I hate my Ethics Class

[FallingToFly]

And I'm going to tell you why.
It's a crock.
It's bullshit.
The entire way this class is presented is the diametric opposite of the STAED purpose of the class. We're supposed to be studying and learning how to balance the world, how to end the color and sex and orientation and culture barrier.

Every single questio is basically a hamer blow to the skull if you happen to be white. They go so far as to warp history so that ONLY Blacks were enslaved, and if you are white, male and gods forbid working class, you are the AntiChrist. I'm getting more and more angry as I do my homework... and I had to rant.

So, here's today's Discussion Question. I would absolutely love to see what the Litizens make of it.

• Post your response to this question: Consider racial imbalances in education, the economy, family life, housing, criminal justice, health care, and politics. Of these societal challenges facing modern African Americans, which do you think are most difficult to overcome, and why?

 

[FallingToFly]

Oh, and this is the DQ from Tuesday, with my response. I got a little irate.

How do you think slavery influenced the evolution of both Black and White America today? Explain your answer.

I don't think any of the influences left behind from all the aspects of slavery (not just the ones concerning Blacks) in America are a good thing. It seems to get pushed aside and forgotten that the first slaves in America were not Black, nor were they Native American. The first slaves in America were white. Of course, they got a fancier name- indentured servants- but they were slaves. Slavery in any aspect is a disgrace to humanity, but for the time period in which these events took place, they were a necessary evil. Southern plantations could not have been run effectively in any other fashion at that time. Northern factories had it much easier- they were located in large populations, and cheap immigrant labor was readily available- and more often than not, as far as physical care and basic necessities of life, the true slaves in the South came out ahead.

Before anyone starts making assumptions- I don't think any slavery, at any time is acceptable, but then again, I grew up in a time where slavery has for the most part been abolished. One of the lingering aftereffects of slavery in our modern world, and one that annoys me no end, is that the events of nearly two centuries past have become a lever to promote any agenda that has no merit to the population as a whole, and only benefits one select group of individuals. In high school I actually had a fellow student inform me that she deserved more than the white students did in terms of consideration and attention from the teachers because "the white people enslaved my ancestors." I simply stared- something that happened over a century ago meant that she didn't have to work as hard as I did?

If that's the case, I should have been getting special consideration- my ancestors were enslaved by "white" people for centuries! I made a rather sarcastic comment to that effect, and my teacher asked what my last name was- at the time it was Kelly. Which is about as Irish as it gets without my first name being Paddy or Seamus. The subject was dropped, and we were graded equally in all things- and neither of us recieved extra consideration.

Slavery in America has had several profound effects on this country. The Civil War. The assasination of President Lincoln. The reformation of the South, which beggared the states to a point where they are still trying to recover and become economic solvent in the areas of agriculture and industry. The civil rights movements of the fifties and sixties, which led to desegregation. The Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity programs. All of these things were set in motion because of slavery and were meant for tearing down the racial barrier in America.

Unfortunately, they have now gone the other way, and become reverse racism and discrimination. As of right now, the biggest detriment to getting a good job in America is being a young, white, able-bodied male with no criminal background and no college degree. You get two choices- hard physical labor such as construction or long-haul trucking, or the Army.

Congratulations, kids. Here's your rifle and hard hat.

 

[3113]

• Post your response to this question: Consider racial imbalances in education, the economy, family life, housing, criminal justice, health care, and politics. Of these societal challenges facing modern African Americans, which do you think are most difficult to overcome, and why?

Answer is economy. This from my black husband. The reason being that ALL people in the U.S. at least, suffer most from the widening discrepency between rich and poor. AND that applies to African Americans as well. There is very little racial imbalance if you have money--you can get justice with a good lawyer, you can get health care, you can get into good schools and you can get into politics. If you lack money, then you have a harder time getting these things no matter what race you are. So, if there is likely to be a racial imbalance, it is likely due to the fact that these people were poor as well as black and could not afford good schools, good lawyers, health care, etc.

Simple, really.

However, I think you should not sit back but take this up the ladder to whatever greviance committee you can find. The question is loaded--it implies that there IS a racial imbalance without first proving it. This assumption might be correct, but the question ought not be asked without first presenting evidence.

Also, if you feel that you are learning ONLY about African-Americans, and that you are not learning questions regarding ethics across cultures, races, religions, etc., then you have every right to complain that the school tricked you in presenting this as an ethics class rather than a class on the ethical problems facing African-Americans or Minorities. You have every right to accuse the school of false advertising (so to speak).

