Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
1/22/2020 12:12:56 PM
Posted: 9/11/2009 2:58:55 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/11/2009 3:04:25 PM EST by SnakeLogan]
At my university I have to take another multiculturalism (read: white bad, non-white good). Let me first say I don't believe in white privilege; it's scapegoating. However, what are your thoughts on this study highlighted in the textbook (Racial and Ethnic Groups by Richard Schaefer 11th edition)?

For the study, four 23 year-olds (2 white, 2 black) went looking for entry-level jobs in Milwaukee, WI. Each claimed to have similar job experience and a high school diploma as their highest level of education as they applied to 350 different employers. One of the black and one of the white men claimed to have served 18 months in prison for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, while the other white man and other black man claimed no criminal record.

Job applicant/ proportion of Initial Job Queries Leading to a Callback
Black Male, jail time––––––5%
Black Male, NO jail time––-14%
White Mail, jail time––––––17%
White Mail, NO jail time––-34%

What do you guys think? She used this study as "proof" that white privilege exists.
Link Posted: 9/11/2009 3:09:48 PM EST
I'd say 40 years of "being Milwaukee" has had it's understandable effect on those business owners.

Past racism led to handouts. Handouts led to voluntary segregation, enclavism. Enclavism led to
lack of outside influence. lack of outside influence led to poor behavior, be it broken homes, drugs,
crime, or what have you.

The FHA is to blame for this. You make a big enough petrie dish, you're gonna grow some germs.
Link Posted: 9/11/2009 8:40:05 PM EST
Proof? What it's proof of is her lunacy. A sample of 4 people might be enough for another moonbat Dateline piece, but not a valid statistical study. IIRC, 1,500 is the minimum sample used in any legitimate statistical analysis. It should be easy to google that, print out, and put on her desk.
Link Posted: 9/12/2009 4:52:09 AM EST
A year ago I returned to college after 15 years. I had to take a course that was mandatory for all students at the school I am going to. It is called success in college life. It was chocked full of "diversity" and pearls of wisdom like look at the big picture and do not worry about the details. And of course my favorite and now think about this one and tell me what is wrong with it.

"If poor people all had computers then they could buy their groceries online and save money." Needless to say I really had to bite my tongue in that class for the most part I managed to except for the part about being a good listener where we had to take a "test" where a friend or coworker comes and gripes about what a mess their life is to you. I answered by telling the friend that if you do not like what is going on you need to shut up and do something about it. I was told by the instructor that was the wrong answer you should never tell anyone that . You should just listen. I told the instructor if you do not want feedback then do not air your laundry out . That guys and girls is why our kids are so screwed up. This is also the same course that teaches kids that if someone disagrees with your life choices that they are practicing hate speech.
Originally Posted By SnakeLogan:
At my university I have to take another multiculturalism (read: white bad, non-white good). Let me first say I don't believe in white privilege; it's scapegoating. However, what are your thoughts on this study highlighted in the textbook (Racial and Ethnic Groups by Richard Schaefer 11th edition)?

For the study, four 23 year-olds (2 white, 2 black) went looking for entry-level jobs in Milwaukee, WI. Each claimed to have similar job experience and a high school diploma as their highest level of education as they applied to 350 different employers. One of the black and one of the white men claimed to have served 18 months in prison for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, while the other white man and other black man claimed no criminal record.

Job applicant/ proportion of Initial Job Queries Leading to a Callback
Black Male, jail time––––––5%
Black Male, NO jail time––-14%
White Mail, jail time––––––17%
White Mail, NO jail time––-34%

What do you guys think? She used this study as "proof" that white privilege exists.


Link Posted: 9/12/2009 5:12:45 AM EST
Is White Privilege the same as racism by whites? If so, then it certainly exists to some degree.

