Re: Interesting Article
 

Sounds like it. Definitely get you past summary judgment.

But consider this hypo... Suppose you're in an office full of Irish people and they bond a lot about some Hibernians Dinner (and other Irish social events). You're from Pakistan. Nobody treats you badly. But you don't attend the same dinners these guys do, and consequently, you don't get as much business and move up the ladder as fast as they do. Are those guys, acting tribally as they are, bigots?

(Please don't go with the low hanging fruit of "Yours is a hypo, mine was real." This hypo is played out in offices all over the country every day. It has been the basis for a huge number of complaints on behalf of women who historically felt excluded when male execs went golfing or to strip clubs.)

Re: Interesting Article
 

I see what you mean. It was really more a slight pride in the advance this generation has made. For myself, I know I sometimes have to stop myself from describing someone in terms of her race, and instead use descriptors such as what she's wearing or how tall she is. I'm glad he doesn't seem to have to make a conscious effort to do that, as that makes him a better person than I in that regard.

Re: Interesting Article
 

It took me years, but several ago I finally reached the point where I wouldn't say, "Oh, Bob. He's that guy who works with Karen... The Black dude."

Tangentially, I gave up using "African American" after a Black paralegal laughed at me: "I'm Black. You're White. Whatever..."

Re: The Jews have all the money, and the whites have all the power.
 

Just fucking stop. If you would acknowledge that the "tribalism" to which you keep referring has two sides to the same coin, maybe you will understand what everyone is trying to pound through your skull. Saying, "That guy is like me, I shall gravitate to him and treat him like an insider with all the benefits that bestows," while lacking the same degree of negative connotation as "That guy is a different color than me, I shall stay away," the result is the same. Furthermore, by favoring those of the same tribe and not favoring those of another, you are implicitly saying that you value characteristics of one tribe over the other. You can call it lazy, tribal, passive, whatever. But it is still fucking racist.

And stop being intentionally obtuse. No one here said that "In all instances in which a minority is excluded, it is irrefutably racism." You made that shit up because you don't like being disagreed with. We were referring to your specific example, because that shit is, indeed, racist.

TM

Re: Interesting Article
 

Well, lots of networking happens at social gatherings like the Irish clubs. So say I go to the Italian American business owners dinner. I meet a guy who then sends me a nice piece of legal work. That is how much of the world works, I don't see anything wrong there. The Pakistani guy may have similar options or may need to find some other way to market himself. You can't rule make rainmaking.

But now that I have the work in house, I don't think I can/should exclude the Pakistani guy. I suppose if Sidd finally gave in and joined up to work under me, and had been with me at that dinner* so he also knew the guy, I'd might well give sidd the work over the Pakistani guy. So if you are asking is it possible that a similarity might occassionally result in a work choice, sure.

But I would encourage Sidd to let the work flow to Pakistani guy. And the next client that comes in, I would start with not knocking on sidd's door, but giving the Pakistani guy a chance. That's rainmaker me. If the firm hired Pakistani guy we need to give him a chance.

Circling the wagons in a law firm to just work with Italians would be bigoted.

*this also works at a bald men's dinner, where I would take sidd as he has a good deal less hair than me. (or plug in Thurgreed to this scenario)

Re: Interesting Article
 

Are we seriously still talking about this? When I was kid, there was good horn-less rock, our fathers drank martinis at lunch, and we knew that if you did not give an employee the same opportunities to succeed based on the color of their skin it was racism. I guess things are more complicated now.

If I were a law school professor, I would find a way to include an individual in the witness protection program as a character in each of my exam questions, I would call that individual "Richie Incognito".

