tell me Jose, Does the father of that cute little redhead welcome you into the family with
open arms.

The Original Synner wants to know. Be as specific as you can. Tell us who, what, where.
and any thing you know first hand to support your point of view.

Leave your thin skin at the door. This is a volatile subject to some. For God’s sake be
good to one another here.

 

[Synnerman]

Hmmmmmm Ten visits, no posts. Maybe nobody does care. How sad.

 

[Lost Cause]

Depends if your view of life is based on "equality", or fair/unfair. Doesn't matter what your sex/race is, it depends on the powers that be giving you a profile, and the networks spreading the bullshit often enough. Young kid in baggy pants=gang banger, successful female exec=bitch, biker=hell's angel, middle eastern dude or dudette=terrorist. Take your pick on what is "equal", you'll never find it unless you look past physical observations and know the person you see.
I get hit by the Waffen State Patrol here religiously. A lot of postering on their part with threats to tow my bike, put me down, and they leave. No citations, no have a good day, they have been told a rider on a Harley is an outlaw with drugs and guns. Who has the guns? Who places citizens in fear for their well being when forced to pull over on a bogus stop? Who are the real threat to citizens safety? It sure isn't my biker club friends! They have never acted the way the cops here have, we'd be safer with no staters on the road. That's my observation, it isn't "fair", it's just the way it is to those who choose a different road than the herd.

 

[sch00lteacher]

Does true equality exist?

No.

Walk into almost any governmental agency. See who is working there.

Count the white men.

Now count the black women.

See any equality?

 

[Synnerman]

Thanks for the feedback schoolteacher.
Isn't that West by God Virginia. My sister lives over the next hill in Chester, VA.

 

[BustyTheClown]

Looking at the questions you've asked, synner -- which are all damn good questions, by the way -- I can see why not many people have responded to this thread, and why not a whole lot have even picked it up. Don't get me wrong, this is one of the biggest questions out there... But I think it's WAY too broad for a lot of people to be comfortable with. Also, answering your questions means that those of us who aren't necessarily aware of the fact that we're not treated "equally" have to face that reality in order to respond to you. It's all relative, anyway, and there are gradations of equality. I'd love to answer your questions, but I'm afraid I just can't, lol.

 

[Synnerman]

Busty the clown. I like that image.

You not only answered the question, you better defined the problem. I know how hard it is to answer. I almost fear the answer as I ask the question.

Anyone can ask the easy questions but then all we get are easy answers. Easy answers will not help to define problems let alone solve them.

I do not intend to solve any problems here. I will be content if I can at least motivate some to think about it. I believe a problem does exist.

Much greater people than I have done wonders in search of equality. J F K, Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks, Gloria Steinham, to name but a few. I am not nor will I be in their league. I can't go out and beat the drum (Carrie Nation) but I can stand behind those who do and jab them in the ass with a hat pin when they falter.

The main thing is think about it.

 

[CelestialBody]

 

[coolr]

no, there is not true equality, nor will it ever exist

 

[Unclebill]

While it might come as a surprise to some, every human being is different in at least one respect from all others.

The differences run the gamut from physical size and strength to intellect to general health to visual acuity to whatever other parameter you can imagine.

There truly can be no equality if defined in such terms.

There is, however, one reasonable aspect or perspective from which it is quite accurate and proper to speak of equality.

That perspective is the concept of rights. Each and every human being has the same rights. Rights are innate to the nature of the being. Some consider them God given. Others consider them a "gift of nature". Whatever one might perceive the source of rights, however, the concept applies equally to every individual.

And it is also proper to speak of rights only in relationship to the individual. No group, organization, collective or other entity beyond the individual human can legitimately claim anything as a right.

So, yes, there truly is the reality of equality.

 

[Guest]

Does true equality Exist??

no

What is the level of equality today?

70/30

Is profiling a reality?

yes

Does being black get you
stopped by the police more often?

I''m not black, but if I were, the answer would probably be yes.

Are there some states more than others where it would
be better to not be black?

yes

Ladies, do you receive equal pay for equal work?

no

Do promotions go to the most qualified
or to the guy down the hall with the big smile?

whoever is favorite (or brown noser) at the time

Tell me Jose, Does the father of that cute little redhead welcome you into the family with
open arms.

Who's Jose?

The Original Synner wants to know. Be as specific as you can. Tell us who, what, where.
and any thing you know first hand to support your point of view.

Leave your thin skin at the door. This is a volatile subject to some. For God’s sake be
good to one another here.