Whites are in the majority and hence there are more whites in hiring positions than blacks. Since some of the people in a hiring position are racist, they will exclude people from other ethnic backgrounds from the list of possible hires. Statistically, this will fall on blacks harder than whites (assuming relatively equal rates of racism for whites and blacks).

This study does not surprise me, but there are a couple of possible issues with it. First, were the "job applicants" aware of the nature of the study. If so, they may have acted or appeared in a manner that helped/hurt their application when they applied (since ethnic background is not a permissible question on a job application, I assume they applied in person). In other words, was this a double-blind test. Did the blacks and whites dress identically or where the blacks dressed as gang bangers?

The second issue is what would have been the result if the applicants had applied for jobs in an area with predominantly black owned businesses. I suspect that the numbers would have been reversed. That would have been evidence of "Black Privilege." It would be interesting to have those numbers subdivided by the ethnicity of the hiring person.
Link Posted: 9/12/2009 5:16:15 AM EST
You have to remember Hitler once said o the effect "It doesn't matter if you join me or not, I have your kids and one day you will be gone and your kids will only know what the state wants them to. "
Link Posted: 9/12/2009 12:02:18 PM EST
I wonder if any of these applicants were looking at Govt. jobs? ... just wondering.
Link Posted: 9/12/2009 5:46:36 PM EST
this study is bogus as the characterisitics of the people applying becomes a HUGE factor in such a small group. You need thousands to knock out any legitimate average.

Link Posted: 9/12/2009 6:36:54 PM EST

Assume they were dressed identically; Assume this study did contain thousands of applicants; This doesn't matter. A study like this should be done in cities across the nation, not just one. Even if this were to be done across multiple locations, what happens and how people act during an interview or when conversing with a hiring company greatly influences the chances of be hired or getting a call back(see: every job website with banners and articles on behavior while interacting with a possible employer). If I walk in wearing a 3-piece suit but act like an ass, I wouldn't expect to get the job, regardless of education and experience.
Link Posted: 9/13/2009 7:02:47 PM EST
Originally Posted By victorgonzales:
this study is bogus as the characterisitics of the people applying becomes a HUGE factor in such a small group. You need thousands to knock out any legitimate average.



+1
Four people???????????? This is taught in college?
Link Posted: 9/14/2009 3:42:59 AM EST
Bet if it was tried here the results would be reversed . Im a 100% sure .
Link Posted: 9/14/2009 4:05:00 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2009 7:07:43 PM EST by Sharpshooter]
You do not need thousands but you cannot get an SRS from four either.
Originally Posted By victorgonzales:
this study is bogus as the characterisitics of the people applying becomes a HUGE factor in such a small group. You need thousands to knock out any legitimate average.



Link Posted: 9/15/2009 5:27:25 PM EST
Too small of a sample and it takes into account no such characteristics that might make an individual more or less worthy of a job position; i.e. grammar, manners, etc.
Link Posted: 9/15/2009 7:15:23 PM EST
Does your instructor even have a legitimate degree or credentials? Her thought process doens't sound like she does.
Link Posted: 9/18/2009 2:58:24 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/18/2009 3:00:04 PM EST by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By SnakeLogan:
At my university I have to take another multiculturalism (read: white bad, non-white good). Let me first say I don't believe in white privilege; it's scapegoating. However, what are your thoughts on this study highlighted in the textbook (Racial and Ethnic Groups by Richard Schaefer 11th edition)?

For the study, four 23 year-olds (2 white, 2 black) went looking for entry-level jobs in Milwaukee, WI. Each claimed to have similar job experience and a high school diploma as their highest level of education as they applied to 350 different employers. One of the black and one of the white men claimed to have served 18 months in prison for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, while the other white man and other black man claimed no criminal record.

Job applicant/ proportion of Initial Job Queries Leading to a Callback
Black Male, jail time––––––5%
Black Male, NO jail time––-14%
White Mail, jail time––––––17%
White Mail, NO jail time––-34%

What do you guys think? She used this study as "proof" that white privilege exists.

