The Sullivan Commission on Diversity in the Healthcare Workforce, headed by Dr. Lewis W. Sullivan, former secretary of health and human services and president emeritus of Morehouse School of Medicine, has just issued its report documenting (surprise!) a lack of diversity in the healthcare workforce.
An article on the report in the Chronicle of Higher Education gives the numbers:
Black, Hispanic, and American Indian people make up more than 25 percent of the U.S. population, but they account for only 6 percent of the nation’s physicians, 9 percent of its nurses, and 5 percent of its dentists.
Similar disparities exist on the faculties of the professional schools for those occupations. Just 4 percent of the faculty members at American medical schools are members of underrepresented minority groups. In baccalaureate nursing schools, the figure is less than 10 percent, and at dental schools, it’s 9 percent.
So far this is standard fare for the diversity mongers, but the fanfare surrounding this report attempts to up the ante by claiming, as the Chronicle article puts it, that this lack of diversity “directly threatens the health of at least one-third of the U.S. population, and indirectly hurts millions more….”
“Access to health professions remains largely separate and unequal,” Dr. Sullivan said in a written statement. “We know that minority physicians, dentists, and nurses are more likely to serve minority and medically underserved populations, yet there is a severe shortage of minorities in the health professions. … Without much more diversity in the health work force, minorities will continue to suffer.”
This is not the first such warning.
A report released in February by the National Academies’ Institute of Medicine called on health-professions schools to act immediately to reverse the shortage of minority health professionals. Otherwise, the report concluded, members of minority groups will continue to get sicker and receive poorer care than the rest of the population (The Chronicle, February 20).
In the report being released today, the Sullivan Commission on Diversity in the Healthcare Workforce echoes that warning, citing cancer, heart disease, AIDS, and diabetes as a few of the health problems that are less likely to be adequately treated, and more likely to be fatal, in minority patients. Compounding the problem, some 44 million Americans lack health insurance, the report adds.
Minorities may well be “underserved” by health care professionals, and minorities may also be “underrepresented” among doctors, dentists, nurses, etc., but it does not follow that either of these facts (or conditions or whatever) means that “access” to health care is “largely separate and unequal.” Insofar as there is a problem here, it is not at all clear that it is a problem of “access” that would be solved by more “diversity” among health care professionals.
Minorities do not avoid crossing bridges built by non-minority engineers, nor do they avoid flights on airplanes whose pilots are not members of minority groups. Perhaps there should be more minority architects or professors of chemistry, but the “underrepresentation” of minorities in those fields does not block their “access” to those occupations or to the products and services their practitioners provide.
If certain communities are underserved by the health professions, then some inducements can be offered to practice in them such as grants or low-interest loans tied to a committment of practice in such communities for a certain amount of time. This would be much more direct and effective than an outright racial preference based on the assumption that minorities may be “more likely” to serve minority communities. If service is needed, provide the service, not the color of the service provider.
I haven’t waded into the report, but I’d be interested to see how many Asian doctors there are. I have a gut feeling they may very well be “overrepresented,” and that there is actually much more health care being performed by “minorities” (who, as you’ve often pointed out, are fungible in some cases and not in others) than this report indicates.
Joey,
I was wondering about this too.
Just 4 percent of the faculty members at American medical schools are members of underrepresented minority groups. In baccalaureate nursing schools, the figure is less than 10 percent, and at dental schools, it’s 9 percent.
But my question is something of the reverse of yours; I wondered whether Asian-Americans might not also be underrepresented, at least in some fields. (Though, anecdotally, there do seem to be a lot of Asian-American dentists and optometrists, at least around here.)
I have no stats; I just get the feeling that there are people who use “underrepresented minority” as a synonym for “non-Asian minority” whether Asian-Americans are in fact “overrepresented” in a given field or not.
Can someone tell me exactly what “underrepresented” means?
Clearly there must be some “correct” representation, or there can be no inequality. But oddly, it does not seem possible for a so-called minority group to be “overrepresented”. Funny how that works.
Is there any math behind this? Or is it just more religion?
Rich
Rich, the idea is that a group is “underrepresented” when its percentage representatation in some activity or occupation is less than its fraction of the relevant population as a whole. Blacks and Hispanics, for example, are “underrepresented” in the UC-eligible student population, because the fraction they represent of that population is lower than their percentage in the high-school-senior population as a whole.
On the other hand, Asian-Americans are wildly overrepresented by a similar definition in the same cohort: far more of them are in the UC-eligible category than would be predicted if academic performance and ethnicity weren’t correlated at all.
The reason that you don’t hear the term “overrepresented minority” often is that of the people who like to talk about “underrepresented minorities,” most would rather not have to talk about Asian-Americans at all. Therefore they are counted tacitly as “white.” I have read, not long ago, and in a slickly-produced new magazine, an entire article about the position of “minorities” in classical music that managed not to mention Asian-Americans anywhere — which if you have ever stepped foot inside a conservatory or heard one of the top youth orchestras, or for that matter heard of Yo-Yo Ma or Kyung-Wha Chung or Midori or Han-Na Chang or Kyoko Takezawa or Lang Lang or Kent Nagano or . . . well, never mind ;-) — is flabbergasting.
