The WOKE Thread (Merged from WTF?)

[Guardian]

That is absolutely the point trying to be made here. It wasn’t done because of/by sexist/racist people. The thought process at the time excluded those people. We haven’t corrected for it yet. The cockpit sizing issue is a very difficult one to tackle because it requires significant chuncks of dollars to fix. Other issues (before you ask, they’ve already been highlighted in here multiple times) are not as difficult to tackle.

No one is accusing anyone of being racist/sexist.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So if it isn’t sexist why are we talking about it?

I thought you guys were trying to answer how putting one race or gender in front of another as a formalized program isn’t racist or sexist.

Re affirmative action. Or the racist equity mentality construct that Kamala is pushing.

[jazzdude]

The unstated assumption in this article is that there should be no inequalities between blacks and whites. That's great, and is an ideal that reflects the desired society which we all hope is someday realized, but it is just not the present reality we live in. I'm sorry. No, the proper framing of the disparity needs to be couched in terms of the broader societal context that we find ourselves a smaller part of. In that reality, blacks commit a grossly disproportionate share of crime (https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/ucr.asp?table_in=2 and https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/topic-pages/tables/table-21 and https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-black-americans-commit-crime). The reasons for this we can get to in another thread, but within the context of the articles you provided, the proper question to ask is this: is it surprising that given blacks commit a higher proportion of crime in the broader society, that they also commit a higher proportion of crime within the Air Force? I don't think it is. So good job stars and stripes, you figured out something we already knew. It would be strange had they not found blacks are investigated 71% more than whites.
I agree that it's hard to see many of these issues as individuals, but it is also very easy to take an interested party's shallow analysis and take their conclusions as gospel without asking harder questions, or doing your own homework. Let's not lose sight of the forest for the trees.

Discrimination is a conscious determination by an individual that they are going to produce favor for one person to the detriment of another based on the characteristic(s) at hand.

Absolutely disagree with you on this point.

Discrimination can also be the result of unconscious decisions or decisions with an unintentionally effect that disproportionately affect a particular group.

The fact that there unconscious or unintended decisions happen does not necessarily mean someone is a "bad" person; it's part of being human. Relationships and society is messy, and no one is perfect, and so many things go in to hire we make decisions, whether we are aware of it out not.

But when an issue is identified/recognized, and a conscious decision to not address the issue is made, then yes, it means those with the information and power to make a change are in the wrong.

And remember, doing nothing is also a choice. And in the face of unclear or imcomplete information, maybe we should exhibit a bias for action-no different than how we'd attack a tactical combat problem when faced with unclear or imcomplete info about the battlespace.

In that reality, blacks commit a grossly disproportionate share of crime
...
is it surprising that given blacks commit a higher proportion of crime in the broader society, that they also commit a higher proportion of crime within the Air Force? I don't think it is.

On the note of not recognizing personal biases and assumptions over data on the issue... But I'll give you the benefit of doubt. Here's a quote from the stars and stripes article that highlights an important second part to this discussion:

In 2019, the Government Accountability Office launched its own probe, which found that in the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force, black, Hispanic and male service members were more likely to be investigated than white and female service members.
...
However, the GAO found no statistically significant difference by sex or ethnicity in terms of convictions.

Minorities were more likely to be accused than white members, but we're convicted at the same rate as white members.

In other words, innocent minorites were more likely to be accused of wrongdoing than their white counterparts. And even when they are cleared of wrongdoing, going through court martial has negative effects on your career. That's the problem. So what do we do about it? And again, doing nothing is a conscious choice, as is ignoring the problem.

[Guardian]

Accused does not equal investigated

[slackline]

1 hour ago, slackline said:

That is absolutely the point trying to be made here. It wasn’t done because of/by sexist/racist people. The thought process at the time excluded those people. We haven’t corrected for it yet. The cockpit sizing issue is a very difficult one to tackle because it requires significant chuncks of dollars to fix. Other issues (before you ask, they’ve already been highlighted in here multiple times) are not as difficult to tackle.

No one is accusing ANYONE of being racist/sexist.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Hate to quote myself, but since you continue to refuse to see the point, I'll post (with bold, italics to make it easier for you this time) this for others because I know you'll still ignore it.  The thought process way back in the day created the system used now.  That system is what makes it difficult for women/minorities.  Again, Guardian doesn't seem to read too well, so I'll reiterate it one more time, suggestions on how to fix the process have all been said in here.  I can't help you if you refuse to read it...

