Any black winner ever?

24 of 25

Mesostim

02-02-2005

Originally Posted by Veri:
“Yes, that would be fair; but asking me to guess at the percentage of racists among BB viewers isn't asking that question.”

I believe it was.....You had dismissed a figure I didn't have and stated your figure, which you also didn't have was more accurate, with the same lack of evidence...We then proceeded to smack each other with fish.

I apologise for any offence caused however, the discussion has since moved on...

Alrightmate

02-02-2005

Originally Posted by Veri:
“I don't think I did say that discussion couldn't continue otherwise, and I'm sorry if I gave that impression.

Also, I did not "finally give an answer". I never gave a guess at the percentage of racists. I did say why I didn't, which I supposed could be considered an answer (despite not being accepted as an answer at the time) but it wasn't "finally".

I sometimes ask for evidence and reasons in such cases, as do others from time to time.”

I'm sure you said more than half, in respect to a question about the proportion of white racists to black racists.
(I'm getting wary about even using the word racist now

)
Not an accurate percentage, but I thought it ended something that you and Mesostim wanted to end.

Anyway at least it got past that stage anyway.

I think you made some good points in your last post. I agree with you that the present social climate can have an effect on people's perceptions of the world around them.
While not necessarily meaning that everyone is racist,..I think the conditions make it so that it's much easier for people to be receptive to certain opinions where a few years ago they would be less xenophobic.

I think Doc Smock touched on this when he said we had evolved with a "cubbyholing" instinct.
We may well naturally tend to identify more with what we believe to be more similar to us, and it may reflect not always necessarily in negative discrimination, but also just as likely, might manifest itself as positive discrimination perhaps.

When you have a show like BB that seems to compare one person to another, and polarises opinions, then any subtle influences could possibly make that comparison much more extreme than it might be otherwise.

Last edited by Alrightmate : 02-02-2005 at 09:03

Veri

02-02-2005

Originally Posted by Alrightmate:
“I'm sure you said more than half. Not an accurate percentage, but I thought it ended something that you and Mesostim wanted to end.”

I've been away since my last post on p 17 until this morning, and I've just caught up. I feel bad about continuing this now, since I see it did come to a reasonable end, but it looks like what ended it (see p 18) is that I wrote "If you want me to accept that racial prejudice has some effect on BB voting, I'm happy to do that. (Consider it done.)" and Mesostim replied "Yep...I'm happy with that. Really....I don't know why we have to go through the rest of the other stuff to reach agreement over something....".

Anyway, I've tried searching the net for relevant stuff, and I've just come across something that's surprisingly good. The social attitude surveys don't seem to be generally accessible on-line, but this may be even more useful.

Quote:
“ This report describes the findings of the 2003 Young People’s Social Attitudes survey, a survey of 12 to 19 year olds. The interviews were carried out in connection with the British Social Attitudes (BSA) survey, an annual survey of adults aged 18 and over.”

Google for http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data...iles/RR564.pdf and you can get the PDF or see it as HTML.

The part I'll quote below is on p 51 (page number 48 in the doc), and before that there's also something about perceptions of prejudice. (For instance, "more prejudice is perceived to exist towards Asians than black people".)

Quote:
“We also asked respondents to say how prejudiced they themselves are towards people of other races. In 2003, young people were most likely to say that they were not prejudiced at all – 82 per cent gave this response. Seventeen per cent said “a little prejudiced”, and just one per cent saw themselves as “very prejudiced”. Previous research suggests that while this item may be assumed to be answered in a ‘socially acceptable’ way (that is, respondents may not be prepared to say that they are prejudiced), it is a good indicator of racial prejudice, as it correlates with more implicit measures of prejudice (Evans, 2002).

Again, there is a difference between young people’s and adult’s responses to this question – while few adults say they are “very prejudiced” (three per cent), the proportion saying they are “a little prejudiced” is ten percentage points higher than for young people, while being “not prejudiced at all” is the view of 69 per cent (compared to 82 per cent of young people).

There has been a reduction in the proportion saying they are prejudiced over time, with over a quarter of young people saying they were “a little prejudiced” in 1994, compared to just 17 per cent in 2003. It is noticeable that the figures from 1998 and 2003 are virtually identical.”