“Just 4 percent of the faculty members at American medical schools are members of underrepresented minority groups.”
I really have trouble getting my mind around this. Is it better for this percentage to be high or low? If no minority group is underrepresented on the faculty, then the percentage would be 0, wouldn’t it? Would that be bad?
This is more propaganda from officials demanding more power for themselves, to manipulate racial and ethnic groups into worse conflict, in order to get even more power later. They resort to scaring people with the threat of negative effects on life expectancy from lack of quota placeholders in medicine, as if that were likely. If, however, you were to say how would you like to be mortally ill, and find yourself depending on someone who needed a quota to get into college, and another to get into graduate school, and another into a residency, and preference to practice in a program, after having failed licensing exams once or twice; the official race-baiters would cry panic-mongering. Yet that is contradictory; either the affirmative action cases are equally qualified, and their relevant environments were no worse overall, or they are admitted to be less-qualified, and get to blame bad environments.
I always get a chuckle out of articles like this. The proportionate representation/diversity cult can never answer why diversity is not important enough to “diversify” HBCs (Historically Black Colleges), or why whites — who make up 70%+ of the American pop. — are sorely underrepresented in pro basketball, football and even baseball, for example.
And it is an insult to ALL people to imply that they’d rather be aesthetically pleased by fulfilling some bean counter’s anointed vision, rather than get competent dental/medical care.
Dave,
It would be funny, if it weren’t so dangerous.
Do any of you believe that Asian Americans are “overrepresented” in upper level management positions in corporate America? If so, please present evidence.
–Cobra
Cobra: Do you believe African-Americans are overrepresented in pro sports?
Or more matter-of-factly: Do you believe in proportionate representation?
Dave,
African Americans are not overrepresented in the majority of professional sports. Baseball is dominated by whites and Latinos. Hockey?
Golf? Tennis? Auto Racing? Soccer? Beach Volleyball? Come on Dave. The only sports you can hang that argument on is Football, Basketball and maybe boxing. That is NOT all of professional sports by a long shot.
I believe in forcing a racist nation to act fairly by rule of law. Now if you want to argue with me that America isn’t a racist nation, bring it on my friend.
–Cobra
There are certain professions that, no matter what one wishes, there will not be a lowering of standards for particular groups. I’ve been taking the actuarial exams, and they just grade the exams – you either pass or you don’t. Just like the bar or the board exams. They don’t put lower cutoffs because you’re a woman or because you’re black.
At my company, there’s a “disproportionate” number of Jews who are actuaries (Orthodox Jews, even). Some of this is a function of other insurance companies having “Jew quotas” (like other New York institutions) to make sure there weren’t =too=many= Jews in a business. So they came to where they were welcome, just as CUNY benefited from the “Jew quota” at Columbia.
As John and others have noted time and again, you’re not going to get more black or Hispanic doctors by making it easier to get into college and med school – they still have those boards to pass and residencies to survive, and they’re never going to let people below a certain level pass those exams. In a way, by lowering expectations at every gate along the way, when it comes to the ultimate test, people are going to be unpleasantly surprised to find they’re not up to snuff.
I saw this happen before at math competitions, in which the smartest from the DC schools went to the same competitions where the kids from Prince Georges or Fairfax Counties were competing. It was totally unfair – these kids were the best in their schools, but they had never been put up against a test at the level of our competition. They had no idea how far outclassed they were going to be. They had been told they were smart (and they were) – and that they knew a lot (which they didn’t).
Likewise, minority kids who don’t do well on the SAT or schievement tests or AP tests are told that these tests are racist, so they think that their lower score does correlate with the higher score of a white student. That’s a lie, and is helping no one. Making people think they know something they don’t is very cruel, and it doesn’t just happen to minority students. I’ve had to teach college freshmen who had taken calculus in high school but didn’t even understand algebra – they had been pushed along, and understanding had never been seriously tested, and no one had been flunked out of a class, though they should have been. It’s cruel that college teachers are often the first time students come slap up against reality.
Cobra. Why do avoid the key question? Do you believe in proportionate representation?
And, despite your corrections, my point still stands: why are AAs disproportionately represented in basketball and football?
If we are “a racist nation,” why is it that we have laws against racial discrimination? On the other hand, why should we have laws against racial discrimination if there’s nothing wrong with racial discrimination? Dave Huber’s question is right on the mark; what seems to bother Cobra is not racial discrimination, which he actually favors in the form of racial preferences, but minorities being “underrepresented’ anywhere. If the underrepresentation is caused by discrimination, then he would oppose discrimination. But if the underrepresentation is not caused by discrimination, then he wants to engage in discrimination to correct it. Discrimination, in short, is not in principle wrong; it is merely a neutral tool to be used for ill (harming minorities) or good (helping minorities). As soon as a majority comes to accept that notion, we can get rid of such bothersome obstacles to good sense as the 14th amendment, the various civil rights laws, etc.