 

[Synnerman]

I am sorry MoonWolf, Jose is a common Spanish name and living as I do in LA the influence is strong enough for me to generalize. It was easier than a long drawn out sentence. I made an error in my assumption the name would speak for itself.
Hmmmm, it seems I make lots of errors. Oh well, the only ones who never make an error are those who do nothing. If that's the cost of being right I will take my chances being wrong.

Thanks to those who have posted. Your responses, though few for the number of visitors, have been mostly to the point. You demonstrate that some are thinking. That's a good thing.

 

[Unclebill]

Originally posted by Synnerman
. . . I made an error in my assumption the name would speak for itself. . .

It did.

 

[LovetoGiveRoses]

Does true equality exist?

No.

Walk into almost any governmental agency. See who is working there.

Count the white men.

Now count the black women.

See any equality?

Your point??? please clarify.. I know that you're a thoughtful person, I don't understand your post though.

 

[Goldfrapp er]

Unfortunately true equality is a pipe dream.

When an individual judges and compares themselves to everyone else it's impossible. Everyone does it to some degree. So if equality can't happen on a micro level how can anyone hope that it can happen on a macro level.

People always ask why is there war? Why can't people just get along? Think on a personal level if you get along with everyone you know. How can we get along on a massive level if we can't get along at a inter personal level?

It's sad but true.

Strides are made every day towards more equality, but steps backward happen every day as well.

If there was true equality and harmony we'd be living everyone's utopia. unfortunately, utopia is but a pipe dream.

 

[JazzManJim]

No, true equality does not exist.

True equality will never exist, because we will never agree on what "true" actually means.

Let's take the job market, for example.

Does equality mean:
- That available positions are filled by the same number of races and genders?
- That an equal number of races and genders applied for the job?
- That the person chosen to fill the position was chosen solely because of their qualifications, or for some other reason?
- That the job was widely advertised, giving members of each racial and gender group an equal opportunity to apply for the position?
- That the job was recruited for from a group of likely applicants of each race and gender?


See what I mean? Oftentimes when folks discuss "equality" they can mean "equality of opportunity" or "equality of outcome" or even "fairness". The whole notion of equality has become so blurred, with legislation purporting to foster equality fostering each of the three notions I mentioned, plus a couple others. In some cases, there is no actual notion of equality, save that the word is present and has no actual power whatsoever.

So until we can first agree on what "equal" actually means, we're going to have problems.

As far as profiling...well, that's a horse of a different color. It has absolutely nothing to do, in the vast majority of cases, to do with either racism of a particular department or officer. It has everything to do with both arrest numbers and what group in what area is more likely to commit what crime.

 

[LovetoGiveRoses]

No, true equality does not exist.

True equality will never exist, because we will never agree on what "true" actually means.

Let's take the job market, for example.

Does equality mean:
- That available positions are filled by the same number of races and genders?
- That an equal number of races and genders applied for the job?
- That the person chosen to fill the position was chosen solely because of their qualifications, or for some other reason?
- That the job was widely advertised, giving members of each racial and gender group an equal opportunity to apply for the position?
- That the job was recruited for from a group of likely applicants of each race and gender?


See what I mean? Oftentimes when folks discuss "equality" they can mean "equality of opportunity" or "equality of outcome" or even "fairness". The whole notion of equality has become so blurred, with legislation purporting to foster equality fostering each of the three notions I mentioned, plus a couple others. In some cases, there is no actual notion of equality, save that the word is present and has no actual power whatsoever.

So until we can first agree on what "equal" actually means, we're going to have problems.

As far as profiling...well, that's a horse of a different color. It has absolutely nothing to do, in the vast majority of cases, to do with either racism of a particular department or officer. It has everything to do with both arrest numbers and what group in what area is more likely to commit what crime.

Good points Jim.

I want to add a little, but I'm not taking a position on this either way... it's too emotional an issue. However, I will relate the points made in a debate at one of our local colleges, Howard University.

Two speakers. The first was a young black woman who got up and cited a) a pattern of traffic stops that shows that blacks were far more likely to be "pulled over" than whites, b) that there was a corration between "pull overs" and arrests, and c) drew the conclusion that Officers are targeting blacks more frequently for "pull overs" (profiling based on stereotypes) and that was the reason for the disproportionate rate of black arrests.