Last edited by Veri : 02-02-2005 at 09:27

Alrightmate

02-02-2005

Thanks for finding that link Veri.
I haven't downloaded and read the full article yet, but your quotes from it are interesting.

Mesostim

02-02-2005

Thanks for the link and quote Veri.....I'll see if I can read it in full when I get home from work.

Doc Shmok

02-02-2005

http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/...&postcount=448

smalltree

03-02-2005

who? exactly, has the authority to decide when an 'issue' of discussion ends??..
it's fair enuff if 'some' decide to 'move on'..
but equally 'others', either existing or new to the thread, should be entitled to continue an 'issue' of interest..
and 'move on' when they themselves are ready to, whether they view/comment over 'old' ground or not.

Mesostim

03-02-2005

Originally Posted by smalltree:
“who? exactly, has the authority to decide when an 'issue' of discussion ends??..
it's fair enuff if 'some' decide to 'move on'..
but equally 'others', either existing or new to the thread, should be entitled to continue an 'issue' of interest..
and 'move on' when they themselves are ready to, whether they view/comment over 'old' ground or not.”

You are completely right.....Personally I was referring to the fall out between myself and Veri above and the fact the conversation had literally "moved on"...by all means continue it Smalltree and anyone else new to the thread...(I assume this is directed at me incidently....In which case that post clearly was part of my discussion with Veri and an attempt to smooth over out disagreements...)

It's similar to the examples of when people come into these discussions, announce that it's boring and the thread should be closed or simply put..."there is no racism..End of".....Who decides if it's "end of"?.....It's exactly like you say...there are plenty more people who may want to discuss all the relevant points with interest who don;t want to instantly dismiss them.....

smalltree

04-02-2005

Originally Posted by Mesostim:
“You are completely right.....Personally I was referring to the fall out between myself and Veri above and the fact the conversation had literally "moved on"...by all means continue it Smalltree and anyone else new to the thread...(I assume this is directed at me incidently....In which case that post clearly was part of my discussion with Veri and an attempt to smooth over out disagreements...)

It's similar to the examples of when people come into these discussions, announce that it's boring and the thread should be closed or simply put..."there is no racism..End of".....Who decides if it's "end of"?.....It's exactly like you say...there are plenty more people who may want to discuss all the relevant points with interest who don;t want to instantly dismiss them.....”

here's a 'cyber' hug.....!<............>!
if my recent post was intended for you, i would have posted you directly or at least made it obvious...you don't need to give yourself so much unneccessary worry.
it is a 'general' question?, coupled with a view...
it may have been a bit "late-in-the-day" to bring it up, considering 'some' had resolved recent misunderstandings..
but i thought better to mention now than later, so that i know where 'things' stand.
i checked out the .gov.uk survey site, but my computer was unable to read the text, so i'll check 'it' on a friends when i've got time.(smile)

Veri

04-02-2005

Originally Posted by smalltree:
“i checked out the .gov.uk survey site, but my computer was unable to read the text, so i'll check 'it' on a friends when i've got time.(smile)”

If you search for the URL with google, you should get a link that lets you see it as HTML, which your browser should be able to handle.

smalltree

04-02-2005

Originally Posted by Veri:
“If you search for the URL with google, you should get a link that lets you see it as HTML, which your browser should be able to handle.”

thanks!
doh! silly me...completely forgot 'search-egn'..
been spending alot of time on www's (stuff in general) lately, which is probably why i've been out of habit with google ect.
cheers!

Deerd

04-02-2005

Just from a simple anecdotal note POV - my daughter and her classmates are 'studying' racism and prejudice at the moment. Today [edit: make that yesterday

] half the class were given green stickers to wear and the other half, blue. They were told that they could not sit next to, communicate with, have lunch with, play with (breaks and lunch included) etc, etc ANother wearing a differently coloured sticker. Those of another 'colour' were to be regarded as differing and unacceptable within their social sphere.

My daughter makes claims to be the first, mid-morning-ish, to take off her sticker and scrumple it up and throw it away (although, i believe this was, after much discussion with many simply expressing the wish of many - she was just the first to actively express the wish held by all). The majority did as she had within seconds/minutes.