Question: What do you call the guy who finishes last in medical school?
Answer: Doctor.
I am definitely in favor of lowering the medical school and licensing standards to increase the number of African-American physicians, but only if Cobra promises that he and his loved ones receive care from the guy who finishes last in his class.
First-
Stu,
Are you making the supposition that any physician who isn’t an African American is qualified? I’ll give you a cookie for each time you’ve HONESTLY asked your primary care physician for a copy of his med school transcript.
Dave,
My friend, I do believe that racial proportions are often, but not always an indicator of available opportunity.
As far as football and basketball are concerned, let me be frank. I believe in the D.O.P.A. system. If you have the Desire to pursue something, the Opportunity to develop the skills needed for it, the Perseverance to practice and excell and the Access to utilize those skills in a profession, you can do most anything you set your mind to. The most celebrated figures in African America are the professional basketball and football players. They, and in my estimation, UNFORTUNATELY represent the dream goals of young African American males who don’t have another example of success readily available. It’s a Lotto’s chance of success in these fields, of course, but that is where the concentration lies.
Dave, so to explain–in those two particular sports, skills can be developed easily, with little money, or access to facillities, as opposed to greens fees, tennis lessons, baseball camps, coached pool time and equestrian training. Multiply that by millions, and you see where the disparity in proportion comes from.
John,
America is a racist nation. You don’t need a refresher course in history and current sociology. There are laws on the books because people need boundaries. If statistics say 1 out of every 3 women will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime, could you say with a straight face America isn’t a crime-filled nation, because there are laws against sexual assault on the books?
Discrimination is a neutral term. People discriminate all of the time. It’s about choices. I find that when the majority discriminates against the minority, it’s problematic for me. Of course I tend to see it from a different perspective, John…I’m part of the conscious minority.
–Cobra
Cobra: You still evade the question. Why is it so difficult to answer? Here it is again:
Do you believe in proportionate representation?
Your attempted explanation for the preponderance of blacks in basketball and football does nothing to answer the question why — if whites make up 70+% of the general pop. — shouldn’t they make up a similar % in those sports? Proportionate representationists would have to say “they should,” yet they never do; or, like yourself, offer “explanations” which avoid the key question!
Cobra Wrote:
… America is a racist nation. …
—
As compared to what Cobra? South Africa? Do you object to the killing of white farmers Cobra? And what they do to the farmer’s wives is not pretty. Somehow I can’t see you objecting to the worst racist discrimination against whites Cobra, or the killing of whites by blacks. I’ve not seen one single black yet who has objected to the killing of white farmers in South Africa. Doubt I shall, but we shall see. This is, of course, the very kind of thing you seemingly always delete. This is my prediction here BTW.
I really rather doubt that you can tell the difference between nationalism and racism anyway.
And it remains, of what value is the blanket assignment of racism by someone who is as racist as can be? You don’t see right and wrong Cobra, you don’t seem to even grok the concepts. You see only race.
Would you support AA to fix the terrible problem of the extreme “underrepresentation” of whites in football and basketball Cobra? Clearly, by your standards (proportional representation), we have a problem that demands a solution.
Rich
Dave,
I’m not an extremist. My position is clear. Proportionate representation is a tool that works in MANY cases, but not ALL. Why do you have a problem with that? Why must this issue be “black and white” (no pun intended) with no nuance, or shades of grey? The sports analogy you make is also a false premise, because you’re only including PLAYERS ON THE FIELD, not coaches, assistants and upper level management..which by the way, trends more DISPROPORTIONATELY WHITE. If your argument is that there should be more white players, than there should be more non-whites in the head office. Fair enough?
Rich,
South Africa is by FAR not the best choice of countries to use as an example. Remember Apartheid, Rich? Hello? Soweto? Biko? The Truth Commission?
I think the taking of innocent, born life is a tragedy no matter WHAT THE RACE. Don’t you, Rich?
–Cobra
Cobra,
Proportionate representation is a tool that works in MANY cases, but not ALL.
Well, my question would be “what do you mean by ‘works’?” What do you intend proportional representation to accomplish? If it’s a “tool,” it’s a means to an end. What is the end?
I’ll echo John’s point: if America is a racist nation, why do we have laws against discrimination? To say that we have them because we have to have them is a non-answer. How did the laws get on the books? If the white people in power want to keep the black man down, why did they write the laws? If the black people wrote the laws, how did they get the power to do that in a racist nation?
You can’t have it both ways. Either there were enough righteous white people to make non-discrimination the law of the land, in which case America is not a racist nation, or there were enough black people with enough power to push them through, in which case ditto.
