Thursday, November 03, 2011

Diversity Thursday

Let's tap in to that train wreck of a N134 brief again. This slide is always fun, click it for larger if you need to.

Love that active discrimination plan. Always nice when they drop the veil for 'ya like that. Bask in it for a bit and then come back.

Well - let me help everyone out here. Without overt and un-Constitutional institutional racism (which you could argue is going on right now) - you will never get there in the near future. Here's why.

Facts are hard things.

One of the worst hangovers we will have from the Mullen/Roughead legacy will be the huge and costly Diversity Industry infrastructure that is now imbedded so thoroughly in the Navy. It is run by people who refuse - outright refuse - to accept that they are asking the impossible. Many know that, but they don't mind. It is job security and an opportunity to get a rush off that thing that makes them feel funny in the pants; grievance pandering and sanctioned race hate.

We know the Navy officer corps is and will be heavy users of STEM graduates (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math). But we also know the Empires of the Parallel Universe also demand equality of outcomes - well, we will never get there.

The percentage of African-Americans earning STEM degrees has fallen during the last decade. It may seem far-fetched for an undereducated black population to aspire to become chemists or computer scientists, but the door is wide open, colleges say, and the shortfall has created opportunities for those who choose this path.

STEM barriers are not unique to black people. The United States does not produce as high a proportion of white engineers, scientists and mathematicians as it used to. Women and Latinos also lag behind white men.

Yet the situation is most acute for African-Americans.

Black people are 12 percent of the U.S. population and 11 percent of all students beyond high school. In 2009, they received just 7 percent of all STEM bachelor's degrees, 4 percent of master's degrees, and 2 percent of PhDs, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

From community college through PhD level, the percentage of STEM degrees received by blacks in 2009 was 7.5 percent, down from 8.1 percent in 2001.

The numbers are striking in certain fields. In 2009, African-Americans received 1 percent of degrees in science technologies, and 4 percent of degrees in math and statistics. Out of 5,048 PhDs awarded in the physical sciences, such as chemistry and physics, 89 went to African-Americans — less than 2 percent.

... of biological and biomedical sciences, where 6,957 PhDs were awarded in 2009. Only 88 went to black men — that's 1 percent. (176 went to black women.)
Don't give me this "mentors and role models" FOD either. I got my a55 handed to me in college by Taiwanese and Communist Chinese students - not to mention the Vietnamese boat kids - who had only one mentor; a better work ethic than I had.

No, the color and shapes of faces is not the problem here - culture and our public education system has the balance of the cause. People with much less opportunity and greater challenges have been able to do it.

Man the frack up.


Outlaw Mike said...

Time for a coup.

This diversity industry is killing your armed forces. You will have to get rid of it somehow. You need cells and networks that, in a first phase, will draft plans on how to eliminate them.

Over-the-hill-spook said...

More from George Will in today's WaPo: Conformity for diversity's sake

LCDR Black said...

Yeah, those Asian kids kicked your tail, but you could destroy them in quarters!

My undergrad is in Physics and microelectronics.  We had one black in the program.  ONE.  I worked at University of Maryland as a research associate, and my interaction with Asians increased.  Then I went to grad school to study fluid dynamics, one black female was in the program and then she disappeared after a  semester.  I had more Chinese in my classes and program than whites especially when you looked at the physics oriented portions. 

In my small world and bit of experience, blacks are extremely under represented in the hard sciences.  This is not a good thing for competition.  The numbers do not support their (diversity industry) goals.  Once again, the diversity industry really needs to focus way down in the age groups and change the meme and work ethic.  To say there are not cultural differences has never EVER had to compete against Asians in math.  Genetically smarter?  I won't go that far, but mom and dad kicking your butt telling you throughout your life that you will do the family proud and you will work hard and you will study, etc.  Look at a lot of the successful Jews you've met and look at their family support structure.  You don't write, you don't cawl, but you will become a doctor or lawyer.  Family culture matters.  Now look at the number of single parents in the black community. 

As for the entrenchment of The Inudustry... 
Send them to Afghanistan and to sea to do a study on diversity in the field.  Send every single one of those guys out of their little offices in their ivory castle and let them actually freaking contribute to the war effort.  The industry will diminish in size rather quickly.

ExNFO said...

Maybe I ought to include this slide in my son's application package with a note threatening a lawsuit if not selected.

TBR said...

So discrimination is quantified, with the overall chance of an officer recruit today making flag as X the chance will be ca. 2.33 times X for "Hispanics", for "API/NATAM's" ca. 1.59 times X and for "African Americans" ca. 2.23 times X with that for "Whites" being ca. 0.77 times X.

That means that diversity wants the average "Hispanic" offcer career inductee to have more than three time the chance of making flag than the average "White" inductee.

At to this that required performance indicators have already been "adjusted" in recruitment to get more inductees with the desired "label", which results in "Whites" having a higher average performance metric from the get-go than any of the identified three groups and the necessity of excessive discriminatory policies (in evaluations etc.) to reach this "goal" becomes quite clear.

Oh, and non-API Asian Americans aren't identified at all but lumped together with "Whites", the same as a lot of other identifiable racial groups, many of which are also underrepresented in the officer corps for various reasons, so even within their worldview the Diversity industry is hypocritical...