 

[Pure]

i agree with 3113, to a large extent. there's no reason to use just Black examples in ethics, and i've taught ethics. that said, you can learn about argumentation and reasoning from a favorite kind of case. so you might learning some ethics, falling, even if the profs focus is Black problems. you can apply what you learn elsewhere.

that said, i think this quesion is not a good one

Consider racial imbalances in education, the economy, family life, housing, criminal justice, health care, and politics. Of these societal challenges facing modern African Americans, which do you think are most difficult to overcome, and why?

this sounds more like a history or social policy question. it's best, IMO, to take a case where the facts are agreed, THEN argue the ethics. on the black issues, take a known harm and ask for an argument--e.g., segregated schools were pretty rotten; however when is the cure worse than the disease, and when, not.

 

[3113]

How do you think slavery influenced the evolution of both Black and White America today? Explain your answer.

Why not answer it honestly? You DON'T believe that slavery influenced the evolution of black/white America. Offer you answer with facts and proofs. Give a GOOD arguement, not one based on your own personal bias--and YES, you are being as bias as the teacher if you assume that reverse descrimination dominates the U.S.--if that were true, then the wealthy and powerful would not be predominately white and male, STILL.

So, release that anger of yours from what stupid, bigoted, bias people have said to you in your life. Release the assumptions you're making on personal experience rather than valid facts.

Do your research and offer your evidence that the teacher is wrong in the assumption that slavery has any influence on present day America.

IF the teacher gives you a not-so-good grade, you can then take it up the ladder and prove that the teacher's BIAS is grading your paper (and YOU!) rather than how well the student presents their logical and reasonable and evidence-solid arguments. Hence proving that the teacher is being a racist.

Not, by the way, a "reversed-racist"--a racist is a racist, be they anti-white or anti-black.

 

[FallingToFly]

What makes me upset is that this class is titled ETH125- Cultural Diversity.

The book ONLY presents pictures that are inflammatory and biased- a picture of a skinhead with "White Power" tattooed across his skull under the boldfaced word PREJUDICE (understandable) and further down the same page a smiling, meek-looking black man in a engaging posture with the word UNDERSTANDING over his head. All diagrams use white males as the aggressor and oppressor in every situation. The professor does NOT interact with the class and is almost impossible to get in contact with.

I'm really upset, but I honestly can't complain- THIS class is required for my degree. It just makes me so mad...

3113- thank your hubby for me I really appreciated that. I'm so tired of the color card being played in every situation... it makes my head hurt.

 

[3113]

I'm really upset, but I honestly can't complain- THIS class is required for my degree. It just makes me so mad

Again, go up the ladder. I promise you that if you shout "discrimination!" and "lawsuit" you WILL be able to contact the professor and many others. If you write a letter to the newspaper and get the class investagated, they WILL pay attention to you.

 

[FallingToFly]

Again, go up the ladder. I promise you that if you shout "discrimination!" and "lawsuit" you WILL be able to contact the professor and many others. If you write a letter to the newspaper and get the class investagated, they WILL pay attention to you.

I'm already in academic trouble My own fault, but that's what I get for trusting my in-laws and other family members not to screw me over.

Right now I'm just venting. I'm keeping my head down as best I can, but I refuse to tolerate some of the stuff that's been said in the class, not just by other students, but by the professor. I did try the "I don't agree with this statement as you persented it" routine and had the paper failed. I have two calls and an email in to him, no luck as of yet.

The joys of school- I remember why I hated it so much now, lol, but at least I'm in.

 

[cloudy]

Why not answer it honestly? You DON'T believe that slavery influenced the evolution of black/white America. Offer you answer with facts and proofs. Give a GOOD arguement, not one based on your own personal bias--and YES, you are being as bias as the teacher if you assume that reverse descrimination dominates the U.S.--if that were true, then the wealthy and powerful would not be predominately white and male, STILL.

Dear god, THANK YOU.

(bold is my emphasis)

 

[Remec]

So, here's today's Discussion Question. I would absolutely love to see what the Litizens make of it.

• Post your response to this question: Consider racial imbalances in education, the economy, family life, housing, criminal justice, health care, and politics. Of these societal challenges facing modern African Americans, which do you think are most difficult to overcome, and why?

The most difficult of the given concerns to overcome is family life. This is due to that fact that you don't get to choose what family you're born into, and--unless very lucky and/or precocious--what your family environment is has a lot to do with your place in the grand scheme of things when it comes to many of the other factors under discussion.