They were told, by the teacher, that "they were wrong to make a mockery of the 'experiment' towards greater understanding"...they (and by all accounts it was as a class) said that they were RIGHT...because they understood and wished to have no part in something which, even temporarily, belittled/questioned their innate belief in opposition to that kind of discrimination anyway. The class stood as one in defiance of discrimination! They have now moved on, as a class, (rather more rapidly than anticipated - it'll be a bugger for lesson schedules

) to 'people are people' and active, equal and reciprocal citizenship.

Cat, my daughter, may only typify 26 out of 26 10/11yr olds...but that's a typical i'd love to hope to live to see represented down the line.

Veri's figures may help provide some basis for current analysis...those figures being, largely, heartening...the future, it seems, may look even brighter.

BTW, 15 of Cat's (Cat included) watched and voted - bloody mobiles

- in this last CBB.

smalltree

04-02-2005

Originally Posted by Deerd:
“Just from a simple anecdotal note POV - my daughter and her classmates are 'studying' racism and prejudice at the moment. Today [edit: make that yesterday ] half the class were given green stickers to wear and the other half, blue. They were told that they could not sit next to, communicate with, have lunch with, play with (breaks and lunch included) etc, etc”

yeh!..numbers/surveys/experiments are of marginal use..
but, i would have been interested(non-bias) to know the 'result' if the 'teacher/s' had given the 'stickers' without the "restrictions".
ie: not to sit next to, communicate, lunch...
Last edited by smalltree : 04-02-2005 at 04:17

Veri

04-02-2005

Originally Posted by smalltree:
“yeh!..numbers/surveys/experiments are of marginal use..”

Naturally, I don't agree. Without them, people just go by their own impressions.

P.S. great story Deerd.

Veri

04-02-2005

Just as we've been talking about ..., along comes ...:

This is a fascinating article and directly relevant to what we've been discussing.

Quote:
“See No Bias
Many Americans believe they are not prejudiced. Now a new test provides powerful evidence that a majority of us really are.

AT 4 O'CLOCK ON A RECENT WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON, a 34-year-old white woman sat down in her Washington office to take a psychological test. Her office decor attested to her passion for civil rights -- as a senior activist at a national gay rights organization, and as a lesbian herself, fighting bias and discrimination is what gets her out of bed every morning. A rainbow flag rested in a mug on her desk.

The woman brought up a test on her computer from a Harvard University Web site. It was really very simple: All it asked her to do was distinguish between a series of black and white faces. When she saw a black face she was to hit a key on the left, when she saw a white face she was to hit a key on the right. Next, she was asked to distinguish between a series of positive and negative words. Words such as "glorious" and "wonderful" required a left key, words such as "nasty" and "awful" required a right key. The test remained simple when two categories were combined: The activist hit the left key if she saw either a white face or a positive word, and hit the right key if she saw either a black face or a negative word.”

I have to say that I find that approach questionable. It may be building up an association between the things that go to the same side, thus invalidating what comes next. However, some things reported later in the article (for instance about tests re insects and flowers) suggest that the test is still valid.

Btw, Mahzarin Banaji, who is quoted in some of what I quote below, is one of the scientists who developed the test.

Quote:
“Then the groupings were reversed. The woman's index fingers hovered over her keyboard. The test now required her to group black faces with positive words, and white faces with negative words. She leaned forward intently. She made no mistakes, but it took her longer to correctly sort the words and images.

Her result appeared on the screen, and the activist became very silent. The test found she had a bias for whites over blacks.

... much omitted...

But the tests do not measure actions. The race test, for example, does not measure racism as much as a race bias. Banaji is the first to say people ought to be judged by how they behave, not how they think. She tells incredulous volunteers who show biases that it does not mean they will always act in biased ways -- people can consciously override their biases. But she also acknowledges a sad finding of the research: Although people may wish to act in egalitarian ways, implicit biases are a powerful predictor of how they actually behave.

... another big skip...

But the critics persist. Philip Tetlock, a professor of organizational behavior in the business school at the University of California at Berkeley, and Ohio State University psychology professor Hal Arkes argue that Jesse Jackson might score poorly on the test. They cite the civil rights leader's statement a decade ago that there was nothing more painful at that stage of his life "than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery. Then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved."