Makes me feel good that I'm not affected by this though here in Germany there are now stirrings of a beginning diversity industry with a certain state which has gone red-green recently planning to introduce a quota sytem in the states civil service to raise the "migratory background" (read Turkish Muslim) percentage of CSO's and other public employees.

Pinch said...

The more things change.  This has been going on in our business long?  On how many levels?  I remember Col Chuck Yeager, while CO of the Air Force Aerospace Research Pilots School, being "directed" to turn black Air Force pilot Ed Dwight into an astronaut, regardless of the absolute dearth of his qualifications/capabilities.  I remember the females at Officer Candidate School having to climb over a 5 foot wall when we had to climb over an 8 foot wall.  What....would the females have to close a *different* and smaller and lighter armored-watertight door than I would during a GQ?  I remember the pissing contest between the AF and the Navy in the 90s and the recruiting posters that showed the most "perfect" specimines of human beings, all perfect - a black, a female, a hispanic and a caucasian, perfect smile, perfect waist, perfect face, perfect build, perfect everything, to tell recruits "You TOO can be part of this!".  There are reasons for standards - if you don't need them, don't have them.  If they are there for a reason, do not compormise on them in the name of having a more "diverse" collection of employees.

AOD said...

Hear, Hear!  Great Post, CDR!

Grumpy Old Ham said...

<span>Family culture matters.  Now look at the number of single parents in the black community.   </span>

Another legacy of The Great Society -- thanks LBJ and his philosophical descendants, including the current Diversity Diktat...

The substantial dollar cost of the "War on Poverty" pales in comparison to the opportunity cost of lost human capital (for lack of a better term) in terms of long-term impact to society.

Anonymous said...

One of the root causes of problems with the Diversity Industry (of many, but let's focus on one that gets them into trouble all the time) is their belief that the percentage of minorities in "X" must somehow be related to the percentage of said minority in the general population.

The fact that there are plenty of examples to prove and dis-rpove this odd notion never seems to bother them...they are free to cherry pick which scenarios support their Diversity mantra and which ones will be simply ignored.

The Naval Profession is a unique sub-culture to begin with, one that demands a very select set of skills, mindset, and attitude in order to be successful.  Why on Earth do we suspect that we will find successful Naval Officers based on this percentage of the general population??

MR T's Haircut said...

We are a polarized nation.  We no longer make common cause with each other. Worse, we do not share a similiar culture any longer.  We dont identify ourselves (plurality) as "Americans".  We are hyphenated this or hyphenated that. 

A shame.  We are the only nation where we highlite and hoist "Diversity" as some great cause.  We have lost the distinctly American spirit and the thing that made us unique.  It is leading to our rapid decline.  We will not survive being different.

We are failing.

butch said...

Does the NBA "reflect" the US population?

Number Cruncher said...

<p><span><span><span>It could not be better said; “</span><span>The color and shapes of faces is not the problem - culture and our public education system has the balance of the cause. People with much less opportunity and greater challenges have been able to do it.” To meet these “goals” our Naval Services either have to raise standards for minorities coming in the front end or lower standards for minorities once they are in the pipeline throughout their entire careers.Hard facts based on GAO (2007) and RAND (2010) assessments. </span><span>Minorities, after 9 months at NAPS do not have scores that meet the criteria used for White applicants. Once minorities are admitted (less Asians) they still don’t make the grade. Academy grad rates are; Whites 94%; Asians 93%; Women 85%; Hispanics 81%; Blacks 75% (Of 82 Black Mids, only 62 will graduate in 2011). Graduates with $360K ($430K if NAPS) diplomas have 5 year in service obligation (ISO). 97% of all Marine Corps Officers and 87% of Naval Officers complete their ISO. More telling (and statistically significant) are specific completion rates; Whites 90%; Hispanics 86%; Asians 83%; Blacks 83% (Of 62 commissioned in 2011 only 51 will meet ISO); Women 75%. Let’s not even talk about what specialties minorities are grouped in vs. those where they are under-represented.    Something isn’t working right. In spite of everything the Navy is doing, the extra year of schooling, extra tutorial and everything else, the numbers tell a bleak story; minorities and women are not graduating and meeting their service obligations as well as white males.<span>  </span>I believe Naval leadership isn’t pulling Mid. candidates up to an acceptable level.<span>  </span>They are settling for second rate candidates to ensure they meet diversity numbers and hope that no one takes a good hard look at what is coming out the other end. Do we increase graduating, retaining and promoting people simply to meet numbers based on skin color? Is this the Naval Service we want?</span></span></span><span></span></p>

MR T's Haircut said...

it will get worse.  Whites as a majority in 2011 are not reproducing.  We will have a diverse Navy sooner than we expect.  The differance is, this new Navy will not be recognizable to us now, because it will not be representative of the people...  It will be interesting for sure.  Will the nation be able to maintain a military when the citizens no longer identify with nationalism?

MR T's Haircut said...

The answer to failing academic standards is one part education system (FAIL) and cultural norms (FAIL).

UltimaRatioRegis said...


I used to seethe at John Thompson when he coached Georgetown's basketball team.  He would always be running his mouth about racism this, and discrimination, that.  Yet, at a school that was 85% white, he did not have a white starter on his basketball team for sixteen consecutive seasons.  His percentage of black players on the team in general exceeded 90%. 

