BF2S Forums Race relations thread

National Review article celebrating some National Hispanic organization stopping the use of Latinx.

Out in the real world, “Latinx” polls even more poorly than Joe Biden does. A Politico poll found that only 2 percent of Hispanics prefer the term, while 68 percent opt for “Hispanic” and 21 percent favor “Latino” or “Latina.” The term is considered offensive to 40 percent of respondents, and 30 percent said that they are less likely to support a politician or group using it.

I didn't like Latino and Latina before it was cool. Gendered words just isn't part of English and the word Hispanic already exist.

30 to 40% of Hispanics seem to be Republicans getting upset over nothing. I would never use Latinx especially since the H-word exist but I did appreciate the existence of Latinx. It was an easy way to figure out where the white person you are communicating with is coming from. If they use Latinx, it would probably be a safe bet they are cool liberals and won't try to talk to me about how "you can't make blazing saddles today".

I am not sure how to pronounce it. Never heard someone say it aloud either. I read it as Latin-X.

We should all try to be better

Last edited by SuperJail Warden (2021-12-14 10:21:36)

I am sorry. I had a rough day. I don't deserve this.

Oh you wouldn't know this. The special education kids come with files that include their IQ scores, family situation, etc. I have access to all of that and more.

I can see first hand the impact of low IQ. It is the kids with low IQ running around doing craziness all the time. Of course there are plenty of kids with low IQ who have great EQ and those kids need to be protected but otherwise low IQ is the common link. The low IQ prevents the link between actions and consequences being fully formed.

Racism, poverty, etc. can have all have a negative effect on IQ individually and broadly. I'm not a libertarian. I would have actually argued against IQ's importance if I didn't see the effects first hand and also read the research.

I just don't think it's a flawless measurement if the results can change with practice, or if some kid's stepfather didn't molest them that morning.

Guess I also don't understand sometimes if you're literally teaching play-doh and crayon-eating special ed, doing a special class for underperforming students, or running a perfectly normal class with students you just call special ed cases.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2021-12-14 15:40:54)

i don’t think there’s any doubt that people designated as such ‘low IQ’ as to be in special education do indeed, quite concretely have a broad range of behavioural and social issues which are directly linked to their cognitive ability and intelligence.

the point of criticisms about IQ is that it’s just one descriptor among many, and, like any paradigm, it has its in-baked flaws and biases. it is not an ‘objective’ measure of a human’s worth and it’s certainly not the basis for political policy or widespread social engineering – as the history of eugenicism, nazism, scientific racism, etc would have had it.

people who narrowly or superficially regard IQ as an infallible metric generally would apply it to those pretty shady ends. all that bunkum about ‘racial theories of intelligence’ and the abstruse, labyrinthine, nonsensical hierarchies that people like dilbert continually refer to are a natural correlate of faux-scientific racism. they get lost in the hall of descriptive mirrors, making tautological nonsense statements like ‘people have low IQ because they’re black because they have low IQ’. it never reaches beyond ultimately some very limited and compromised test.

IQ is just a rather specific and rather limited descriptor of an abstract category like ‘intelligence’, about which we can devise any number of categories or for which any number of tests. in a practical sense, as in specialed, it can be useful to refer to low IQ people. it’s when people start to want to build essentialist racist theories, by turning IQ from a limited diagnostic to an essence, that shit gets seriously dumb.

Last edited by uziq (2021-12-14 19:24:30)

Not going to sit here tell you how to do your job or anything, but I think you may be overrelying on IQ as a predictor even in knowledge of other factors that contribute to success in life. IQ not being a measurement of those other factors, but a specific performance benchmark. Just seems a little lazy, or "I give up" is all. What even is success in life anyway? Your time in spec ed may be tilting your views of young people.

I imagine more than a few reasonably intelligent people have slept in their cars because of circumstances outside their control. GG parents all tapped out by the time they bought a boomer's older siblings their houses, so he makes due. Got a masters but you don't have 5 years of experience in a 3 year old programming language. American medical debt slams hard into a big chunk of immediate family.

Traffic is the only thing that really sets me off. I don't let it affect me once I'm out of the car, but holy moly bad driving really steams me up.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Traffic is the only thing that really sets me off. I don't let it affect me once I'm out of the car, but holy moly bad driving really steams me up.

Cali traffic is famously bad. Even we New York creatures know of your bad traffic.

How does a state warm enough to walk every have such bad traffic?

isn't LA supposed to be uniquely inhospitable to pedestrians and walking access? i've always heard that stereotype. one of the reasons i never want to ever fucking go there. having to drive for 35 minutes to get anywhere sounds super shitty.

"Bay Area drivers park with their trunks and windows wide open so their cars are not broken into"
https://old.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout … runks_and/

Lordy, this is so bad. Yay for bail reform

Last edited by SuperJail Warden (2021-12-16 14:08:02)