> South Africa is by FAR not the best
> choice of countries to use as an
> example. Remember Apartheid, Rich?
> Hello? Soweto? Biko? The Truth
> Commission?
I admit a lack of indoctrination WRT aparthied. But I don’t recall reading that whites were killing blacks and raping and killing their daughters and wives. It seems that black children in South Africa and other countries face a great risk in this regard from their black male countrymen, who think sex with a virgin cures aids. It’s easy to research Cobra, but I don’t imagine that you’d care about it as there is no obvious way to blame whites (not that this will stop you).
Nontheless, do you consider this kind of thing right or wrong. Perhaps you think it right when done by blacks and wrong when done by whites, as you do discrimination.
> I think the taking of innocent, born
> life is a tragedy no matter WHAT THE
> RACE. Don’t you, Rich?
I think drowning in a flood is a tragedy. Natural disasters are tragedies, murder is not a tradegy.
Killing someone because they are white is a crime, in todays parlance, a hate crime. Don’t you think that a white killing a black, because he is black is a hate crime Cobra?
And I note that you have not objected to the specific issue of blacks in SA killing white farmers *BECAUSE THEY ARE WHITE*. You don’t care about race or racism per se Cobra, you care only about blacks. And you don’t see racism as the problem, not at all, you see it as the solution.
> –Cobra
Rich
Do any of you believe that Asian Americans are “overrepresented” in upper level management positions in corporate America? If so, please present evidence.
–Cobra
—-
Cobra, “underrepresentation” means that some black thinks there are too many whites (or some asian or hispanic). It’s voodoo math at best, and there is no foundation to it. It’s not overstating the case to say it’s a religion.
Do you think blacks are “overepresented” at HBC’s like Brown Cobra (and in their management and staff)? Why or why not? What do you propose to do about it?
Rich
Cobra: Your argument still fails. First, b/c you do not offer how and why proportionate representation works SOMETIMES; second b/c I have NOT argued that there should be more whites in pro football and basketball. I merely ask why you’ll never hear this from proportionate representationists such as yourself — who STILL can’t make an argument FOR it after what — three requests by me alone??
And it IS essentially a black-white argument, if you’ll pardon the pun. Either proportionate rep. is correct and just, or it is not. Should all fields of endeavor mirror population figures or not? Again, you say it works “in many cases.” I’d be curious as to just a few of these many cases.
Back to Asians. They seem to be the forgotten “minority.” Whenever someone goes on about AA, they usually mean Hispanics or Blacks, not Asians. In cases where Asians actually are “underrepresented”, such as on TV, the media STILL ignores them and only talk about the numbers of blacks and hispanics on TV.
Let us not be wastrels of openhandedness to such as cobra. Having admitted to advocating ‘forcing a racist nation’ to recruit racially for the underrepresented, one has admitted to believing that aggression can be excused. The racial quotas are imposed by mere aggression; therefore they are always wrong, regardless of circumstances. Further, racist in such usages, means someone who doesn’t want to give everything to the black man which theoretically, could be given. In that usage, every country always will be racist. The equivocation on racism, between its literal meaning of the belief that ideas are inherited racially and genetically, and its convenient redefinition: the lack of unlimited handouts for a disadvantaged race, is what gets overlooked. Likewise an ad hominem approach, such as suggesting that all who disagree are oppressors, is a confession that no rational arguments for racial quotas actually exist.
John,
To relate the facts of American history and current society; the abyssmal treatment of minorities by Whites is not an ad hominem attack. You shouldn’t take it personally, unless you’ve personally taken part in creating that condition. Plus the fact that you only see this is an “black issue”, dilutes your argument. I suggest you talk to a few Asian Americans frozen at middle management
level for a wider perspective on racial discrimination.
Dave,
There is such a thing called theory and application. There is the concept of gravity. The same rules on earth don’t apply on the moon. That doesn’t negate the existance of gravity, or make the application of scienfic theory invalid on earth.
Thus is the same with proportionality. In 1946, there were hundreds of African American baseball players who were talented enough to play major league baseball, yet NONE were on any rosters. There was no ACCESS for them to play. There was an enterprising white man named Branch Rickey who went against the white majority and signed Jackie Robinson. Then there was ONE. Are you saying that the rules of proportionate representation were not right in the case of Jackie Robinson and the segregation of baseball? And if it was appropriate THEN, it would shatter your argument that it’s never applicable.
There are exceptions to rules, Dave.
Moral absolutism is the playground sandbox of dictators and televangelists. I believe in nuance and situational ethics.
Rich,
I can’t educate you in one blog post about the horrors of South Africa’s apartheid government, the colonization of South Africa, separation of families, war crimes, mass murders, attrocities, imprisonments and shanty town slaughters. This isn’t the place for that, as John Rosenberg will certainly second me on. I suggest you do a simple GOOGLE SEARCH for a reliable site on Apartheid South Africa.