Wonder how he would have liked it if he had been forced by the University or the Federal Government to have a minimum of three white starters every year, based on demographics instead of ability, and if he put five black players on the floor at once, would have to submit a letter of explanation as to why he violated the "diversity" mission of the University. 

Anonymous said...

<span>I doubt there is some USN HR program that's whittling out super-competent white sailors for incompetent black sailors. Just isn't happening. The exact numbers for projections are silly, but the goal -- having a service that is representativ</span><span>e, or more representative, of the population as a whole is a laudable goal.

I feel that the article is vaguely racist. Not in a white-shoelaces-on-doc-mar<span></span>ten-boots kind of racist, but racist in its blame-the-victim mentality, and getting comments like this:

"it will get worse. Whites as a majority in 2011 are not reproducing. We will have a diverse Navy sooner than we expect. The differance is, this new Navy will not be recognizable to us now, because it will not be representative of the people... It will be interesting for sure. Will the nation be able to maintain a military when the citizens no longer identify with nationalism?" ... seeing people unironically write stuff like that in a "I have plenty of black friends" kind of way creeps me out even more than flat out racism.


Anonymous said...

<span>Ok, so let's talk about culture. Black people have been in the US since the 1700's and they were, for the most part, forcibly brought here. For 150+ years, most of them were slaves. Then, for 100+ years after that, most of them were treated as second class citizens. Finally, 50-60 years go, civil rights laws were passed and everything was, at least on paper, finally equal. And that seems fair, right? One or two generations grow up under (debatable) equality after a quarter millenia or so of deliberate, mostly violent oppression, and now everything's equal. If you're going to allege that there's a dysfunctional "culture," I would say that the dysfunctional is in the larger culture for not realizing how that just maybe might somehow affect rates of success, access to success, and what success means to another culture. And hey, isn't calling it "another culture" sort of exclusionary? Aren't we all just one culture anyway? And if some element of it isn't quite working out to be equal, aren't we ALL flawed?</span>

<span>Second, public education. Public education is funded in the most insane way -- for the most part, property and other local taxes. So, when we got "equality" in the 50's and 60's, we got white flight out to the suburbs which changed the status quo from legal to de-facto segregation, decimated the tax base of public schools. So you have great suburban schools and shitty urban schools.</span>

The Usual Suspect said...

The Great Society will go down in history as one of the most damaging programs ever foisted on a people.  The first thing it did was ruin the structure of the family.  It told people that instead of family, the church, or friends coming to help, good ol' Uncle Sam was going to take care of you and you didn't need anybody else.  It stole people's dignity - instead of a helping hand it was a hand out: no exchange, no skills acquired just,"Here's your check."  No incentives to better oneself.  Everything it did was an affront to human dignity and human nature.  Just like today's social spending programs, it was designed to capture votes...and did so very effectively.

Anonymous said...

<span>It all boils down to this: there ARE wildly different success rates in different racial groups. It is either THEIR fault for being "inferior" or it is society's fault for rewarding, either tacitly or explicitly, other groups, or there being a legacy of imbalance amongst the groups that has to be forcibly remedied. Either that, or we can just continue to have a racially-based underclass in the country. I'm not saying I know what the exact right recipe to repair ethnic/race imbalances is, but I think the necessity is unquestionable.</span>

<span>Finally, I am sick of the "equal opportunity isn't my fault because my family weren't active slaveholders" argument. That's like saying you should get to eat a bald eagle because your family didn't make bald eagles extinct.</span>

Anonymous said...

<span>I work as an Army ROTC instructor. I have overheard some extra emphasis being put on recruiting minority students (in completely racially tone-deaf if not borderline racist ways ... i.e. NCO's being told that they need to "recruit from within their demographic" or inquiring if black candidates were "homeboys") ... that being said, we have never and will never turn away a candidate or cadet based on race. No one is getting a rating, evaluation, ranking, etc. on bringing in more black kids. We don't rank cadets as better or not based on race. It's just an emphasis and a goal. The tangible applications are more like spending more money recruiting at HBCU's, not turning away fully qualified white candidates.</span>

Anonymous said...

But your theory of Black culture "only" having 2 generations since the civil rights era to "fix" all the historical damage fails to explain how other cultures (Vietnemese Boat people to name 1 sub culture in America) recently came here less than 1 generation ago and have done spectacularly well by any definition.  They arrived with literally nothing and have succeeded.

You argument also ignores comments from Black writers (Williams and Sowell to name two) who have pointed out that Black employment rates and economic oppoturnities for young black males were BETTER 60-70 years ago for a variety of reasons.  Things have gotten worse for the young black male in certain areas.

The Usual Suspect said...

While the goal may be "laudible" it is racist at its heart.  The military should be a meritocracy - as should be every workplace.  When you have less qualified people in jobs over their heads, they put the rest of the people around them at an unacceptable risk.  If the standard is XXX on the SAT, 100 push-ups, 1.5 miles in 10:30, etc and you don't make it, you don't get in.  If you really want to get in, you go home, work harder and smarter and try again.  Nobody here is blaming the "victim"; they blame the system.  The system that robs people of their victory and applause when they have earned it whether they be black, white, asian or whatever mix they are.  The sytem that perpetuates the paternalistic pat on the head that says, "Well, you're not good enough to accomplish this on your own, so we have to help you."  The soft bigotry of low expectations.  It is theater of the absurd.  It is a program that does not end up with the best product as its end state.