[Breckey]

28 minutes ago, Guardian said:

Ok. For this argument let’s say that is true and there are zero other reasons than name. How do you fix a name bias?

Assign a number to the package that is masked above the board level. The board only ranks candidate number X rather than Sparky Jones. Once the board has made their decision the numbers are de-anonymized for approval at the appropriate level.

[slackline]

21 minutes ago, jazzdude said:

In other words, innocent minorites were more likely to be accused of wrongdoing than their white counterparts. And even when they are cleared of wrongdoing, going through court martial has negative effects on your career. That's the problem. So what do we do about it? And again, doing nothing is a conscious choice, as is ignoring the problem.

 

 

 

 

20 minutes ago, Guardian said:

Accused does not equal investigated

Just helping you out here again buddy, since reading does, in fact appear really tough for you.  Accusations alone can damage/destroy careers.  If you haven't seen it, you aren't looking...

[Guardian]

Hey buddy. You don’t have to be a giant condescending A$$hole. All I said was that they don’t equal each other. Because the writer of the comment said the article said accused. Then later said investigated. When talking about serious things it’s important to use words in the way they are intended and defined. Words mean stuff.

And yes. You are a condescending prick. I have no problems saying that because you seem incapable of taking out emotion and you readily fling insults without trying to rationally think through things. Use of emotion based reactions tends most to a feminine quality. Yes you are a little bitch. (Female dog) who is afraid of your own shadow and is a self proclaimed victim of your own lack of rational thought and discussion abilities just because you can’t use logic or reasoning and before getting your panties in a bunch. Pretty sure if you are above the rank of Lt it’s just because of attrition of good leaders due to airlines over the last 5 years and the Air Force has put you in a position where you can’t do much damage. Hopefully for our Air Force anyways.

And I say all of that without emotion. Read it that way. The only emotion I have is laughing at your lack of a lot of basic things that people on this board use to carry on a discussion

You ain’t my buddy.

[Guardian]

Hate to quote myself, but since you continue to refuse to see the point, I'll post (with bold, italics to make it easier for you this time) this for others because I know you'll still ignore it.  The thought process way back in the day created the system used now.  That system is what makes it difficult for women/minorities.  Again, Guardian doesn't seem to read too well, so I'll reiterate it one more time, suggestions on how to fix the process have all been said in here.  I can't help you if you refuse to read it...

The discussion was about what is racist or sexist. In a negative fashion that we can discuss and fix or maybe even agree that is a problem.

Quote yourself all you want. Doesn’t change things. I bet you do that a lot in person. Talk down to people, interrupt conversations, don’t care about other peoples thoughts or opinions and force yourself upon people. I bet you don’t even really know what’s going on around you

I am not asking for your kind of help bro. Feel free to go play somewhere else dipshit.

[slackline]

2 minutes ago, Guardian said:

Hey buddy. You don’t have to be a giant condescending A$$hole. All I said was that they don’t equal each other. Because the writer of the comment said the article said accused. Then later said investigated. When talking about serious things it’s important to use words in the way they are intended and defined. Words mean stuff.

And yes. You are a condescending prick. I have no problems saying that because you seem incapable of taking out emotion and you readily fling insults without trying to rationally think through things. Use of emotion based reactions tends most to a feminine quality. Yes you are a little bitch. (Female dog) who is afraid of your own shadow and is a self proclaimed victim of your own lack of rational thought and discussion abilities just because you can’t use logic or reasoning and before getting your panties in a bunch. Pretty sure if you are above the rank of Lt it’s just because of attrition of good leaders due to airlines over the last 5 years and the Air Force has put you in a position where you can’t do much damage. Hopefully for our Air Force anyways.

And I say all of that without emotion. Read it that way. The only emotion I have is laughing at your lack of a lot of basic things that people on this board use to carry on a discussion

This is just getting fun.  Did I trigger you?  You're making it too easy.  I started out trying to work with you, but your continued, intentional ignorance in the face of fact, reason and logic just makes it hard to take you seriously anymore.  Notice what I bolded in your reply.  You sure you wanna stand by that statement?  You're embodying sexist ideas by saying emotion tends to a feminine quality.  Ideas like that, men shouldn't exhibit emotion, are definitely sexist.