Flawed methodology...

You need real people looking for real jobs, otherwise it introduces real problems...

What happens when the 'fake' job seeker is background checked, for example... Do all of the candidates in each category have a similar drug-use history (some employers WILL drug-test you (swab-in-mouth) prior to hiring)....

Milwaukee, WI is also not the best place to do a study involving HS diploma-only candidates and jobs...

There is not much work left there for those without degrees (I grew up in the Milwaukee suburbs)....
Link Posted: 9/19/2009 4:21:46 AM EST
I would ask if YOU do a study that includes 4 people in a situation, lets say which ethnicity can handle the mosty alchohol, if that makes it citeable as a valid study. Or just do it, and submit it to her as new study just released.

Type it up so it is in black and white for her to cite.
Link Posted: 9/19/2009 4:56:15 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/19/2009 9:35:37 AM EST by mnvwguy02]
Statistically speaking, I'd need to know the sample size to determine if there is a statistically significant difference. Since the data is attribute data, to detect any statistically significant difference the sample size would need to quite large; roughly n=60 per applicant type, (not to mention that using one person for each of the fourn applicant types introduces its own bias). In addition, the 5% result is too close to zero to make any real statistical inference at all (the proportion is much less than 0.10). Even if a bias is detected, the result would only apply to Milwaukee and the four applicants. The results can not be generalized over another population with any real scientific reliability.

That said, a cultural bias is not indicative of privilege; but the professor's operational definition may allow for calling any bias a privilege. If so, the definition may be so broad it is rendered meaningless.

Back to the conclusion of bias being statistically significant only for Milwaukee, if such a study were done in Zimbabwe or South Africa today, an opposite result may occur. As you can see, one must be sure a study of any kind is well constructed before a cultural bias conclusion can be determined. If a bias is detected, it is critical to study further to find the root cause, and simply generalizing to say one group is bad or acting out of malfeasance is irresponsible without knowing the root cause for the bias.

Lastly, if there is a bias always ask "so what does this mean?", and ask "is the bias functionally or culturally significant?" If so, you should ask what should be done about the bias and root cause, if anything. If the answer to rectify the bias requires people to violate their innate human right of freedom of association, or reduces the people's right to life, liberty and property, the rectification is invalid and another answer should be sought.

Edit: added statement about using one person per each sample group.
Edit 2: Added OP quotation.

Originally Posted By SnakeLogan:
At my university I have to take another multiculturalism (read: white bad, non-white good). Let me first say I don't believe in white privilege; it's scapegoating. However, what are your thoughts on this study highlighted in the textbook (Racial and Ethnic Groups by Richard Schaefer 11th edition)?

For the study, four 23 year-olds (2 white, 2 black) went looking for entry-level jobs in Milwaukee, WI. Each claimed to have similar job experience and a high school diploma as their highest level of education as they applied to 350 different employers. One of the black and one of the white men claimed to have served 18 months in prison for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, while the other white man and other black man claimed no criminal record.

Job applicant/ proportion of Initial Job Queries Leading to a Callback
Black Male, jail time––––––5%
Black Male, NO jail time––-14%
White Mail, jail time––––––17%
White Mail, NO jail time––-34%

What do you guys think? She used this study as "proof" that white privilege exists.
Link Posted: 9/19/2009 6:27:56 AM EST
How much experience does the employer have, and of what kind? Let's say I'm a small business owner of a construction firm- unskilled labor, no degree needed.

If I hired a black and he stole from me, how likely would I be to hire another? Most people applying will be white, and that may be the only black I hired. What does that teach me? Or do I do the right thing and hire another black?

After hiring dozens of people, if I notice a trend, do I go with probability, or keep "doing the right thing"? I don't think I can afford to play let's pretend.


But in the '60s "white privilege" meant having come from a wealthy home, and screw the poor whites.

I guess the indoctrination is dumbed down....
Top Top