UltimaRatioRegis said...

<span><span> "equal opportunity isn't my fault because my family weren't active slaveholders" </span></span>

Nobody is denying equal opportunity.  But, with two equal qualifications, one candidate is chosen on the basis of race, that is not equal opportunity.  It is racial discrimination. 

If one candidate has notably inferior qualifications but is chosen over more qualified candidates because his race is preferred over the race of the others, that is "diversity".  Which is institutionalized discrimination perpetrated in violation of the 14th Amendment.  Those who advocate such should be relieved and dismissed from the service.

AOD said...

It's just an emphasis and a goal

And meeting goals is judged on Fitness Reports, ARMY ROTC Instructor.

Would you like to try again?

AOD said...

Hey, T, let me be politically incorrect for a second...

Whites aren't reproducing because the economy is bad.

Everyone else is reproducing because the economy is bad, and they have no problem taking a huge share of public assistance.

Cut off the coin.......

Grandpa Bluewater said...

You want that many non-white flag officers? Easy. Select that many.

Problem solved.

You want the absolutely best in the world and utterly preeminent Navy?  You may want to pick the best possible flag officers, or perhaps more important, smartest and most dedicated officer candidates. Best possible - no other criteria matter.

That problem solved. Easy.

You want both? Mmmm, we'll take that under advisement and get back to you. Later. Much, much, later.

Kristen said...

A five-foot fence?  Wow.  Even a non-athlete like me could probably make it over a five-foot fence, but I wouldn't have a prayer of getting over an eight-foot fence.  Changing the standards for women or for anyone infuriates me.  It puts everyone at risk.  I read that in the Army they were having trouble qualifying women because most females can't throw a grenade further than the blast radius.  Great.

Kristen said...

My husband was an engineering major at a large university.  There were basically no women in almost any of his classes, especially in the last two years.  He used to walk over to the humanities area of campus at lunch to get a glimpse of a female face during the day.  The engineering department was under a lot of pressure to produce some female graduates to make the feminists happy.  Were standards lowered to let some in?  Yup.

Instead of accepting the fact that men are significantly more interested in the hard sciences than women, less-qualified applicants are allowed in and then flunked out.  When I was at UCLA, we were all aware that qualified white and Asian kids were turned away so that marginal black and hispanic students could be admitted.  They dropped out at a much higher level than the rest of the students.  Social engineering which benefits no one except the people who are paid to agitate for it.

cdrsalamander said...

<span>"equal opportunity isn't my fault because my family weren't active slaveholders" </span><span> </span>

My family was one of the largest slave holding families in the Confederacy - and it isn't my fault either.

The grandson of a guy who immigrated from Madrid in the 1930s had nothing to do with that.  The son of Nigerian immigrants have nothing to do with that.  The Vietnamess boat child had nothing to do with that.  The Bosnian immigrant had nothing to do with that.

... and neither did I.  If I do - then the British government owes me  big time for burning my ancestors at the stake for being Catholic - confiscating all their land for being Jacobites - for slaughtering almost the entire family during Tyrone's Rebellion .... etc .... etc.  Also, we are still waiting for reimbursement from the Federal government for buring down all our homes and business buildings, all the crops, and killing 30% of the men in our family during the Great Unpleasantness.

If you want to play that game ...... 

Try again. 

MR T's Haircut said...

All people have ACCESS to the same opportunity.   You can choose to be a victim or not.   It is a personal choice.  Culture is 71 percent of Black Children live in a Fatherless Dysfunctional family.  No Father.  No one to show them or teach them responsibilty.  Role models are thugs on Hip Hop videos.  No hope, and reliant on the Government.  They choose to hyphenate and that leads to disimilar cultures.  We are grwoing apart.  Great Society.. yea right...

MR T's Haircut said...

Dont call me a racist.  I am citing an opinion based on fact.  Look at the census results and you will see a declining white caucasion birthrate and an increase in minority birth rates.  Facts.  How does that make me a racist?  YOU are part of the problem by denying any contra voice.  Stick your head in the sand.

ewok40k said...

btw equal opportunity used to be having the same time to answer the same questions on exam... and equal access to literature in the library :)

MR T's Haircut said...


Whites are not reproducing for several reasons, yes economy, but also a decline in religious beliefs (days of 6 kids and a strong Irish or Italian family or even a solid Latino family), late marriages or failures to launch and the expediancy of abortions.  It was said once that a Nation that kills its children will perish and not cand cannot last. 

just sayin

MR T's Haircut said...

That shot back was to "guest"

Grumpy Old Ham said...

One more thing.

That bumper sticker:  "Setting up future CNO for success"

N1:  Please define "success" as used in that context.  I do not think that word means what you think it means.

SouthernAP said...

If your sick of that line then I am sick of it being thrown in my face that I owe someone of another color because I am Caucasian. It is an old argument that is being worn out on both sides.