In a real discussion/argument emotion has no place.  You continue to ignore what people say, so now I'm just screwing with you.  It is so predictable, the tropes you will immediately apply to a given response.  If you think these are emotional responses, sorry buddy.  And yes, you are right, I am condescending to you.  That means to talk down to...

[slackline]

5 minutes ago, Guardian said:

The discussion was about what is racist or sexist. In a negative fashion that we can discuss and fix or maybe even agree that is a problem.

Quote yourself all you want. Doesn’t change things. I bet you do that a lot in person. Talk down to people, interrupt conversations, don’t care about other peoples thoughts or opinions and force yourself upon people. I bet you don’t even really know what’s going on around you

I am not asking for your kind of help bro. Feel free to go play somewhere else dipshit.

and of the two of us, one of us has resorted to name calling.  Have I gotten under your skin.  Toughen up buddy.  

[Guardian]

Nope. Zero emotion. Just using facts and reason to communicate to someone incapable of it.

There are differences between the genders. Or are you not aware of that? You know boys have a penis and girls have a ######. Facts aren’t sexist. You’re just an idiot. It’s not your fault though right? You’re blaming society or your parents for your lack of abilityu to think.

Somehow you think what you are doing is screwing with me. Just goes to show you don’t understand things.

Republicans don’t get triggered. They just get even. But in this case there isn’t any need since you don’t have the comprehension ability.

[slackline]

Just now, Guardian said:

Nope. Zero emotion. Just using facts and reason to communicate to someone incapable of it.

There are differences between the genders. Or are you not aware of that? You know boys have a penis and girls have a ######. Facts aren’t sexist. You’re just an idiot. It’s not your fault though right? You’re blaming society or your parents for your lack of abilityu to think.

Somehow you think what you are doing is screwing with me. Just goes to show you don’t understand things.

 

[Guardian]

and of the two of us, one of us has resorted to name calling.  Have I gotten under your skin.  Toughen up buddy.  

Think you need to re read your own texts from the past. You’ve used name calling before.

And dipshit is a statement of fact in this case.

[Guardian]

Funny thing is you still can’t acknowledge or prove me wrong on any of the things I’ve said this morning you just use your super vagisil to type out your unintelligent responses.

[slackline]

1 minute ago, Guardian said:

And dipshit is a statement of fact in this case.

I think your grasp of reality is loose at best.  

 

Okay, for the benefit of everyone else, I'll stop screwing with him.  I just don't understand why people keep biting off on his trolling responses.  Don't humor him anymore...  His immediate go to is, "but you're not using facts, please give me yet another example I will ignore in my next response as well."

[Guardian]

And yes, you are right, I am condescending to you.  That means to talk down to...

Condescend all you want. You are correct. The tip of my penis is way below yours. Haha. You’re right. This unintelligent banter back to you is kinda fun. It would be a blast to destroy you in a roll call, drink you under the table, all the while exposing you for the simple minded person you are. Really hope the AF has given you little to no responsibility if it ever hopes to survive.

[Guardian]

Yet you can’t give any facts or reason and your go to is I ignore you.

Nope. I’ve blown up your inability to argue and your inability to use facts or reason. And now you’ve got nothing but personal attacks which started quite a long time before this morning. And aren’t always directed at me. But I just don’t like when someone who thinks they know something really doesn’t and tries to run others down and acts superior. Continue perfecting your OPR. I’ll go back to doing the AF’s work.

[Guardian]

Ah. I get it. I thought slackline had something to do with PR. Now I know it’s a reference to your downstairs mix up.

Already sent your moderator complaint for the day in SLACKline?

[Guardian]

Feel free to go play somewhere else dipshit.

Look... I quoted myself. And it’s still true.

This quoting yourself to make your own argument stronger is awesome. Not sure if it makes sense but it sure does make my EMOTIONS feel better. And it’s very soothing of my triggered-ness. I’m glad you showed me how to do this SLACKline.

[SocialD]

Are we sure Guardian and Slackline aren't married to each other?  

[Prozac]

Dudes, this shit is beneath both of you. KIO. 

[lloyd christmas]

Girls girls.  You are both pretty.  

[Guardian]

Thanks Lloyd.....now about these jeans....

[slackline]

You guys are right. I had a little too much fun with it, but see the error of my ways.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[17D_guy]

4 hours ago, Guardian said:

Republicans don’t get triggered.

LOL.  Responding almost 2-for-1 in posts.  Def not triggered.