If a prominent black civil rights leader could hold such a bias, Tetlock and Arkes ask, what do bias scores really mean? Whatever the IAT is measuring, Tetlock and Arkes argue, it is not what people would call discrimination -- no one would dream of accusing Jesse Jackson of harboring feelings of hostility toward African Americans.

Banaji says Tetlock and Arkes are relying on an outmoded notion of discrimination. The IAT research shows that hostility is not needed for discrimination to occur. Women and minorities can just as easily harbor biases, absorbed from the larger culture, that can lead them to discriminate against people like themselves.

...

Even if whites and blacks committed crimes at exactly the same rate, Banaji says, people would assign greater weight to the black crimes. This phenomenon is known as an illusory correlation: Aberrational behavior by a member of a minority group is not only given greater prominence in the mind but is also more easily associated with the entire group, rather than just the individual.

...big skip

No one knows exactly why people develop implicit biases. Living in a diverse neighborhood does not in itself seem to reduce bias, but having close friendships with people from other ethnic groups does appear to lower bias, the IAT researchers have found.

...big skip

To take the Implicit Association Test, go to https://implicit.harvard.edu.

To better understand how the test works and your results, go to https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/faqs.html

... more...”

From the same article, about a different test, emphasis added:

Quote:
“Much as we like to believe that our perceptions and memories are always accurate, a number of experiments show people routinely make errors in how they see and remember things, without their being aware of it.”

The Washington Post being a major American paper, the article is long.

See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2005Jan21.html

You have to register, but it's free.

You can follow the Harvard links without registering.

Mesostim

04-02-2005

Cheers Veri....

Veri

04-02-2005

BTW, I've now looked at the faq for the test and it answers my suspicion about the order -- ie that doing white/positive - black/negative first biases the result.

Follow the Harvard faq link above then one to "Race FAQs".

Quote:
“I had to group White items (faces or names) together with pleasant words first. I then found it difficult when I later had to group Black items with pleasant words. Was that because I had done the task first with White items and pleasant words?

Answer: The order in which tests are administered does make a difference in magnitude of what we call 'IAT effects'. However, the difference is small and recent changes to the test have sharply reduced the influence of order. Because of this order effect, the orders used for IATs presented on this website are assigned at random. If you want to check whether the order made a difference for you, you can take the test again and complete it if you get assigned to the reverse order. If you do take the test twice in different orders and get different outcomes, the best estimate of your result is intermediate between the two.”

smalltree

05-02-2005

Originally Posted by Veri:
“Naturally, I don't agree. Without them, people just go by their own impressions.”

don't get you!..
what's wrong with 'marginal' use?...did you presume i meant 'marginal' in a negative tone..
what's wrong with people "going by their own impressions"?..are you implying that people can't think for themselves?
gosh!..is your descretion floppy or choosy??

the result of an experiment/survey, albeit informative, is still only of marginal use...
there are few surveys that come anywhere near to being able to fully reflect a convincing understanding/result of 'it's' research...surveying needs to improve it's tactics to gain my full confidence.
i'd rather trust personal 'life-experience'(something that few in this discussion seem to be sharing) than give too much credence to the result of a survey.

btw: "re: ps great story Deerd"
why? did you address your disagreeing post to me, yet include a complimentary 'ps' to another FM.
Deerd is personally, perfectly capable of deducing my posts.
you DON"T have that 'touch', therefore, your attempt won't work with me.
Last edited by smalltree : 05-02-2005 at 02:34

smalltree

05-02-2005

Originally Posted by Deerd:
“J
My daughter makes claims to be the first, mid-morning-ish, to take off her sticker and scrumple it up and throw it away (although, i believe this was, after much discussion with many simply expressing the wish of many - she was just the first to actively express the wish held by all). The majority did as she had within seconds/minutes.”

earlier today, i told my daughter about what your daughter had done and she said, with arms raised;
"YEEHHHH!! POWER to the PEOPLE!

Veri

05-02-2005

Originally Posted by smalltree:
“don't get you!..
what's wrong with 'marginal' use?...did you presume i meant 'marginal' in a negative tone..”

