Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's good advice (and an opinion I share, by the way--and said as much to the OP). However, given the context of his now obvious race baiting, had people offered up Oakland or Berkeley without any explanation of why they fit his criteria better than San Francisco, someone surely would have attributed it to racism, rather than the economics and logistics of the situation. The OP clearly stated that COL wasn't a factor in his decision.
It would be the perception of that old, passive-aggressive "wouldn't-you-be-more-comfortable-with-your-own-kind?" racism. I believe this was exactly the response the OP intended to generate.
What is also being missed in the ensuing and predictable opportunistic shots at SF is the context of segregation and racism relative to Houston. Even you tried to somehow steer the conversation toward the atmosphere of political activism in the Bay Area and SF's declining role as a primary driver of it (I attribute part of this to the poor wording of the OP and his aforementioned baiting).
The question posed dealt solely with race relations in SF versus Texas. I have a Houston perspective and offered it. True, Houston has a much larger black population than The Bay Area. I found it to be much more segregated than the Bay Area, though. It's a more blue-collar environment, certainly in relation to SF in particular and the Bay Area in general, which I believe may be clouding the issue at hand, given the OP's descriptions.
Houston is, however, still mired in the HBCU system that does as much harm as good in furthering the upward mobility of blacks beyond its regional boundaries in 2015. It's the same "wouldn't you be more comfortable here?" kind of racism. Its main public university, UH, is more on par with a Fresno State--a solid regional school that offers good opportunities to minorities, but likely won't buy much clout in the competitive Bay Area. I am a UH alumnus, BTW.
The OP described bringing a trade-oriented Associate's Degree (not yet obtained) from a largely blue-collar city into one of the most competitive, educationally elite white-collar cities in the country, couching his expectations of success along racial lines. I believe he was hoping to get shorthand responses that would fuel a biased agenda or at least spark the discord that ensued.
i suppose the OP won this one.
By the way, the OP's research links a "top 10s" list where California isn't ranked. Texas is ranked third, if you click to see the list. I don't find this to be credible "research" one way or another, but I do find it amusingly ironic and telling of the OP's agenda.
I didn't mention Houston because I've never been to Houston so I am sticking with what I know. Now you're accusing me for a second time of "taking shots at SF". Again, you don't know me well enough to know what you're talking. San Francisco is a great city but it has it's problems whether you decide to face that doesn't change anything. A lot of Black People do see SF a little differently than non blacks and that's just how it is. Same with San Diego and if I "take shots" at any city, it would be San Diego, especially since that's where I currently am. However, I am a native of the Bay Area and love the place but it's not a utopia of any kind so yes, sometimes you will here people, myself and other say negative things about it. Is this something that you're going to be able to come to terms with some day?
Reflections on intolerance in "the most tolerant place on earth"…
Perhaps you should read it again. That's a well written blog entry, not about intolerance, but about insensitivity (particularly the author's own introspection). It is, in fact, encouraging people of SF to not rest on their laurels of living in such an accepting environment and allowing that level of acceptance to passively diminish their attitudes of actual, active progress in changing people's attitudes.
I read nothing in it that bolstered your claim that I am in denial. I also read nothing in it to refute my answer to the OP that SF is a more racially harmonious place than Texas.
Location: Baghdad by the Bay (San Francisco, California)
3,530 posts, read 5,138,681 times
Reputation: 3145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gentoo
I didn't mention Houston because I've never been to Houston so I am sticking with what I know. Now you're accusing me for a second time of "taking shots at SF". Again, you don't know me well enough to know what you're talking. San Francisco is a great city but it has it's problems whether you decide to face that doesn't change anything. A lot of Black People do see SF a little differently than non blacks and that's just how it is. Same with San Diego and if I "take shots" at any city, it would be San Diego, especially since that's where I currently am. However, I am a native of the Bay Area and love the place but it's not a utopia of any kind so yes, sometimes you will here people, myself and other say negative things about it. Is this something that you're going to be able to come to terms with some day?
I apologize. I misspoke. I did not mean to suggest you took shots at SF. I meant to point out that you steered the conversation to activism, where the question at hand was exactly racism in SF relative to that in Texas.