Re: Interesting Article
 

I try not to do that. I judge people based on their actions. And when the wealthy choose to live in an unnecessarily large mansion in an exclusive, gated community (or some other area where everyone is super rich) and spend $50k/yr to send their kids to schools in which they will have countless advantages over middle and lower class kids, I judge them. If parents are looking to isolate themselves and their children from people who don't fall in the same tax bracket, no matter what the pretext, I think it's kind of shitty. And I understand the world is kind of designed this way in that there are good neighborhoods and bad neighborhoods and good school districts and bad, etc. I just think that the more we actively choose to add layers of protection between us and normal fucking people, the worse everyone is for it.

That said, you are correct in that there are more reasons than the two I stated to send your child to boarding/private school. I was overstating because so many of the people I meet who send their kids to elite private and boarding schools are douchebags. I know you and think you are a good person (as I'm sure you already know). I admit that I did think you sounded kind of douchey talking about all the wonders your kids' choice of schools will bring. You are very intelligent. I'm sure your husband is as well. Your kids are undoubtedly doing well and will continue to do well wherever you send them because you will see to it.

One of the articles I posted talked about how people mistakenly think that private schools educate kids better than public schools when, in actuality, the reality is that kids of successful, smart people do better than kids whose parents are not, no matter what school they're in. It's a difficult distinction to realize because almost all the parents at elite boarding schools are successful and smart. Causation? Correlation?

The real problem I rail against is based, as you said, on our unfortunate history. From slavery, to Jim Crow, to redistricting, to white flight, we've set up our society in such a way that those who have, hoard and flee from those who don't. And, like Sebby has demonstrated with his 'tribal' argument, we look for pretexts as to why we do these things. And I think one of the ones we use most often is "If I can give my kid every advantage, I will." Will your kids have more opportunity if they go to Exeter, Yale and Oxford? Sure. Will they be a better person with as realistic a view of the world (with some empathy for those who have a much different experience) as a kid who went to a public school and a great college that doesn't fall in the top 3? Maybe. And I'm not saying that you aren't equipped to give your child the lessons they will need to be good people who can empathize with those who have less. Surely you are.

The question is, are they going to go through life never really even knowing someone their own age who grew up in the projects, has never left the 30 block radius around their house, who has no idea that it's even possible to achieve the things we expect of our kids? Will they have spent time in a friend's house whose parents offer them the meat they were going to have at dinner because their kid asked if your kid could stay over at the last minute and there wasn't really enough food for everyone in the house and it's 4 days til payday and they're stretching it out? I don't know. Is that even important? Depends on who you talk to. And I recognize I'm off on a ridiculous rant that probably doesn't apply to you. But I think this lack of exposure is the basis for the thought process behind the clients who I talk to who actually believe that they earned the $40 million dollars they made last year.

http://jezebel.com/black-woman-shot-...hit-1459915081

TM

Re: Interesting Article
 

I think that the fact that you think this parenthetical helps your argument is hilarious.

TM

Re: Interesting Article
 

I'm with you (from your first post) on this one. If it never occurred to your kid to tell you he has a black friend, that's awesome.

But don't fall into this "I don't see race," fallacy. It's perfectly okay to describe someone to another person using their race. It's part of who they are. "Deb is the tall, black woman who sits on 4," is very different than, "I was out late last night with my black friend, Deb." As you, of course, know, minorities don't expect or want their differences to be ignored. They want them respected. And they expect to not be judged unfairly based on the stereotypes such differences evoke.

TM

Re: Interesting Article
 

tl;dr

Re: Interesting Article
 

It's elitist to post inside jokes.

Re: Interesting Article
 

Actually, I did read the Jezebel article. Holy crap.

Re: Interesting Article
 

I'm not elitist. Just lazy and tribal.

Re: Interesting Article
 

Somewhat related, and interesting (even given the author clearly suffers from undiagnosed autism): http://www.canberratimes.com.au/nati...928-2ul2m.html

I am the Thurax, and I Speak for the Minorities
 

I think it's hysterical you're speaking for all minorities. Minorities aren't a monolith on this or anything else, and among ten of them, I'm pretty confident you'll find three or four different positions on how they'd like to be considered and described.