Until there is a concerted effort, not just at the neighborhood or community level but generationally, to begin to give......*trailing off into a rant of my own*

 

[FallingToFly]

The most difficult of the given concerns to overcome is family life. This is due to that fact that you don't get to choose what family you're born into, and--unless very lucky and/or precocious--what your family environment is has a lot to do with your place in the grand scheme of things when it comes to many of the other factors under discussion.

Until there is a concerted effort, not just at the neighborhood or community level but generationally, to begin to give......*trailing off into a rant of my own*

Right there with you Remec... as much as I can be. My phone won't quit fucking ringing!

 

[Pure]

well, falling, if the course is labeled "ethics--cultural diversity" that's a pretty good clue, don't ya think? i withdraw my speculation about the course being misdescribed.

there is something to your complaint, for after all, racism is not always linked to whites. further 'colorism' is found among Blacks (as to shade), not to say classism, sexism, etc. (as with every racial group).

HOWEVER: given that white folks are on the upper (dishing it out) end of mosts ineqalities, a focus on Black experience doesn't hurt, though i don't think attempts to "guilt" whites are very effective.

why don't you try to widen the discussion as to related racism, ethnocentrism, etc? for instance the gap between American and African Blacks is substantial and there are ill feelings. there are probs between middle and working class or unemployed Blacks too.

right now the Arabs are doing a good job in racism against Blacks in Africa.

spread the guilt around! there are *many* injustices and some Blacks are on the 'upper' (dishing out) end of some of them.

 

[Liar]

Dear god, THANK YOU.

(bold is my emphasis)

If I may.

The wealthy and powerful are predominantly white, because the wealthy and powerful were predominantly white, for a very long time. Who do you look out for? Your kids. So does the rich and powerful. That's a hard pattern to break, and therefore the money and power will linger where it is.

Which way institutional discrimination leans, traditional, reversed, whatnot, is only a marginal factor.


/Liar, niether rich nor powerful, or eligble for nothing, and very, very white.

 

[3113]

The most difficult of the given concerns to overcome is family life.

This is true, but the question is asking it in regards to "racial imbalance." If it were a general question about all people, than I'd vote with you on Family--the family we're raised in, good or bad, no matter our economic, social, or cultural level, has a lot to do with your place. A poor kid from a poor family can still do well if raised by the right family.

HOWEVER, since the question relates to race, we must assume that it is refering to the predominately African-American problem of black families more often being one parent families (a single mom)--otherwise, how can the person writing the essay argue that racial imbalance between black families and white is difficult to overcome?

And one can certainly argue that single-mom families have a harder time raising the kids right and so create a racial imbalance if most single mom families are black. So this would be a valid argument.

Still, a single mom family with money does do better than a single mom family without money. So, once again, economics could also be argued.

 

[cloudy]

If I may.

The wealthy and powerful are predominantly white, because the wealthy and powerful were predominantly white, for a very long time. Who do you look out for? Your kids. So does the rich and powerful. That's a hard pattern to break, and therefore the money and power will linger where it is.

Which way institutional discrimination leans, traditional, reversed, whatnot, is only a marginal factor.


/Liar, niether rich nor powerful, or eligble for nothing, and very, very white.

Your reasoning is correct, however, I have to disagree that institutional discrimination is marginal. Maybe it is where you are, but it's alive and well in the states, as well as in Canada. It's just gone underground/become more subtle, but I promise you, it's still very much a factor in much of life.

 

[3113]

Which way institutional discrimination leans, traditional, reversed, whatnot, is only a marginal factor.

Nope. Because the wealthy and powerful maintain influence over such institutions--at least in the U.S. For example, there is a lot of outrage about reverse discrimination in who gets into a elite colleges. People will say, "You shouldn't let minorities in just because they're minorities. They should have to earn the right."

And this is true. But these same people DON'T complain about legacies--that is, the kids of rich parents who went to these schools who get into these schools even if their grades are not good enough. They get in why? Because their parents give money to the school and without that money, the school is screwed.

Hence, the white rich folk get their kids, and friends of their kids into the schools. And if these rich white kids get the best education--and make the best connections as well, connections that they can use to, say, go into politics or business...then white politicians and business folk still dominate. This domination may not be based on a bias against minorities, but it is still a bais status quo.

Understand, by the way, that I believe this status quo is more and more becoming that of rich vs. poor rather than race vs. race. HOWEVER, on television, in movies, in novels, in politics, in CEO's running powerful companies, etc. the white male still dominates. If reverse discrimination were dominating the U.S. as argued, this wouldn't be the case.