Michelle,
If there is no tangible, physical way to observe whether ALL MINORITY-AMERICANS have a fair and inclusive shot at life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, there is NOTHING prevent a slide back to the blizzard-like white monopoly that existed for the vast majority of this nation’s history. Many in here forget that segregation was the RULE, and not the exception for 190 of this nation’s 228 years of existance. People question my statement that America is a racist nation. How on earth can they question me in the face of American History and current society? Where are your facts? Now, I didn’t come in here and claim that ALL Americans are racists. But why would it take nearly TWO CENTURIES to get civil rights for all of it’s non-white citizens? That’s kindegarten-level simplicity.
Michelle, the simple answer is, it won’t end. America is a journey, not a destination. Some on this trip have been riding in first class since the beginning. The majority have been in coach. The minorities were in steerage for a LOOONG time. What exact problem do you have with upgrading some of those minority tickets? There’s room on the Cruise of America for all.
–Cobra
Cobra: Thank you for letting yet another chance to explain how/why proportionate representation is valid. IOW, you CANNOT explain, so you avoid. Either way, you end up just looking utterly cretinous.
The Jackie Robinson story proves zilch. It was discrimination that kept blacks out of baseball then, period. Proportionate rep. had not a thing to do w/black #s in baseball then, and obviously not now, either.
So, I guess you’re off to think of yet another way to avoid the issue. Meanwhile, I’m just plain bored to tears.
Cobra,
I concede all you say above, but I still haven’t got an answer to the question I asked, which is basically, if proportional representation “sometimes works,” what does it work to do? What is the goal? How will you know when the goal has been achieved?
I am trying not to leap to the cynical conclusion that you think proportional representation is to be encouraged whenever Blacks are underrepresented, and disfavored wherever they are overrepresented, but I’m finding it difficult.
Look, there are myriad possible reasons for the racial (or gender, for that matter) breakdown in a given profession not matching that of the whole population. In sports, part of it is (as you said) that Black youth channel a great deal of hope into certain sports — mostly football and basketball, both of which have a dominant Black presence already. (Feedback effect here.) But there’s Black dominance in track and field too, especially in the racing events. I don’t see that being merely an artifact of Black kids wanting to grow up to be the next Bruce Jenner (oh, dear, I’m dating myself . . .) Plain physical aptitude enters into it, among other things. The best sprinters and the best distance runners are both mostly Black, as I understand it, but from completely different ancestries.
The point being that there are all sorts of reasons that a race or an ethnic group might be over- or underrepresented in any field. They do not necessarily include racist discrimination.
To take an example I’ve alluded here before, only because it’s one I know well: there are very few Black classical-music instrumentalists. (Singers are another matter.) So one Aaron Dworkin founds the Sphinx Organization, a foundation that gives fellowships and orchestral internships to promising young Black and Latino musicians.
Dworkin is interviewed and asked what the main obstacles to minority (meaning “Black and Latino”) advancement in orchestras are. He names two. One is tenure: orchestras are clogged up with older players who “couldn’t win a competitive audition today,” and these are good and high-paying jobs, so no one quits them until it’s absolutely necessary or they’re outright fired (which is rare and difficult, but does happen occasionally). So job openings are few.
But the other is that we have this pernicious habit of listening to auditioners behind screens, so that the evaluators can’t tell race/gender/age/body weight/anything else of the sort, but have to judge by the sound — which after all is what orchestras are paid to produce. Dworkin allows that the screen was a good idea at one time, but he says it has now done its work (which was apparently that of getting a lot of women into orchestras; silly me, I thought the idea was to make sure you were hiring the player who sounded best), and ought to be discarded.
So, basically: lots of people who couldn’t win a blind audition should be dismissed and others hired in their stead; but blind auditions should be abolished anyway.
And all along I had thought that the explanation for the small Black presence in classical music had something to do with the enormous pull of the great indigenous African-American popular musical traditions. Wouldn’t at least some musically-talented young Black kids be drawn there?
Dave,
Bored? You’re just not getting the answer you want to hear. Your FIRST question to me was SPORTS RELATED.
“Cobra: Do you believe African-Americans are overrepresented in pro sports?
Or more matter-of-factly: Do you believe in proportionate representation?”
Obviously, Dave, if Jackie Robinson was the ONLY African American playing Major League Baseball in 1947, African Americans were UNDERREPRESENTED. You can’t refute that. Larry Doby, Satchell Page, and others followed after, but there were MANY others who were QUALIFIED TO PLAY, but as you put it correctly, were DISCRIMINATED AGAINST. Of course if you don’t think that there was more than ONE black baseball player in 1947 QUALIFIED to play in the Majors with whites, then I can understand how you would not see a need for proportiante representation.
