Jump to content

Update on new Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion MB


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, BQZip said:

No, that's evidence that they PERCEIVE systemic racism. "I'm worried that..." isn't proof that anything actually exists outside their own perceptions (that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist, only that this isn't proof of it).

I provided the peer reviewed studies as an edit to the original post. There is more than ample evidence that ANY indication that the applicant for a job is African American, even if just their NAME, leads to fewer interview call backs.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 299
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I have major issues with BSA actively entering the political arena.  By mentioning B. Taylor, they have gone way beyond selling war bonds and into anti-police propaganda.  That is something that they

Likewise. Which is all I'm looking for. But by the chosen phrasing, I fear that this is NOT what we are seeing. If "white privilege"/"check your privilege" or "systemic racism" is brought up

Let's start with the "equity" portion. Equity is an impossible goal to achieve. No matter how we strive we will never achieve equal outcomes. The goal of "equity" is a myth, an impossible achieveme

Posted Images

3 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

I provided the peer reviewed studies as an edit to the original post. There is more than ample evidence that ANY indication that the applicant for a job is African American, even if just their NAME, leads to fewer interview call backs.

You changed what you wrote thereby changing the meaning of what I originally criticized, which was their perception.

I'm not saying there aren't biases, but you're also using info from 20 years ago published in a report from 18 years ago (from Boston and Chicago, supposedly more "woke" places). Lots has changed. For the article from 2016, 100 resumes per city isn't a very large sample size.

Edited by BQZip
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, BQZip said:

You changed what you wrote thereby changing the meaning of what I criticized.

I'm not saying there aren't biases, but you're also using info from 20 years ago published in a report from 18 years ago (from Boston and Chicago, supposedly more "woke" places). Lots has changed. For the article from 2016, 100 resumes per city isn't a very large sample size.

You really think things have changed THAT much that African American sounding name resumes get the same treatment as White?

Seriously?

As for the "100 resumes", it was 1600 which in fact is a good sample where Population = 328,200,000 (US), Confidence Level = 95% and Confidence Interval = 3

Edited by CynicalScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CynicalScouter said:

You really think things have changed THAT much that African American sounding name resumes get the same treatment as White?

Seriously?

You're making some critical leaps of judgement here.

"I think there are some problems with your logic here" is not tantamount to "There are no problems!" Criticism of their methods/accuracy and the perceptions of those you mentioned doesn't mean that I believe there aren't biases or that we can't do better.

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
Just now, BQZip said:

You're making some critical leaps of judgement here.

"I think there are some problems with your logic here" is not tantamount to "There are no problems!" Criticism of their methods/accuracy and the perceptions of those you mentioned doesn't mean that I believe there aren't biases or that we can't do better.

Really? So, where's the methodological flaw? These are peer reviewed pubs. You know there's a flaw? Cough it up.

As I said: 1600 resumes is a perfectly acceptable sample size where Population = 328,200,000 (US), Confidence Level = 95% and Confidence Interval = 3 .

And the idea that since the research as 18 years ago therefore everything's just ducky now and racism doesn't exist? Any research for that No? Ok then.

Edited by CynicalScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

Which is a ringing endorsement for the notion that systemic racism still exists.

It's a ringing endorsement that people believe it exists, and IMHO it does (I won't get into who is largely responsible for creating it - separate topic), but is not an endorsement that it *does* exist.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

I provided the peer reviewed studies as an edit to the original post. There is more than ample evidence that ANY indication that the applicant for a job is African American, even if just their NAME, leads to fewer interview call backs.

You are both correct, and not talking about the same thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, BQZip said:

I see, so you cannot actually show a methodological flaw in that paper, you throw up a news article about...other papers that are not even in the same field (medical/bio-med).

Ok then. You convinced me. Racism doesn't exist. All a hoax. Fake news!

Edited by CynicalScouter
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CynicalScouter said:

I see, so you cannot actually show a methodological flaw in that paper, you throw up a news article about...other papers that are not even in the same field (medical/bio-med).

Ok then. You convinced me. Racism doesn't exist. All a hoax. Fake news!

That's not it at all. The concept that belief does not necessarily equate to reality is pretty sound. While half the people I was talking about believe eeoc hurts their chances of getting a job, half the people believe it does not hirt their prospects. If we flip the "ringing endorsement" statement we can jist as easily say half the people believeing it doesn't hurt their chances is a ringing endorsement that systemic racism doesn't exist. All we are saying is that perception doesn't necessarily make a thing true. If it did my wife would always be right... Oh wait nevermind.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CynicalScouter said:

I see, so you cannot actually show a methodological flaw in that paper, you throw up a news article about...other papers that are not even in the same field.

Ok then. You convinced me. Racism doesn't exist. All a hoax. Fake news!

OMG, you're doing nothing but trolling at this point.

The studies you cite indeed show what they say it does. I do not agree that they support your conclusions. Additionally, one is a study of data 20 years old (criticism #1) from a limited marketplace (criticism #2). The other uses a small number of resumes which I find to be less statistically valid (criticism #3).

I NEVER said racism didn't exist.
I NEVER said anything was a "hoax".
NEVER uttered the words "fake news"

You've tried to paint my concerns as tantamount to the worst of Trump's rants. Reply if you wish. I won't be addressing you further. 
 

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Bowsprit said:

The concept that belief does not necessarily equate to reality is pretty sound.

Yep. And any peer reviewed research that shows racism in hiring exist is fake news. Made up. Hoax.

Got it. No, I'm clear on your concept. African Americans and others only "believe" there is racism. There's no racism! Fake news! Hoax!

Edited by CynicalScouter
  • Downvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TAHAWK said:

JTE "metrics" fail to  give any points for actualluy using the Patrol Method - not a decision or any leadershipo by Scouts is required.  Morteover, it does not give points for election of Scout leaders, so the adult-run troop method is AOK with "JTE."

It does not necessarily require a single actual outdoor activity, defining indoor activities as "camping" in the official Q&A.    So no poutdoor program whatsoever is AOK with "JTE."

Wretched at best.

 

JTE is just dumb.  It doesn't measure the scouting program, it measures the part of scouting that the Scoutmasters hate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TAHAWK said:

JTE "metrics" fail to  give any points for actualluy using the Patrol Method

Current JTE is a good start, but could use refinement as others noted. What is the process to update the JTE nationally?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Owls_are_cool said:

Current JTE is a good start, but could use refinement as others noted. What is the process to update the JTE nationally?

Can I suggest a JTE thread, or reviving the dormant one?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...