Second Speaker: the Black Police Chief of a major American city, Miami I think. He got up and diplomatically praised the young lady for the statics that she'd brought forward and agreed with many of her points... till he came to the last. He said for most crimes we have a description of the criminal. We send our officers out to look for people that match the description. The reason that we "pull over" people of a given description isn't "random" or based on some malicious stereotype, it's because they match the description of the perpetrator. He added, the fact is, the demographics for the arrests that we have are very close to the demographics for the crime reports that we recieve.

Shoot, I don't usually post this kind of stuff... Oh well..my Mel is away this weekend anyway..so what the hell.

 

[Impetus]

I'll try this, if only for the purpose of infusing new ides. Though it might as well be known that I think true equality would be as difficult to attain as world peace. Both worthy goals, but humans being as different as they are, and the world being a big a place as it is, It would only take one person making one decision in one place to set the ballence off.

Can true equality exist? I submit that the question itself lies close to the problem. Equality implies that there would be an equal percentage of everyone in everything. In a community with 50% white people and 50% black, most businesses and clubs and social institutions would have membership close to 50% white and 50% black.

Now let me take you to my major, Electrical engineering. Most of my classes have, lets say, 1 female to every 15 males. But I have not once heard any rhetoric that my college is being unfair because the ratio of men to women is offset. The truth is, simply, that fewer women want to be electrical engineers. Simple. I don't think anyone has a problem with that.

So as to the problem of equality, I would submit that being equal is not necessarily the best we could hope for. Being truely free is. If a woman wants to join the electrical engineering department, she is free to do so and has just as much a chance to succeed as a man. If a black man wants to be a CEO, he will be judged against the same criteria as the white man next to him and the asian woman next to him. He will not be restricted by his race, nor will he be hired simply because there aren't enough african-americans in the company.

I submit that a better goal, and perhaps a simpler one to attain, is one of freedom. A man or a woman can do what he or she wants without restriction of race or sex. If she doesn't want to be an electrical engineer, she shouldn't have to be.

There. Rhetoric.

-I

 

[JazzManJim]

Two speakers. The first was a young black woman who got up and cited a) a pattern of traffic stops that shows that blacks were far more likely to be "pulled over" than whites, b) that there was a corration between "pull overs" and arrests, and c) drew the conclusion that Officers are targeting blacks more frequently for "pull overs" (profiling based on stereotypes) and that was the reason for the disproportionate rate of black arrests.

Second Speaker: the Black Police Chief of a major American city, Miami I think. He got up and diplomatically praised the young lady for the statics that she'd brought forward and agreed with many of her points... till he came to the last. He said for most crimes we have a description of the criminal. We send our officers out to look for people that match the description. The reason that we "pull over" people of a given description isn't "random" or based on some malicious stereotype, it's because they match the description of the perpetrator. He added, the fact is, the demographics for the arrests that we have are very close to the demographics for the crime reports that we recieve.

Excellent anecdote. In my experience, this has been true for the vast majority of folks arrested. The "random" arrests (such as, the officer saw something strange, investigated, and made an arrest) are also often part of a stereotype, but one firmly rooted in factual tendencies - how often crimes are committed in certain areas by certain physical types of folks. As an example, the profile of the average illegal marijuana user is different than for the average heroin user or crack cocaine user. Each have their own stereotype, drawn from the majority of people arrested for the crimes in the past, and that's what police act upon, because that's the most efficient use of their time. Maybe I'll put together a thread to go into this in more detail.

 

[Phoenyx]

It does not exist because no one is my equal.

 

[Texan]

Why would anyone who desires to excel ever want equality?

I want to earn the rewards for my "unequal" efforts. I don't want "equal" pay... because I don't expect to do "equal" work.

I have a nine-year-old who excels, academically. I don't want him to be educated "equally". I want him to be allowed to excel and have that ability and effort supported.

In the same sense, I realize that some athletes are much better than others. Would we expect the better athletes to compete below their ability to make everything "equal?"

I think every indivudual should be judged/paid/promoted based entirely upon their demonstrated abilities and their willingness to apply their abilities.

I like what JMJ said about our inability to even define "equal." I also liked how Impetus said we should strive for "freedom" not equaility. I think equality is "equal" to mediocrity. I don't want either.

 

[Goldfrapp er]

I want to earn the rewards for my "unequal" efforts. I don't want "equal" pay... because I don't expect to do "equal" work.

I don't think anyone would argue that a person who does more should be paid more.

But the question of equality is raised when you realize women and minorities get paid less per dollar than their white counterparts for doing the exact same job. It is not about being paid less for unequal work.