I can post links and give you the history of the NBA and the NFL in regards to blacks if you like, Dave. Would you be shocked to see the SAME type of UNDERREPRESENTATION? The difference between you and I, is that I still believe there is widespread discrimination against minorities TODAY, and you apparently DON’T. That is why, many times, proportionate representation is a handy tool to use to GAUGE how inclusive a particular field is.
Michelle,
You’re right about my stance. I don’t believe proportionate representation can be used all cases. There are certainly other factors involved to be considered. Take your classical music example. I grew up in a suburban, affluent school district that offered a robust music education program from elementary school through 12th grade. I had an opportunity to play an instrument, and some music teacher suggested the oboe. I took to the oboe like a brick takes to a swimming pool, but nonetheless there was an opportunity available for me to pursue it if I really wanted to. And you’re absolutely right about a finite number of slots available and a low turnover rate in a particular field.
As far as track and field, it’s interesting. Again, I feel it’s a case of a sport where you don’t need much to develop skills in, as opposed to throwing a javelin, pole vaulting, discus or shot put.
Water sports, where full time access to a pool would be the best case scenario, trends white.
We can find common ground on this topic, Michelle. It’s probably just a matter of degree.
–Cobra
Cobra, I’m not following you. All you need to practice discus, shotput, and javelin are a large open space and a discus, shotput, or javelin. As opposed to 100m hurdles, where all you need is, um, 100 meters and some hurdles. One doesn’t look terribly more equipment-and-space-intensive than the other to me.
You didn’t really take my classical-music point — which was that Dworkin, arguing for increased Black and Latino representation in orchestras claimed that tenure should be abolished because many tenured players wouldn’t win blind auditions now because technical standards have improved so much, and in the next breath that blind auditions should be abolished anyway, because they make affirmative action impossible. I don’t see why the hypothetical failure of tenured players to pass a test that the speaker wants abolished anyway should be a compelling argument. But I’ll have to come back tomorrow; it’s been a long day.
Michelle,
First–a shot put, discus or javelin is not readily available at your local sporting goods store. Perhaps with Ebay, or the internet, you can acquire such items more easily, but on the whole, a five year old isn’t going to get their hands on one without parental aid. Secondly, you actually need an open, safe space to throw a discus, shot put or javelin, which may not be readily available in a densely populated urban setting. (not saying that all blacks live in that environment, of course.)
The simple act of RUNNING and JUMPING is something most healthy children can engage in free of charge, with no additional equipment required. A sidewalk would suffice, or dead end street.
I do understand your point on classical music. I just added my own account of MY brush with classical music as a child, and how access was available to me due to my suburban upbringing. Access to instruments and training at an early age is the key to success in classical music, and you correctly pointed out that SINGING is not part of that equation, because…like with running and jumping, most healthy children can sing free of charge.
–Cobra
So, Cobra, using your so-called “logic,” then clearly now blacks are OVERrepresented in the NFL and NBA b/c they make up 60+ and 80+ % of those sports, despite being only 6% (black males, that is) of the pop. Why? Well, would you seriously argue that whites are denied the opportunities to play those sports?
Since any rational person would say “no” to the above question, we then need to ask why blacks are so overrepresented in those leagues.
So, I’m asking you, Cobra: WHY?
Cobra, I don’t think five-year-olds of any race are practicing the lower-profile track-and-field events. I get the impression that these are events taken up in high school at the earliest, college more likely. And don’t you kind of need a large, open space to learn to play football? And I sure hope young sprinters aren’t training on sidewalks. People do need those to, you know, walk on.
Re music, of course access to instruments and training at an early age matters, and the latter in particular is hard to find in the public schools. When I was growing up, in Orange County, NY, there were only two school systems in the entire county that had string-instrument programs. (Winds and brass were another story, because football was big and so every high school had to have a band.) But that’s a problem for everyone in the public schools. As for private music education, there are cheap instrument rentals and relatively inexpensive teachers pretty well everywhere. It is not impossible to start a child on an instrument unless you are genuinely flat broke.
I’m still trying to imagine you as an oboist, of all things! Did you get as far as making your own reeds? They’re terrific noisemakers if you don’t attach an oboe (well, and sometimes even when you do . . .)
Oh, and by the way, I take your point about singing not requiring the purchase of an instrument, but there’s another factor in Black prominence in singing, and that’s the Black churches and their incredible musical tradition. Every Black classical singer I’ve ever heard interviewed has said that you start by singing in church as a child. And then your voice gets noticed, and then . . .
The history of America and its regions is not morally relevant to whether aggression may be used by the government to get the representation of minorities that they want. Even if only blacks were on affirmative action, their handicap, if they have inherited one from American or European history, is not a form of merit. Being aware that quotas are far from being a black issue today; one ought to ask how de jure segregation of blacks is supposed to explain affirmative action going to immigrants, latinos, certain oriental groups here and there, the handicapped and so on. From this it is to be concluded that historical events of the Jim Crow type, are not the reason for affirmative action as it is practiced today. Something else is, namely, the use of the minorities as steppingstones to power, for certain officials.