If you want to go down the path of society's fault for rewarding/denying others. Then what about all the Catholics that were oppressed in the New England states for thier religion by the heathen Prostestants. What about the various tribes that oppressed each other in the Native American races? What about the various Black Americans who oppressed each other while under slavery for being from different tribes. Or we could talk about the Black Americans who are oppressing other Black Americans because one group decides to rise above their place and achieve the "American Dream" of having a safe home and good job.
We could also talk city folk that treat all who come from Smallville Kansas as backwards hicks, maybe we could talk about the active suppression by agents of the Government for those that want to pratice thier religion in public settings as allowed by law, or we could talk about educated folk suppressing those who chose to work in the blue-collar enviroment via sterotypes and poor jokes. We could talk about how the pendulm has swung to far the other way that those who identify as Men are hated on by government and society for being born as Men.

This goes beyond ethnic, race, religion, sex, sexual choice, and all the other pigeon holes. This is about an organization that claims to be blind as laid out in its own Regulations (see para 1164) and instead actively discriminates and violates its own regulations along with a slew of laws; all of this in the name of trying to balance the field.

So ask yourself what is worst violating the law to balance the field or just abiding by the law letting the chips fall where they may?

G-man said...

If it is a stated "goal" of the Navy, then it should be a stated goal that the Congress of the United States represent the ethnic statistics of this country.  Likewise for instructors at any university that receives federal money.  And for every state legislature.  And...  You get the point.  This is like a virus, it won't stop until every potential host is infected by the insanity.  Or until one brave soul steps in to cull the herd.

Actus Rhesus said...

I think we need to seperate two distinct issues here:
1. disadvantage based on race; and
2. disadvantage based on economics.

I think most of the issues we see with attrition are more because of the latter.  However, because we are still shaking off the remnants of institutional racism which led to an impoverished state for many minorities, there are a disproportionate number of minorities impacted, and so the problem is viewed not as an economic problem - which it is...and can be fixed with the right infrastructures, but as a racial problem - which it may have been in the past, but is not now.  It's teh same dynamic as when the Navy tries to address "women's issues" (which all involve how to spend more time with the children) when this is actually a "family issue" that happens to affect more women because women are more likely to want to be the primary caregiver.  We're not making any progress because we are trying to solve the wrong problem and then throwing our hands up and blaming it on (nonexistent) discrimination when it fails.

This is not to say there aren't some very real issues with gender and race discrimination, but the real problem is economics and family structures.

Old Farter said...

You can't get there from here.

Casey Tompkins said...

Gotta disagree, MTH, at least to an extent.

I don't doubt that the regulars here see themselves as non-hyphenated.

Just remember the long lag time between when a social problem becomes recognizable, and when solutions start appearing. Sometimes I visualize the series as a change in tides. Usually not obvious & requires a significant amount of time for perceptible change to appear.

Casey Tompkins said...

<span><span>I doubt there is some USN HR program that's whittling out super-competent white sailors for incompetent black sailors. Just isn't happening. </span></span>

Not paying attention to 'Phib's series about "diversity" at the Naval Academy, are you?

Frankly, I don't care how "laudable" the goal is; that kind of non-rational flawed thinking has helped produce a leviathan federal agency which has become fixated on running nearly ever facet of our lives. In this particular case, the primary goal of the armed forces is to break things & kill people in the most expeditious and effecient manner possible. The skin color or ethnic heritage of the enlisted & officers involved is irrelevant.

This mindless obsession with elements of physical appearance and/or heritage have -as Kristed pointed out below- produced literally decades of minority students who were admitted into colleges for which they were not prepared, resulting in far higher drop-out rates for those minorities. But, hey, the goal is laudible, so it's all good, right?

That's not to mention the simple fact that there exists in any branch of the armed forces the underlying sense of trust in the guy/gal next to you; those who serve literally risk their lives on an every-day basis, and forcing quotas in recruitment introduces the suspicion that latina or black (male) officer you're serving under holds their position as part of that quota. And before you (excessively freely) throw the racist flag again, the young men and women serving today are the least racist people in the country. As has been pointed out before, they were born when Bill Clinton was in office, and they've grown up in an incredibly mixed society.

No, the problem lies with "smartest people in the room" who insist on trying to "tune" the Navy (or any other part of our society) as if they could tune a car engine. This leads us back to your foolish claim that those here are somehow "blaming the victim." We aren't. We want those folks to have a fair & honest chance, not something which stacks the odds against their success.

P.S. Can people please quit with the silly knee-jerk claims like "blame the victim," expecially when it self-evidently does not apply to the topic at hand? I'm just sayin'...

MR T's Haircut said...

Not sure with what it is you disagree with.  The Polarization is pretty clear.  We are succeeding from each other...

Steel City said...

Setting up the future CNO for success???  YHGTBFKM!  Success by what standard?  The promotion of institutional racism?

UltimaRatioRegis said...

Yeah, pretty much.  I am sure they will word it differently, but you capture the general idea.

Grandpa Bluewater said...

You would do better to agitate for thicker textbooks with smaller print, more and harder problems at the back of the chapters, more homework and teacher qualification based on functional expertise in the area that they teach. Add dropping varsity athletics, weekly reports home to parents, and more truant officers calling on parents in the home when the child is late, fails to do his homework, or throws a punch at another kid.