I assumed you meant marginal, and I think I understood you correctly. As for impressions, the problem is that people will often be wrong, because they don't encounter a representative sample and will be influenced by their prior beliefs in ways that affect how they perceive the evidence. The "See no bias" article I quote above gives some examples of ways in which people can be mistaken in what they see and remember and even about themselves, and there are plenty of other examples in the cognative psychology literature.

Surveys and experiments aren't the whole story, but they are very useful.

Quote:
“btw: "re: ps great story Deerd"
why? did you address your disagreeing post to me, yet include a complimentary 'ps' to another FM.”

I was just saving time. What is your problem with it? Just pretend it was two separate messages if you have to.

Quote:
“Deerd is personally, perfectly capable of deducing my posts.
you DON"T have that 'touch', therefore, your attempt won't work with me.”

What is "deducing" a post? What do you think I am "attempting" to do?

smalltree

05-02-2005

Originally Posted by Veri:
“What is "deducing" a post? What do you think I am "attempting" to do?”

do you understand the word 'deducing'?..
if yes!..then what more indepth understanding do you need?
your 'attempt' was in typing a 'ps' message to another FM, while you were obviously still in address to me..
why? write a 'ps' to another FM within a post to me..
does a FM have to search other FM's messages to see if there are any 'ps's' from you at the end of other FMs recieved mail?...
i don't need anymore 'entangled connotational' messages than there already exists...there's enuff debate as it stands.
hence, the comment.. "it won't work with me".

Veri

05-02-2005

Originally Posted by smalltree:
“do you understand the word 'deducing'?..”

Yes, but what does deducing a post mean?

Quote:
“your 'attempt' was in typing a 'ps' message to another FM, while you were obviously still in address to me..”

But what do you think I was trying to do, so that you thought it made sense to say I lacked a "touch" and that it wouldn't "work" with you?

You seem to think I was up to no good in some subtle way.

Quote:
“why? write a 'ps' to another FM within a post to me..”

I told you why in my previous message. What the heck is the big deal?

I often reply to more than one FM in a message. I put FM names in bold when I don't use a quote block so that the FMs can spot them if they happen to glance at my message. I can see why you might have found the "P.S." confusing (sorry

), but I didn't intend any entangled connotations.
Last edited by Veri : 05-02-2005 at 05:58

Getmeoutofhyaaa

05-02-2005

Originally Posted by Veri:
“Just as we've been talking about ..., along comes ...:

This is a fascinating article and directly relevant to what we've been discussing.
”

A really interesting article but of questionable value, I think. As you say, building up an association one way or the other in the first part will obviously make the second part more difficult.

And in any case, surely people will always gravitate towards people of their own kind, whether that means race, religion or nationality? I don't believe that necessarily makes somebody a racist. All this agonising and accusation doesn't help anything.

And the Jesse Jackson thing was interesting. His experience was surely nothing to do with racesm or personal belief - simply a recognition that crime rates are higher among the black population than the white.

Getmeoutofhyaaa

05-02-2005

I've just been reading through this thread - I used to find it all very tedious but Mesostim's badgering of Veri is actually quite entertaining. And then his equally idiotic sidekick Smalltree takes over. 'Deducing a post'! Wonderful.

Mesodim is still the champion though. Reminds me of that sketch in 'Brass Eye', the Agency for Thick People, where you can hire a Thick Person to win an argument for you. Great stuff. Any Brass Eye fans in?

tonbangeratty

05-02-2005

Originally Posted by Getmeoutofhyaaa:
“I've just been reading through this thread - I used to find it all very tedious but Mesostim's badgering of Veri is actually quite entertaining. And then his equally idiotic sidekick Smalltree takes over. 'Deducing a post'! Wonderful.

Mesodim is still the champion though. Reminds me of that sketch in 'Brass Eye', the Agency for Thick People, where you can hire a Thick Person to win an argument for you. Great stuff. Any Brass Eye fans in?”

I think you need to develop 'internal monologue' and perhaps a smidgen of respect for your fellow FMs - I don't see how such an insulting post has anything to add to this discussion at all. It only serves to showcase your own tactlessness and arrogance.

Whether or not you agree with the views of others, or on occassion find their attempts to express themselves lacking, there's no need for such an outburst - we have all learnt to cut each other some slack and try to constructively move the debate forward when we can.
Last edited by tonbangeratty : 05-02-2005 at 11:52

24 of 25