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.
Nevertheless, on the average Asians earn more than whites and are better educated. ONly migrants from INdia do better than Asians. BTW, gay and lesbian couples also earn more than white heterosexual couples.
Cry me a river!
FYI - Indians from Asia are Asian lol.
They are included in Asian statistics.
Note that the average Nigerian immigrant is more educated and earns more than the median income of whites as well, but they, like Asians, also face stereotypes.
IMO this whole thread is just a re-hash of silly conservative talking points honestly. You all like to act like sociological privilege doesn't mean the absence of negative impacts of stereotyping, prejudice and exclusion.
Sociological privilege has nothing to do with income or education statistics, it has to do with the sociological perspectives and treatment of people by a greater society.
I know that you and the OP know this, but you willfully deny it and just want to victimize yourselves and denigrate other Americans in the process. It is sad IMO.
I know that you and the OP know this, but you willfully deny it and just want to victimize yourselves and denigrate other Americans in the process. It is sad IMO.
Show me one post where I portray myself as a victim of society. I think you are projecting and certainly lying.
If whites have a "sociological privilege" and the evidence is whites have better outcomes than other races....than Asians have better outcomes across the board than whites...sociological privilege?
Asians are twice as likely to become doctors as their population suggests, almost thrice as likely to become a professor...
Asians are 21.7% of Pharmacists
Asians are 18.1% of surgeons
Asians are 34% of Motion Picture Techs
Asians are 38.3% of Hardware Engineers
Asians are 19.5% of Electrical Engineers
....11.1% of Mechanical Engineers
....11.4% of Aerospace Engineers
So they are going into lots of jobs that don't lead to becoming CEOs...
What about managers in fields that Asians go into?
Asians are overrepresented as managers...
....11.2% Engineering Managers
....11.7% of Food Processing Managers
....13.0% of Computer IT managers
....8.2% of Financial Managers
....12.5% Lodging Managers
Asians are more likely to be managers than whites proportionately...."bamboo barrier?" Asian Privilege. Asians outperform whites in the US in all key areas. If there is white privilege than there is Asian Privilege.
Maybe they're privileged and maybe they're not, but higher proportional representation doesn't necessarily equate to privilege. You also have to consider whether or not there's a difference between how the populations are evaluated or given different opportunities.
For example, say group A (90 people) and group B (10 people) take a test, but only group A are allowed to take some extra credit.
If 45 people from group A (50%) and 7 people from group B (70%) pass, I would still say that group A had an advantage, even if group B did better.
I would also say that group A was privileged even if many in group A opted not to go for extra credit; they still had an advantage because they were given an opportunity that members of group B were not.
Asian soldiers stationed in the South during WW2 were to be classified as white for all intents and purposes. That meant that they could use any and all facilities that whites could use.
Only Blacks and Japanese were segregated in both world wars US Armed Forces. Initial Chinese draftees for WWII were sent to the China Burma Indian theatre but then the War Department decided that any cultural good done there was not worth the disruption to the Army as a whole. A disruption all willingly took with regard to those thought of as Black or Japanese after Pearl Harbor
I have a hard time believing anything you say after you were blatantly lying about what Professor Robert Plomin was saying in regards to IQ being in part genetic - all while carrying on about how you have a degree that makes you analytical.
Is the lack of Asian CEOs more myth?
Asians in the age range of obtaining CEOs make up a disproportionately smaller amount than their composition of the whole. So they make up about 3.5% of the US population in the age range that become CEOs and they are just over the 2% number for being CEOs.
So, some discrepancy...but then again, aren't Asians also going into professions that don't result in CEOs?
Asians are twice as likely to become doctors as their population suggests, almost thrice as likely to become a professor...
Asians are 21.7% of Pharmacists
Asians are 18.1% of surgeons
Asians are 34% of Motion Picture Techs
Asians are 38.3% of Hardware Engineers
Asians are 19.5% of Electrical Engineers
....11.1% of Mechanical Engineers
....11.4% of Aerospace Engineers
So they are going into lots of jobs that don't lead to becoming CEOs...
What about managers in fields that Asians go into?
Asians are overrepresented as managers...
....11.2% Engineering Managers
....11.7% of Food Processing Managers
....13.0% of Computer IT managers
....8.2% of Financial Managers
....12.5% Lodging Managers
Asians are more likely to be managers than whites proportionately...."bamboo barrier?" Asian Privilege. Asians outperform whites in the US in all key areas. If there is white privilege than there is Asian Privilege.
So you are hung up over someone disagreeing with a post that was made months ago about be believing (not because of degrees but because I can actually think about things and not rely on anyone else to tell me what to think about particular topics/interets) intelligence is not being defined or measure by IQ and there is not a way to determine a genetic component to it because of the above....very immature and petty.