All those inner city schools with below 50% graduation rates have neighboring catholic schools full of AME, Baptist, Pentacostal and non-denominational storefront or unchurched minority kids who graduate and go on to be a big chunk of the Ph.D's discussed above, as well as Doctors, Lawyers, Dentists, Accountants, Pharmacists, Nurses, Engineers and skilled tradesmen, cops and firemen.

The culture of the administration, faculty, and parents are determinent. Race is not victimization, unless they decide it is.

Look up Cass Technical High School.

James said...

What the hell happened to "by the content of my character not the color of my skin"?

WTF happened to the right man getting the right job reguardless of his race?

The helarious part is to them this cant qualify as racism! Whats next?

Why the hell can't we just judge others as we see fit? If you want to be a dumbass racist and hire a guy who is less qualified because he is one color go ahead! Your a dumbass and the one who doesnt care will win in the end!

Progressives-keeping racism and bigotry alive.

LCDR Black said...

There were not many female I had in my classes, but the couple I worked with were brilliant.

Chris G. said...

Wasn't the old joke "2 at home, 3 on the road, and 4 in the playoffs"? (Believe it was regarding the number of black starters on Auburn's team, but certainly someone with the facts will correct me.)

LCDR Black said...

There is no money to be made by that.  Those that pump the crap out supporting a racist agenda have money and mortgages tied into the liberal plantation meme.  And God bless the libs.  I am certain many have a soft spot in their hearts.  Do the big brother and big sister thing.  Take the kids from the inner cities and Appalachians out into a wider world and let them see the difference, but stress the importance of high standards, hard work, striving towards success.  There is nothing wrong with that, but DO NO LOWER STANDARDS in society or the Navy to accomodate those that are not fully prepared for the competition of life. 

FCC(SW) said...

That caught my eye, too.  I read it as "I got a bad racial turn-over."

Grumpy Old Ham said...

<span>I am certain many have a soft spot in their hearts.</span>

...and another part of their anatomy, namely, the part they use primarily as a hatrack.

FCC(SW) said...

Maybe it's just an FDNF thing, but out here in 7th fleet, "homeboy" means Filipino.  8-)

Grumpy Old Ham said...

Needs a "No U-turn" sign to go with it.  :-P

Actus Rhesus said...

then perhaps the focus needs to be on WHY women "aren't interested" in hard sciences.

Growing up, I recall math and science teachers fawning over the "brilliant" boys in my classwhile the girls were never called on.  I assumed I sucked at math until my SAT scores came back and my math and verbal scores were actually tied (and both pretty damn high).

There are ample studies that suggest girls are not encouraged early on, leading to lack of interset later.  Couple this with boneheaded statements by people like Larry Summers about women lackign the capacity for math, and the societal engineering that pressures women into the "nurturing fields" and it's no wonder women "aren't interested".

Byron said...

Huh...I remember a geometry class where a certain young lad of admirable looks got nothing but hard times from his admittedly brilliant math teacher...and who took the course in summer school an passed it with flying colors.

pk said...

what it amounts to is that you can't head fake arithmetic problems.

no matter how you slice it theres only one correct answer to 6+7=?


Actus Rhesus said...

Actually, pk, you're wrong.

as the value of 6 approaches 7, and as the value of 7 approaches 8, the answer could in fact be 14.

And then of course there's the Lemma prof where if x+x=y, then it ALSO equals y+1.

as to the rest of your comment...disagree.  There are ample studies refuting the myth that boys are better at math than girls, but as long as we have idiots like Larry Summers saying women are too stupid to do math, there's goign to be an issue of self-selection.

Anonymous said...

Actually the comment from Larry Summers was a quesion as to (fact) why there are fewer women then men doing HIGHER math...

He asked a question based on an observable fact and got slammed for it.  He most specifically did NOT say "women are too stupid to do math" no matter how much you want to believe that it what he said.

A summary of his comments are as follows:

Summers then began by identifying three hypotheses for the higher proportion of men in high-end science and engineering positions:
The high-powered job hypothesis Different availability of aptitude at the high end Different socialization and patterns of discrimination in a search

Actus Rhesus said...


You are wrong.  What Summers said was, QUOTE (not summary, quote)

"In the special case of science and engineering, there are issues of intrinsic aptitude, and particularly of the variability of aptitude, and that those considerations are reinforced by what are, in fact, lesser factors involving socialization and continuing discrimination."

Intrinsic aptitude, according to him is the primary issue.  In more simple parlance womens is stoopid, no matter how much you want to believe that he didn't say it.

pk said...

would you use that type of math to calculate your paycheck???


Anonymous said...

You are doing everything in your power to avoid answering the question Summers raised - whay are there fewer women than men in high-end science and enginnering positions??????

Shooting the messenger is always fun but the after you have patted yourself on the back for shooting the messenger, the question still remains.

Actus Rhesus said...

guest, you are a pyromaniac in a field of strawmen.

scroll up.  I already suggested my answer to the question - early conditioning, which has nothing to do with the theory offered by summers of intrinsic aptitude, which has already been disproven, repeatedly.  

pk, my point is that your statement, couched in absolutes, was mathematically incorrect.  Ironic, given that I'm pretty sure you are male.  To now say "well that math doesn't count because it's not used on paychecks" is to ignore the realities of higher math.

ASWOJoe said...

If you keep expectations low, don't be surprised when people fail to meet them.  Cass tech was a way out for a lot of kids.