Dave,
There is absolutely nothing on the books preventing you, or any other white person, from going outside and playing football right now. If you are talented enough, somebody will sign you. The attrition rate of pro football is such that the average career span is around three years. Now, most pro-scouts are looking for some experience at a high level of competitive play, (for example, Brock Lesnar, a 6’3″ 295lb pro wrestler who never played in college was cut by the Vikings in pre season) so the odds aren’t going to be good for the NFL, but there are semi-pro leagues. As far as basketball is concerned, one only has to look at this years OLYMPICS to see that race has very little to do with excellence. The international influx in the NBA is so pronounced right now, Dave, I really wonder what you’re watching. And taking it further, since white men only represent 34% of the population…oh..waitiminute, that would mean that the 40% level of white players in the NFL is an example, by YOUR argument, of Overrepresentation.
Feel free to take this little quiz I found that puts some perspective on the proportional representation issue.
http://www.mdcbowen.org/p2/rm/tests/issues.txt
It may be a couple of years old, but the basic data is very revealing about the perceptions and misconceptions being bandied about in here.
The bottom line to this is the 800lb gorilla in the middle of the room you don’t want to bring up. You want me and people with my position to argue that black dominance in football and basketball is some sort of “trade-off” for white male dominance in business, commerce, government, judicial appointments, law enforcement, media, etc. I won’t fall for that bait, my friend.
Michelle,
You didn’t want to be anywhere near my house when I was practicing the oboe. I tortured our family dog for about a year before I admitted defeat. And I must’ve gone through more reeds…geez. I turned my musical love back to voice, and indeed, the Baptist Church choir I was raised in. I still sing to this day.
http://www.omegatrain.com
–Cobra
Cobra: I see this is an exercise in futility. You have YET to show how proportionate representation works in “some cases,” or for that matter, ANY case. The argument made by PRs is that any field of endeavor should mirror the general pop. #s.
Since whites, as you and I pointed out, have ample opportunity to practice football and basketball, PRs would expect proportionate figures in those sports. There are not, however. So, using the PR “argument” there is some sort of discrimination at hand.
But wait — you haven’t said that (b/c you’re unwilling, which is ultimately wise), so either you agree that there is some sort of discrimination against white males in those sports, or…is it b/c black males are better at those sports in large measure? Or, do a disproportionate # of black males (compared to whites) concentrate on those fields of endeavor, thus drastically increasing their #s to choose from?
Your bringing up irrelevancies such as attrition rates and influx of European players into the NBA are just a waste of space, keep in mind. Again, either proportionate rep. is right and just, or it is not. I and others are STILL waiting to see how it is a “tool” to be used in “certain cases,” Cobra. After all these posts, you’d think you’d be able to make your case.
You have not. Not even slightly.
Which is no surprise, really, since in the whole scheme of things, proportionate rep. is NEITHER right NOR just. That’s why you play word games and delve into irrelevancies. Like I said, I’m bored.
Dave,
They are only irrelevant to those who want to see the argument that way.
>>>or…is it b/c black males are better at those sports in large measure? Or, do a disproportionate # of black males (compared to whites) concentrate on those fields of endeavor, thus drastically increasing their #s to choose from
Michelle wrote:
“There is such a thing called theory and application. There is the concept of gravity. The same rules on earth don’t apply on the moon.”
They don’t?? Who told you this?
“That doesn’t negate the existance of gravity, or make the application of scienfic theory invalid on earth.”
Perhaps you should stick to subjects you understand Michelle, cause you got this example quite wrong.
Rich
Dear Rich,
The sentences you quote came from a post by Cobra. Not only were they not written by me, but they weren’t even in response to one of my own posts, and the poster signed his name to the end of the post (in addition to the byline that the hosting software adds automatically). Please, read carefully before insulting a poster. Or, really, borderline literacy would do. Yeesh.
Cobra: Ahhh, there we go. Your cathartic “dub dissenters as racists” moment has arrived at last, eh?
Puh-leaze.
I know I won’t get you to say that “blacks are better at this, and whites are better at this…” You’re too smart for that. But if you cannot rationalize your basis for proportionate representation (which you STILL are not even close to doing adequately) then you tell me what other conclusions can be drawn from your unwillingness to back up your belief in PR? Is it that different groups largely make different choices, then? If it’s not that, then WHAT?
BTW, I happen to subscribe to that last idea, for the most part.
White male dominance in most facets of American life is due to the fact that white males have generally run just about every facet of American life. Duh. Do you actually expect PR to be a rational basis for “rectifying” such [perceived] wrongs? (I say “perceived” mostly due to the “male” part of your statement. Traditional gender roles hardly equate to purposeful discrimination.) Do you expect what is essentially immediate correction of past racial discrimination, especially based on further discrimination?