As noted above sociolgoical privilege is not about income or educational statistics, it is about prejudice, stereotyping, and inclusiveness/exclusion.
You, like the others, willfully ignore this and would rather we pretend that your skin makes you less intelligent than Asians and that you have to consistently deal with negative prejudices or stereotypes that impact your day to day life when you don't. Also, as another poster alluded to, these sorts of discussions are typically brought up by people to try to stop an "alliance" of black, Latino, and Asian people in regards to ethnic discrimination and racism in our country. The tactic is to play one group against the others - it is always a self proclaimed white poster for instance, usually one (as is the case for this thread) that has racial superiority leanings who starts conversations trying to place Asians above whites and use them as a weapon against other minority groups in America. Fortunately today, most people don't buy the okey-doke in this regard. As soon as I saw the title I knew it was from a racial superiority poster and that a majority of the posters would be the same (I was correct in this regard as well) who would try to go out of their ways and ignore the fact that Asian Americans are stereotyped and negatively impacted by those racial stereotypes in this country - something that white Americans do not deal with like they do and other minority groups do.
Privilege is a sociological concept when it is discussed by both the liberals and by the conservatives in a political perspective. The fact that Asian Americans are positively stereotyped by you and others as intelligent and smart and hard working, makes your statistics actually prove that stereotyping and sociological privilege is connected. The way people perceive others based on their appearance has the ability to assist or negatively impact persons in reaching/achieving higher economic or educational statuses in their lives. However, as noted, Asian Americans have many more negative stereotypes than you are willing to admit have an impact on them. This is not admitted because you'd rather see them through a purely positive lens and try to reduce your own sociological privilege by trying to place them above you, when they are not to any wide degree.
Also, as others have noted, Asian American immigrants, and actually all immigrants really (excluding refugees) do better than the average 3 generation + American on a variety of factors because they have more drive to make a mark in their new home country. Asians in Asia do not do better than black Americans in America income-wise or educational achievement in a majority of Asian countries, yet you continue to view them through a specific, limited, superior lens to black Americans (based on your own prejudiced and stereotyping I will add). In regards to the Asian community in America, as others have noted, you have your richer Asians and you have your poorer Asians. FWIW whites have similar populations - Jews and Arabs are considered white in America and are much more likely to have higher wages and educational achievement than the average white American who are descendants of Catholics for instance similar to the Chinese or Japanese versus the Filipinos, Vietnamese, and Hmong in America.
I was reading recently how they will be asking whites on the next census about your genetic origins. Some folks in genealogy/history groups I frequent were upset about this, but my position is, it would be a great way to show you whites how diverse you are, especially from an economic and educational perspective based on ethnic roots. This is interesting to me from a genealogical/historical perspective because of the fact that northern black Americans (including those from my home state of Ohio) were deemed as intellectually superior to whites from specific countries in Europe and whites from specific southern states as a result of "mental testing" during World War I. Sociologically within black America, similar to the Asian American community, there are groups who have historically had more education and wealth that can either be hidden or consume the others of that generic racial group from a statistical perspective. Prior to 1920 a majority of black Americans lived in the south where they suffered from sub-par educational opportunities, nutrition in many instances and other poor environmental conditions that were not as prevalent for northern black Americans, especially not the case for education as northern blacks had been educated for many generations by 1920 unlike southern blacks, a majority of southern withes, and European immigrants. So for me, it will be interesting to see how people view the data and I do believe that it can cause a sociological shift away from the idea that skin color by itself should be used as a basis for judging people in regards to prejudice and stereotyping, history and specific ethnic roots that break apart "white" would be beneficial IMO for both those who you do not like - those who say all whites have a "privilege" and those who false believe the idea that all people of a certain racial/ethnic group are generically represented by the best of those - like Asian Americas, or the worse of those - like black Americans.
Will note, I do believe that some whites are more privileged than others and I'm not all that "into" the concept of privilege, but I am aware of what it is and what it means and am not a person to ignorantly deny that it is, in fact a "thing" from a sociological perspective in our country.
Show me one post where I portray myself as a victim of society. I think you are projecting and certainly lying.
If whites have a "sociological privilege" and the evidence is whites have better outcomes than other races....than Asians have better outcomes across the board than whites...sociological privilege?
On the bold, the quote that you quoted from me was not to you. It was to Julian. Don't be defensive when it is not needed.
If whites have a "sociological privilege" and the evidence is whites have better outcomes than other races....than Asians have better outcomes across the board than whites...sociological privilege?
That is not a logical statement. It's also not true, but it's an opinion that many hold.
On the bold, the quote that you quoted from me was not to you. It was to Julian. Don't be defensive when it is not needed.