 

[Pure]

Maybe it is where you are, but it's alive and well in the states [US], as well as in Canada. It's just gone underground/become more subtle, but I promise you, it's still very much a factor in much of life.

i must partially disagree, here, cloudy. i don't think it's 'more subtle' or especially subtle. though the public use of racist terms is a lot less.

you don't see folk from the 'rez' in the Supreme Court of Canada or the US. Coincidence? Further they aren't represented well in the graduating classes of the better law schools.

IMO, what's changed is 'tokens' or *very small segments [of the whole group]* are found in many areas. Colin Powell is a General. There are however, hardly any Black generals, and black officers are relatively rare, afaik, esp. as the rank goes up. There are a few female CEOs of the major companies.

It might be pointed out that these tokens are often UNrepresentative and UNsympathetic, which is why they were chosen, e.g., Gonzales, the Attorney General in the US. He is a former general and rationalizer of Bush's flouting the law. He is probably in favor of these detention centers that I have posted about, which mostly contain Hispanics.

By a 'small sectors,' i mean like women in the US cabinet or in the Senate; *very small numbers*

Arguably these tokens and privileged sectors HURT the advances on the part of the main part, since among other things, they allow people to say, "sure there are women in Supreme Ct."

---
To falling, i would add, racism as you know is not just conscious choices like to use racist labels. It can happen w/o conscious choices. In other words, in the pool of candidates for the Supreme Ct of the US there are few racial or ethnic minorities. So Bush does not have to be racist, for the outcome to be predominantly white. The "system" has screened out the "undesirables" before the pool is constituted.

 

[FallingToFly]

Nope. Because the wealthy and powerful maintain influence over such institutions--at least in the U.S. For example, there is a lot of outrage about reverse discrimination in who gets into a elite colleges. People will say, "You shouldn't let minorities in just because they're minorities. They should have to earn the right."

And this is true. But these same people DON'T complain about legacies--that is, the kids of rich parents who went to these schools who get into these schools even if their grades are not good enough. They get in why? Because their parents give money to the school and without that money, the school is screwed.

Hence, the white rich folk get their kids, and friends of their kids into the schools. And if these rich white kids get the best education--and make the best connections as well, connections that they can use to, say, go into politics or business...then white politicians and business folk still dominate. This domination may not be based on a bias against minorities, but it is still a bais status quo.

Understand, by the way, that I believe this status quo is more and more becoming that of rich vs. poor rather than race vs. race. HOWEVER, on television, in movies, in novels, in politics, in CEO's running powerful companies, etc. the white male still dominates. If reverse discrimination were dominating the U.S. as argued, this wouldn't be the case.

It's not that I think reverse discrimination is running rampant, but I'm in a class where literally, the teacher is saying that discrimination against minorities- with a strong emphasis on the race card- is rampant, and I disagree with that entirely. I'm frustrated with his attitude, and the eager clamoring of agreement from the other students- what was supposed to be a class on cultural diversity has now become a constant stream of "Tell us how Blacks are being discriminated against, and then show how much you agree with that statement." I have pointed out repeatedly that it isn't just race thats a factor, and that it's NOT as prevalent as the teacher is claiming, and pointing out all the programs in place to stop it and help equalize society as far sa advantages go, and literally, getting slapped down. It is extremely frustrating, and at this point in time, my fuse is short, and I have no more patience with it.

It drives me crazy to be in a class that rather than educating, is being used as a platform for a personal agenda.

 

[Retrieval]

This can all be summed up in two words; "Political correctness".
It's just code for Anti-White.
If you take a stand against it then be prepared to be labeled a Nazi, just like myself and many others.
If you are strong you will take this stand, if you are weak then you will sit there and say nothing.

 

[cloudy]

This can all be summed up in two words; "Political correctness".
It's just code for Anti-White.
If you take a stand against it then be prepared to be labeled a Nazi, just like myself and many others.
If you are strong you will take this stand, if you are weak then you will sit there and say nothing.

What if you're non-white? What stand would you have us take?

sheesh.

eta: I'm not calling you any names, but what you're spouting sounds damn close to the skinhead party lines.

 

[Retrieval]

What if you're non-white? What stand would you have us take?

That's for you to decide.

eta: I'm not calling you any names, but what you're spouting sounds damn close to the skinhead party lines.

What I've said is true, if that sounds close to the skinhead party lines, then so be it. The alternative would be for me to lie.