Everyone deserves to be afforded the same opportunities in life to excel. That is where inequality truly shows. Everyone does not start on a level playing field. Poverty, racism, hate, education, family life, and so much more weighs into the equation. Think of why you have excelled. Possibly because you've been afforded better opportunities than others. Possibly, simply because of hard work. The problem lies in the fact that starting out women and minorities have the deck stacked against them in many ways.

So it's not about equality in the sense that everyone should strive to be average or mediocre. Equality just gives everyone the same starting point to become who they will be. Shouldn't everyone have the same opportunities to exceL?

I think every indivudual should be judged/paid/promoted based entirely upon their demonstrated abilities and their willingness to apply their abilities.

Agreed. But that doesn't happen now. That is what fighting for equality is. So that this can and will happen.

 

[Unclebill]

Originally posted by Impetus
. . . Can true equality exist? I submit that the question itself lies close to the problem.

Why can it not exist?

Originally posted by Impetus
Equality implies that there would be an equal percentage of everyone in everything. In a community with 50% white people and 50% black, most businesses and clubs and social institutions would have membership close to 50% white and 50% black. . .

So having equal proportions of every racial/ethnic group in a given geographic locale is the definition of equality? Equality implies two things are equal, i. e., the same in some perspective. How does proportionality of populace based on some arbitrary physical trait possibly affect equality?

Originally posted by Texan
Why would anyone who desires to excel ever want equality?

I want to earn the rewards for my "unequal" efforts. I don't want "equal" pay... because I don't expect to do "equal" work.

I have a nine-year-old who excels, academically. I don't want him to be educated "equally". I want him to be allowed to excel and have that ability and effort supported.

In the same sense, I realize that some athletes are much better than others. Would we expect the better athletes to compete below their ability to make everything "equal?"

I think every indivudual should be judged/paid/promoted based entirely upon their demonstrated abilities and their willingness to apply their abilities.

I like what JMJ said about our inability to even define "equal." I also liked how Impetus said we should strive for "freedom" not equaility. I think equality is "equal" to mediocrity. I don't want either.

It amazes me that people will limit themselves to the concrete manifestations of some trait or other in an attempt to justify their assumption or belief that equality is some unattainable state.

And I grant so long as you remain concrete bound, you are correct. But there is also the capacity of the human intellect to deal with abstractions which everyone here is either ignoring or evading. Yet abstractions are things which enable us to expand the scope of our knowledge and understanding.

So why then does everyone seek to avoid the abstract thinking and reasoning which provides a clear and simple answer to the question? Is it that they wish there were no equality? Is it they have decided there is no equality and use the concrete bound reasoning to justify their choice of a decision?

As indicated above, I reject the need to remain bound to physical, concrete, quantifiable measures as the only means of evaluating equality. Granted, when you choose to impose such limits on your intellect, you must come to the conclusion that equality is a myth.

I reject the self-imposed limits. I understand what the man who wrote the Declaration of Independence understood and intended to convey by the words:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Do you think that the man who wrote this did not recognize the vast differences in the people around him in terms of physical size, strength, health, intellect, etc? If he were constrained by the concrete bound mentality that asserts there can be no equality, he could never have written such a marvelously insightful statement. And note how he defined their equality; not in any physically quantifiable terms but with regard to their unalienable rights.

Texan, from reading your post, it sounds as if you've bought into the liberal mode of using outcome to determine equality. The inevitable result if you inflict this ridiculous perception of equality on people is to drag everyone down to the level of achievement of the least among us.

The reason is that the more capable can perform at a lower level of achievement (outcome) but not everyone can perform at the level of achievement of the most productive, creative and capable among us.

The liberal ideology, being very concrete bound, seeks equality of outcome and the pursuit of equality in the name of social justice or some such hackneyed platitude. The methodology is to penalize the most capable and productive among us by plundering their achievements to be awarded to the lesser achievers to gain equality of outcome.

This is the great pursuit of altruism and collectivism in all their various guises.

Equality of oportunity is another mythological creation of the collectivist (liberal) mindset. For any such thing to exist in reality would necessarily imply that everyone knew of the particular circumstance offering the opportunity, that they were all interested in pursuing it, that all had the same qualifications, and a host of other things being true which are literally impossible.

 

[Guest]

I am sorry MoonWolf, Jose is a common Spanish name .

No problem here, and I realize it's a common Hispanic name, but the common English name is John for male, and Jane for female. Just pointing out ethnic differences.

 

[MechaBlade]

Synn has probably got enough posts on this already, but here's another. No one is equal, so there will never be equality. Such is the problem with communism.

Also interesting to me, is I might have seen Synn sometime in my life and not known it.