You can pick apart my quote to you above
You clearly started off addressing me as the OP with that poster and than made the point using the plural...
Quote:
Originally Posted by residinghere2007
I know that you and the OP know this, but you willfully deny it and just want to victimize yourselves and denigrate other Americans in the process. It is sad IMO.
You writing is very confusing if you didn't intend to lump me in with that statement, but with you I will believe it.
All of the key stats of life used to show white privilege are more extreme favoring Asians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by residinghere2007
So you are hung up over someone disagreeing with a post that was made months ago about be believing (not because of degrees but because I can actually think about things and not rely on anyone else to tell me what to think about particular topics/interets) intelligence is not being defined or measure by IQ and there is not a way to determine a genetic component to it because of the above....very immature and petty.
You were not "disagreeing" with the link you were "lying" about what the link and Professor Robert Plomin were saying. If you weren't lying, than you have severely awful reading comprehension, which is ironic because you went into detail to defend your lie or falsehood about what the link was saying by talking about how analytical you are because of your college degree.
You completely shot your credibility, because you repeatedly lied about what the link was saying even after I was pointing out to you that the link was saying the opposite of your conclusion.
You are a science denier, that denies that the structure of the brain is correlated to intelligence, memory, processing speed - and these structures can be genetic. You then repeatedly lied, even when confronted with facts from the link you were misusing to defend your denial of science.
You clearly started off addressing me as the OP with that poster and than made the point using the plural...
You writing is very confusing if you didn't intend to lump me in with that statement, but with you I will believe it.
All of the key stats of life used to show white privilege are more extreme favoring Asians.
You were not "disagreeing" with the link you were "lying" about what the link and Professor Robert Plomin were saying. If you weren't lying, than you have severely awful reading comprehension, which is ironic because you went into detail to defend your lie or falsehood about what the link was saying by talking about how analytical you are because of your college degree.
You completely shot your credibility, because you repeatedly lied about what the link was saying even after I was pointing out to you that the link was saying the opposite of your conclusion.
You are a science denier, that denies that the structure of the brain is correlated to intelligence, memory, processing speed - and these structures can be genetic. You then repeatedly lied, even when confronted with facts from the link you were misusing to defend your denial of science.
LOL you are a denier about the ability of people to think for themselves and not agree with people just because you do. Which is actually in direct contradiction to the "science" you supposedly esteem.
Scientist welcome debate and challenges of their position and if they are confident in said positions and theories, they don't get bent out of shape like you are doing months after a conversation I'd forgotten about until you brought it up. Glad I hit a nerve and hopefully you'll use that nerve to think about the fact that everyone is not going to agree with you. And that's okay if they don't. I honestly could care less if you disagree with me. You're entitled to adhere to the ideas of people you find on the internet more than think about other perspectives if you like. That's not my style. And I don't consider any random internet article as proof of anything, which I'm sure I told you in whatever conversation we had about IQ (which again cannot adequately or accurately define intelligence, since intelligence is defined differently by different people and/or scientists itself).
If you don't like my opinion or words, you can just ignore me. Not a big deal.
If whites have a "sociological privilege" and the evidence is whites have better outcomes than other races....than Asians have better outcomes across the board than whites...sociological privilege?
Forgot to address your question above.
But will note that, again, sociological "white privilege" is not about "outcomes" nor statistics.
I'd have to ask you what you think "white privilege" is.
From a socio-political position it is usually defined as a society's preference for white people, which elevates the social status of whites in a society.
From the above definition - Asian Americans educational outcomes or income are not relevance. The preference in America is to be white and being white means that you do not have any overt judgements placed upon your American-ness and that you are not instantly negatively stereotyped and prejudged based on your appearance by the majority of our country's citizens.
Asians do not have a sociological preference in our society. Off the bat, Asian Americans are typically not even thought of as "real" Americans. That is a negative for our Americans of Asian ancestry - that they are typically thought of as perpetual foreigners.
Their prejudged intelligence is even a negative in many situations, especially in regards to "white flight." I lived in metro Atlanta for a long time and there is a "white flight" situation occurring right now over Asian Americans moving into a suburban community called John's Creek. White families are leaving because the children of Asian Americans, they perceive to be "too smart" and they don't think they're kids can compete again Asian kids or that the Asian kids are perpetual nerds and don't give their kids a chance to succeed at school. Note that the idea that Asian Americans or Asians in particular have superior intelligence is a classic racist idea - racism implies ideas of superiority or inferiority of a group based on their race. Seeing Asian Americans as smarter than white children means those white parents are being racist against Asian American children and their families.
Being a victim of racism over the dominant groups "positive" perception of your group's intelligence is not necessarily a good thing IMO nor does it impart a sociological privilege in society.
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.