It was others who seized the opportunity to divert the conversation to SF's flaws in regard to racism.
I don't view SF as Utopia. Far from it. I was merely trying to stay on topic--which was admittedly a moving target, given the agenda of the OP.
Last edited by dalparadise; 01-02-2015 at 01:15 PM..
Location: Baghdad by the Bay (San Francisco, California)
3,530 posts, read 5,138,681 times
Reputation: 3145
For the record, I acknowledge that racism exists in SF. It exists everywhere. That article linked by Mateo states what most every well meaning person like me cringes to say, that racism exists within me, too.
SF does seem to attract people who wish to rise above racist ideas, though. Some may doubt our degree of success in doing so and mock our stereotype of a self-congratulatory attitude in this area, but what purpose does that serve? Generalization is generalization even outside racial lines.
In my observation, SF is much farther along in the battle to eradicate racism (it will always be present, no matter how much we congratulate ourselves on its demise) than Texas. That was my answer to the OP's question.
Location: Baghdad by the Bay (San Francisco, California)
3,530 posts, read 5,138,681 times
Reputation: 3145
Quote:
Originally Posted by mateo45
And "De Nile is a river in Egypt" (not quite as sanctimonious an adage, but still apropos….).
By the way, it's a bit ironic to be called out as "sanctimonious" on the topic of prejudice by someone who has what can easily be interpreted as an (admittedly only mildly offensive, but nonetheless derogatory) anti-gay slur in his location field.
The story states that "SF welcomes people of color," but not poor people because of its high cost of living. It is therefor equating the current marginalization of the poor to racism of 50 years ago. The article states this in the first paragraph.
No, you were being disingenuous (look it up) in asking inflammatory questions, then you quickly answered them with what you hoped to hear. If you want to know the truth, look back at my first response to you. I more politely said then, that you won't get lower pay in SF because you are black. You will get lower pay here because you will be bringing a BS "Associate's Degree" to compete with the best and brightest in the world.
If you prefer to attribute that to "covert racism" and that makes you feel better, or serves some weird Texas versus SF agenda on an anonymous forum, that's your business, but it doesn't seem like serious business to me.
PS--the first link also lists the top 10 Bon Jovi songs to play at a wedding.
"the number of Black residents of San Francisco has shrunk by nearly half. Black children are grossly over represented in San Franscico's foster care and juvenille justice systems, and unemployment among blacks in San Fransico still remains higher than in other groups."
Maybe you should learn to read everything and not pick and choose details.
Marginalize
To relegate or confine to a lower or outer limit or edge, as of social standing.
According to the 2010 U.S. Census, Bayview-Hunters Point had the highest percentage of African-Americans among San Francisco neighborhoods, home to 21.5% of the city's Black population, and was the predominant ethnic group in the Bayview. Census figures showed the percentage of African-Americans in Bayview declined from 48% in 2000 to 33.7% in 2010, while the percentage of Asian and White ethnicity increased from 24% and 10%, respectively, to 30.7% and 12.1%. However the eastern part of the neighborhood had a population of 12,308 and is still roughly 53% African-American.
Since the 1960s, the Bayview-Hunters Point community has been cited as a significant example of marginalization.[8] In 2011, it remained "one of the most economically disadvantaged areas of San Francisco".[28] Root causes include a working class populace historically segregated to the outskirts of the city, high levels of industrial pollution, the closure of industry, and loss of infrastructure.[8] The results have been high rates of unemployment, poverty, disease and crime.[8][29] Attempts to mitigate the effects of marginalization include the city's building of the Third Street light-rail line, establishment of the Southeast Community Facility (SECF) as a response from the SF Public Utilities Commission to a community-led effort to balance environmental injustice associated with public utilities,[30] the Southeast Food Access Workgroup,[31] initially formed by the SF Department of Public Health as part of the SF Mayor's ShapeUp SF health initiative, and implementation of enhanced local hiring policy that recognizes that regulations requiring hiring for public projects prioritize City residents and contractors may not help specific neighborhoods where job seekers and contractors may still be overlooked. Place-based and asset-based community building programs networked through the Quesada Gardens Initiative began in 2002 adding direct grassroots public participation to the social and environmental change landscape with a goal of preserving diversity and encouraging longterm residents to reinvest in their neighborhood.