Good luck.
The last 40 yrs. have witnessed tremendous strides in undoing irrational racial wrongs. Imagine what the next 40 will see. But we won’t get there if the majority sees discrimination as the method of attaining those strides — the same majority that overwhelmingly supported MLK and his message.
BTW Cobra, “those that are against AA and diversity” are those that “want to continue discrimination”?
You really believe that?
Dave,
Not all people who are against affirmative action and diversity want to continue discrimination. But many do.
Do you REALLY need me to post a laundry list of white nationalist websites that have an anti-affirmative action, anti diversity stance? You know I could in a heartbeat, but it wouldn’t make any difference to you, would it? That’s not calling YOU a racist to hold those positions, but it will obviously show that your claimed altruistic rationale is not universally held.
Dave, you also have this tendancy to paint the history of American discrimination in favor of white males as some “happy accident”.
If you want a look a proportionate representation, take a look at the first Constitutional Congress. It was ALL WHITE, and ALL MALE. That did NOT reflect the population of the US. There was no seat at the table for white women, or non-whites. They wrote laws that favored WHITE MALES–laws that took CENTURIES to AMEND, usually with bloodshed required. Now, all white and all male was NOT a proportionate representation of America in 1787, was it, Dave? But your conclusion is that it didn’t MATTER.
You say we’ve “made strides in the past 40 years”. Well, HOW HAVE WE MADE THOSE STRIDES? It’s ONE thing to say that “minorities now have access to something”, but what is your GAUGE of participation, Dave? How do you KNOW if inclusion is not occuring if you DON’T WANT TO LOOK AT THE NUMBERS.
There are many conservatives who will gleefully trot out statistic upon statistic about how many minorities are incarcerated, or the percentage of single parent black households, not to mention what happens at the polls. I suppose it’s just smashing to some in the majority to use percentages about race to derive a negative connotation, but God forbid we use percentages to view if equality of access is in question.
Conservative radio talk show hosts often say how much “racial outreach” the Bush Administration has because they have three prominent African Americans in the cabinet..Powell, Rice and Paige. But waitiminute, Dave…how can that be a sign of racial outreach by just having a three cabinet members? By your own words, Proportionate representation shouldn’t be applied, right? Therefore, in your theory, the Bush Administation has to use a different explanation, because simply having a certain percentage of blacks in your cabinet doesn’t amount to anything.
–Cobra
I never made any bones about the history of the US, Cobra, if you’d bother to note my last post. I am fully cognizant of who dominated what (and whom).
I am also aware of the white nationalist websites, etc. The thing about them is, they’re overwhelmingly disdained and shunned by … white Americans!
You seem to think I somehow favor PR, but it has been YOU that says it “can work in certain instances!” (I still await how.) I’ve merely been playing the game you set up. Overall, it seems more to me that you’re arguing for blanket AA, not necessarily PR, though. I still disagree, however. I still believe it wholly wrong to call for discriminatory measures based on numbers when indeed no discrimination may be occurring whatsoever. I have no problem w/monitoring numbers of various groups, but instances of discrimination should be dealt with on an individual basis.
I know what some conservatives do when spouting #s; however, the opposite is done exactly the same way by the left — #s of blacks in jail, out of wedlock births etc. are the result of [white] societal dominance/justice system, but of course PR is a “just” result in any field since “we’re all equal.”
Your Bush anecdote doesn’t wash, either. Those that claim “outreach” are not advocating PR at all. I’ve never heard the admin. or its advocates discuss the actual % of blacks in the cabinet compared to #s in the general pop. Indeed, it has been Democratic/liberal admins. who have claimed they want an “admin. that looks like America.” THAT sounds like PR to me.
The above doesn’t even address my libertarian beliefs about the private sector anyway, which, although related, is an entirely different topic.
Heym Cobra — if America is such an awful place for you and your family, why don’t you make like a bird and get the flock outta here? Go find someplace that is not racist, and make your life there.
And take your DOPE standard with you
Precinct,
I don’t believe in the concept of “America: Love it or Leave it”. I beleive in “America: Like it, or work to change it for the better.”
–Cobra
I don’t believe in the “love it or leave it standard” either — but you do not appear to even like the US or the majority of its citizens. You appear to despise its culture and its political system. In short, you seem to hate the US. As such, I see no reason for you to stay, other than to whine loudly about your alleged victimhood — which appears to be self-imposed, given the freedom this country gives you to leave.
Or is it that you like the race-based benefits that accrue to you and your family the louder you shout “racism”?
One of the great things about America is that you have the right to criticize it.
I’m not about to run away from anybody who doesn’t like what I have to say.
–Cobra
Proportionate representation in school discipline
My monthly NEA (National Education Association) news magazine arrived yesterday, and, since I’m in need of a bit of levity when I get home from school, I took it downstairs to read in between my workout reps. In its “Rights…