ASWOJoe said...

Look, it really is not about "intrinsic aptitude".  Mr. Summers may be a brilliant economist, though I think his sudden infatuation with the Keynesian system was rather conveniently timed.  Unfortunately like most economists he's kind of retarded when he goes off script.  Leave the race and gender out of it, if our schools can't even manage to leave students with the impression that they can grow up to be whatever they have the will to work to be then what the hell good are they?  If there aren't many women in upper level math and science courses it sure as hell isn't because they aren't capable of doing it so I'd look for solutions on the "nurture" side instead of "nature."

PK- you're a troll, either make an actual argument or sod off.  If the best you've got is tantamount to saying girls need to slide by on social skills and looks then I really feel for any daughters you end up raising.  I'm sure they'll make fine trophy wives in the trailer park though.

Guest - Women don't go into high level STEM because by the time it's shown to them as a viable option they're already in college.  Also, have you seen how graduate students act around women?  Jesus it's like watching a pack of brain damaged lions try to take down a gazelle.  Also, get a handle or go away, it gets tough to keep track of the sock puppets when they don't have names.

MR Ts Haircut said...

I would recommend to all on this board to read "Suicide of a Superpower" By Patrick J Buchanan.   It is a very telling analysis of what is happening and how we are getting there...

A couple of salient points:
We are a nation founded on christianity but we have turned our back on Christianity
We are a nation founded on immigrants, yet we allow the immigration tsunami to destroy our fabric
We are a tolerant nation, and yet we are expected to surrender our very identity to the minority and in effect watch our own death
our nation is not the same as the one we grew up in.  It is not the same as the one our parents grew up in, it will not be the same as our children grew up in.

it details the damaging effect of "diversity" in all its ugly colors.

give it a read...

Actus Rhesus said...

And I heard negroes can't fly planes because they are night blind.

For fuck's sake, Kristen, how about doing some research before you lambast your own gender.

these are myths perpetuated by those who want women out of combat.  Here...let's try an experiment.  I played softball throughout my youth and had a brief stint as a shot-putter.  So, I can throw.  Now watch as I stand up, take a ball, apple, grenade, whatever, in my left (non-dominant, non practiced hand) and watch me try to throw.  End result: I "throw like a girl".  

Throwing, like most physical activity, is muscle memory.  While the size of the muscles is different, we aren't talking about having a 90 mph fastball here, we're talking about lobbing a grenade, and anatomically, a male rotator cuff moves the same as a woman's. 

What is different though, is that fewer women grew up with little league, and so things like "step with your opposite foot, stand sideways, lean into your throw, don't release too early/too late" are not innate and need's a taught and practiced.  This whole "women can't throw grenades" myth has been refuted.  While the average woman can't throw as far as the average man, with training, both genders can throw the required safe distance.

And as a side note...with the lightweight grenade launchers out there, from a tactical standpoint why would you want to stand up, out of your cover, exposing yourself to fire, when you can stay low and launch?

Actus Rhesus said... prove my point, please review the attached links, and ponder who will have a better chance of clearing the blast radius?

hint...22.63 meters is further than 60.5 feet, and a shot put is heavier than a baseball.  Training.  It matters.

Kristen said...

I'm sorry to have annoyed you, AR.  I have traditional values, which means that you and I don't agree about much.  I don't think that women belong anywhere near combat.

Stu said...

Women in combat is the silly notion of a society that hasn't seen a true war in ages and relies too much on technology.  Besides, why would women want to lower themselves to such activities. 

Actus Rhesus said...


It's not your values I take issue with, it's the fact that you repeatedly put out false "facts" to support your ideological position.  Do some research, stop repeating disproven old tropes, and then we'll talk. 

Side note, thank you for presuming to know what my values are, and implying that yours are superior.

cdrsalamander said...


Actus Rhesus said...


same reasons men do.  Patriotism, sacrifice, and desire to serve are not linked to any particular chromosome.

LCDR Black said...

   When I was in grad school, we had a program to address the women in science issue.  We brought in a bunch of young ladies, around 14 yo, and tried to bring them in from the socio economic gambit.  The idea put forth on which they followed on with money was to focus energy at the age where men and women begin to separate in the STEM studies.  They did not know if it was the issue with boys becoming more aggessive at that age and take up more time, or they out compete i.e. get louder and try to take over the class and "win" in the answering of questions, or if the young ladies just start to go elsewhere in their energies.  I do not know if the women coming out of these camps have gone further in science then their contemporaries, but they have addressed this a bit.  I will try to reach out and see if they have kept up with the girls.  I do not know why, but there is a big difference in the numbers of men vs women in the STEM studies.  And maybe because it is filled with guys like these that they scare the women away:

Stu said...

Men don't fight for those things, not singularly at least.  In fact, at the end of the day men for their brother next to them.  Warfare is savage and brings out the worst elements in men.  In fact, military life in general brings out such things.  Ladies have historically been above it all, instead focusing on what really matters in life; family.  But in a strange way, male chauvinism has really been effective in convincing women that masculinity is the only standard by which to measure the true worth of someone.  Feminity, and the gifts it brings, are looked upon as simply not important.  Society is "bent."

Kristen said...

All right, AR.  Again, I'm sorry to have offended you.