This is covertracism. Hence the word covert.
Black = Poor Poor = Black in San Francisco and the poor are segregated from the rest. If it were out in the open then it wouldn't be covert.
the number of black residents of San Francisco has shrunk by nearly half. Black children are grossly over-represented in San Francisco’s foster care and juvenile justice systems, and unemployment among blacks in San Francisco still remains higher than in other groups. - See more at: Poor Is the New Black: Segregation in San Francisco Today | San Francisco Public Press
That's good advice (and an opinion I share, by the way--and said as much to the OP). However, given the context of his now obvious race baiting, had people offered up Oakland or Berkeley without any explanation of why they fit his criteria better than San Francisco, someone surely would have attributed it to racism, rather than the economics and logistics of the situation. The OP clearly stated that COL wasn't a factor in his decision.
It would be the perception of that old, passive-aggressive "wouldn't-you-be-more-comfortable-with-your-own-kind?" racism. I believe this was exactly the response the OP intended to generate.
What is also being missed in the ensuing and predictable opportunistic shots at SF is the context of segregation and racism relative to Houston. Even you tried to somehow steer the conversation toward the atmosphere of political activism in the Bay Area and SF's declining role as a primary driver of it (I attribute part of this to the poor wording of the OP and his aforementioned baiting).
The question posed dealt solely with race relations in SF versus Texas. I have a Houston perspective and offered it. True, Houston has a much larger black population than The Bay Area. I found it to be much more segregated than the Bay Area, though. It's a more blue-collar environment, certainly in relation to SF in particular and the Bay Area in general, which I believe may be clouding the issue at hand, given the OP's descriptions.
Houston is, however, still mired in the HBCU system that does as much harm as good in furthering the upward mobility of blacks beyond its regional boundaries in 2015. It's the same "wouldn't you be more comfortable here?" kind of racism. Its main public university, UH, is more on par with a Fresno State--a solid regional school that offers good opportunities to minorities, but likely won't buy much clout in the competitive Bay Area. I am a UH alumnus, BTW.
The OP described bringing a trade-oriented Associate's Degree (not yet obtained) from a largely blue-collar city into one of the most competitive, educationally elite white-collar cities in the country, couching his expectations of success along racial lines. I believe he was hoping to get shorthand responses that would fuel a biased agenda or at least spark the discord that ensued.
i suppose the OP won this one.
By the way, the OP's research links a "top 10s" list where California isn't ranked. Texas is ranked third, if you click to see the list. I don't find this to be credible "research" one way or another, but I do find it amusingly ironic and telling of the OP's agenda.
Your looking way too deep into this.
I was curious about living in san fransico because its always the top city on every list about good cities.
I had bad experiences with the northeast and its covert racism. It parades itself as a liberal area just like SAN FRAN but PA,CT,NY, MA are some of the most racist areas in the whole nation.
Using my past experiences of being refused for jobs that I'm qualified for, apartments I can afford, and being bullied by the police I wanted to make sure I didn't move back into a similar environment.
I live in Houston TX now and like it here but it has its flaws.
My friend left for California and I wanted to move out there because from what I have been told San Fran >>>Houston.
I make 55,00$ a year now (not counting sidework) as an A level technician one step below a Master which I'm training to become. So I figured $$$ wouldn't be too much of an issue.
I thought if I could make 62,000$ a year as a Master technician (+side work $$) and switch over to engineering when I get my Bachelors degree I should be fine. I wanted to make sure this liberal city isn't pretend to be liberal like the Northeast.
I asked multiple forums; CD being one of them and I received mixed responses. So I did some research that backed up the negative information I received from certain posters and I made my decision to stay in Houston.
I never said anything negative about the city or its people. I just wanted an answer to my question.
Thankyou all for your input.
I live in Houston TX now and like it here but it has its flaws.
My friend left for California and I wanted to move out there because from what I have been told San Fran >>>Houston..
Well then, I'm sure your "friend " musta told you SF has no flaws.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veyron
/thread closed.
Obviously you don't know this forum
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