 

[3113]

This can all be summed up in two words; "Political correctness".

Political correctness originally was about courtesy, and we will agree that it got out of hand in some ways and with some people, as all movements, however good intentioned, can. However, it currently has NO real power save for being used as a strawman by right-wingers--you are using it in this way.

You argue that if you take a stand against PC, you're labeled a Nazi, but if someone takes a stand against someone like you, arguing about people being Anti-white, they're far more likely to be labeled "PC" and dismissed, than the anti-white person is to be labeled either a Nazi or a Skinhead.

The right-wing radio stations do this all the time. It's both "Straw-man" and "name-calling." Someone trys to present a rational argument, and instead of arguing facts, they get dismissed as being "PC!" which, at this point, not something you want to be called. How, after all, would you like it if you had an objection to someone very evident anti-black bigotry and they dismissed you as PC? You'd be appalled, wouldn't you? And you'd shut up and stop arguing for fear of being thought "PC" and "weak."

And hence, as Cloudy points out, the racist white folk get to maintain their power by making any attempt at fairness seem ridiculous and weak--and giving that which is ridiculous and weak a name they can shout, very like children shouting names at other kids on a playground: "PC!"

Currently, however, the "PC" that has power is not Political Correctness. It's Patriotic Correctness. Say a wrong word about, say, the troops in Iraq and that's the end.

 

[cloudy]

You argue that if you take a stand against PC, you're labeled a Nazi, but if someone takes a stand against someone like you, arguing about people being Anti-white, they're far more likely to be labeled "PC" and dismissed, than the anti-white person is to be labeled either a Nazi or a Skinhead.

The right-wing radio stations do this all the time. It's both "Straw-man" and "name-calling." Someone trys to present a rational argument, and instead of arguing facts, they get dismissed as being "PC!" which, at this point, not something you want to be called. How, after all, would you like it if you had an objection to someone very evident anti-black bigotry and they dismissed you as PC? You'd be appalled, wouldn't you?

And hence, as Cloudy points out, the racist white folk get to maintain their power by making any attempt at fairness seem ridiculous and weak--and giving that which is ridiculous and weak a name they can shout, very like children shouting names at other kids on a playground: "PC!"

Yes.

And it often hides real racism behind the shield of being "anti-PC." For that reason alone, I suspect a motive other than just being against political correctness..

 

[Remec]

This is true, but the question is asking it in regards to "racial imbalance." If it were a general question about all people, than I'd vote with you on Family--the family we're raised in, good or bad, no matter our economic, social, or cultural level, has a lot to do with your place. A poor kid from a poor family can still do well if raised by the right family.

HOWEVER, since the question relates to race, we must assume that it is refering to the predominately African-American problem of black families more often being one parent families (a single mom)--otherwise, how can the person writing the essay argue that racial imbalance between black families and white is difficult to overcome?

And one can certainly argue that single-mom families have a harder time raising the kids right and so create a racial imbalance if most single mom families are black. So this would be a valid argument.

Still, a single mom family with money does do better than a single mom family without money. So, once again, economics could also be argued.

I actually trailed off what I was writing before getting into these things, but I feel that you're exactly right. The imbalance involved is that, as far as I've heard or ever been aware, black single mothers are almost always either on their own entirely--ie, with no contact from the father--or they rely on the next generation (or two) and the child(ren) are raised with a skewed view of things.

 

[3113]

I actually trailed off what I was writing before getting into these things, but I feel that you're exactly right. The imbalance involved is that, as far as I've heard or ever been aware, black single mothers are almost always either on their own entirely--ie, with no contact from the father--or they rely on the next generation (or two) and the child(ren) are raised with a skewed view of things.

Well, refering again to my husband--he was raised by a single mom in what was a fairly typical situation for a black child. But he saw a significant difference between his single mom and other single moms. His mom was happy, loving and adored her children. Other moms always seemed angry and put out by their kids. I do not know if money would have changed these women from angry single moms to better single moms. Certainly having a partner to help them discipline and raise the kids would have helped. But it's clear that being poor single moms, they felt overwhelmed and angry by their situtations--not just frustrated at raising the kids alone, but also in paying the bills given their small salaries, etc., and they took that out on their kids.

I would think, however, that if kids were raised in a nice, middle class home by a single mom who had enough money to pay those bills, if said kids were going to a good school and not living in a poor neighborhood rife with gang violence, that the kids would be at less at a disadvantage, single mom or not. And the race of that single mom wouldn't matter at all.