Kristen said...

Brings back fond memories of sorority days during house meetings when any two sisters could go at it for hours over the stupidest what color shoes we were all supposed to wear on a certain day of rush.  Good time, good times.

Bistro said...

Welcome to Detroit. Every inch of it was made by public policies put into effect by the city council and mayors.

Bistro said...

I don't think Obama can either

Actus Rhesus said...

Kristen...the fact you are equating demostrably  false stereotypes about gender and your extrememly condescending assumptions about my core values with an argument over whether to wear your real pink alligator pumps or your faux pink alligator pumps pretty much sums up the whole problem here.

How is life in Stepford, these days?

MR T's Haircut said...

<span>AR,  </span>
<span>I love your candor and your way of getting your point across in most discussions, but I am surprised at your attacks on Kristen.  </span>
<span>She is defending her traditional values and states her opinion of which many would agree with.  She is entitled to her opinion.   
<span>You have chosen to take up the martial profession and you appear to be meeting every success.  I would opine your reaction to Kristens defense of her values is some how seen as an attack on your success to date...   
Women are allowed to serve their nation in combat in all areas except SOF.  Fact  
<span>War is a dirty business.  It is the most self debasing and primitive of acts a human can undertake.  It is fought for many reasons but at the end of the day it boils down to a human killing another human to either take or defend from one another.</span>
<span>I would prefer the females in my family not be exposed to that side of humanity as I prefer the other many qualities the fairer sex is superior to men then making war.   
like they said in Stripes... "lighten up Francis.."</span>

Actus Rhesus said...

As I said, she can defend her opinions and values all she wants, but when she makes assertions of fact to support the same, that are, in fact, wrong and have been proven wrong for decades, and when she assumes to know what MY values are, then expect a response.

Truth be told, here is what I found most offensive in all of that:  When I was in law school, we had a "women's law caucus" that was categorically liberal.  When I, and other conservative women, expressed an opinion that we were being alienated by their agendas, we were told "women's rights are a liberal cause."  Offensive, yes?  Well, what Kristen did is the flip side.  Apparently I am unable to have "traditional values" because she and I disagree on this issue.  She's presuming to know my values, and more importantly, presuming that her world-view is the last word on traditional.

Finally, I find it interesting that you would tell me to "lighten up francis" in the same comment that you defend Kristen's right to an opinion.  Am I not also entitled to my opinion?

MR T's Haircut said...

Of course you are entitled.  No question.  My comment to "lighten up", didnt say to stop, simply try to see the view from Kristen's side.  

Strong women expressing opinions... Girl Fights always bring collateral damage!

Actus Rhesus said...

How about this...I'll try to see things her way when she either a. acknowledges that her opinion is based purely in moral belief (which she is entitled to) and not any extrinsic fact or b. starts putting forward arguments that are actual facts, and not disproven old meme.

Scroll up.  You will see that the origin of this conflict was not based on my disagreement with her opinion, but on her reliance on and perpetuating of bad facts which the most cursory google search would have shown inaccurate.

Facts.  Research.  It's important, especially when you are making an argument in favor of discrimination.  Although I disagree with the ultimate conclusion, there are good arguments against women in combat that don't rely on "Well I heard that [insert bullshit here]"

Also, ditching "Well I have traditional values" as an argument would also help.  I would argue that I too have "traditional values".  Her implied claim to moral conservative superiority was grating.

/AR OUT.  Time to frolic in the sun.

pk said...

aswo joe and ar:

no i'm not a troll. what i was pointing out was that a great many of the current best and brightest have not invested in the time required to get the basics down pat.

the so called modern math that accepts the "acceptable method" of problem solving over the requirement of an accurate answer leads to considerable problems down the road. we saw an example of this hypocracy in Los Angeles Unified School District many years ago. they wanted to teach modern math in their classes whereby actually getting a correct answer was not the goal. yet when approached about using modern math to calculate paychecks the teachers union managed to kill that pretty fast.

examples can be, but not restricted to:

a machinist making a valve stem an inch to short.

a shipyard building a deckhouse for a battleship that is a foot short on the starboard side.

a building yard that builds a ship by using modules that is three feet shorter on the port side than the starboard and had a distinct wander to the left for its entire life.

an exploratory mission to mars that uses english measurement for part of its programming and metric for another part and nobody picks it up until it fails.    

just what is politically incorrect or sexist about getting 2+3=5 correct? its the basics. its either right or wrong. some jobs, positions, avocations quite simply require being right, not washing a messup away because of race, gender or political leanings.


Kristen said...

AR, my comment to the CDR had nothing to do with you.  He was teasing us about a girl fight, and I had a flash back to the way back when girl fights were pretty common in my life.  I wasn't trying to conflate sorority arguments with our previous discussion.

I come here because I enjoy the CDR's posts, and because I like the company here on the porch.  I do not come here to fight.  I've had argumentative follow ups to my comments once or twice before, and I didn't engage with those people either.  I feel absolutely no need to justify myself, my life or my "Stepford" opinions to you.

Finally, since it's still bothering you, I want to extend an explicit apology for being presumptuous about your values.

Kristen said...

Thank you, MR T.

Stu said...


You are a classy lady.

All the best.  

LT B said...

Mafia has a different feel than in NY as well!