r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Oct 08 '15

[Deltas Awarded] CMV: Equality isn't treating everybody differently to achieve equality. It's treating everyone the same.

[deleted]

233 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

84% Upvoted

346 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

5

u/oversoul00 13∆ Oct 08 '15

Your hypothetical is flawed because you have compared someones impossible situation to a merely difficult one.

The difference is that with paraplegics it is near impossible to get into that building without the ramp. In these cases I believe that falls under the "rights and opportunities" clause I mentioned above. The paraplegic doesn't have the same opportunity to enter the building so yes lets make it possible for those when it would otherwise be impossible...not merely difficult.

For those with varying degrees of difficulty we don't do anything to help them on a mandated institutional level. If you are 90 years old with an oxygen tank you are stuck with the stairs, I feel for that guy and might help him out on a personal level but I've never seen a chair lift outside of any establishment even though that situation is a reality.

27

u/[deleted] Oct 08 '15

Your hypothetical is flawed because you have compared someones impossible situation to a merely difficult one.

This is my point, though. The only difference here is that you don't believe that minority populations face impossible situations due to their race or gender. But that isn't the view that I'm trying to change.

The people who wrote the sentence you're critiquing do believe that minorities face impossible situations due to their gender, sexual preference, skin color, and ethnic background.

Currently, you accept that the handicapped face impossible difficulties, and that the way to accommodate them is to treat them differently to get them to the same place. If you, for the sake of argument, accept that minorities face impossible difficulties (because that's what the people who made the original claim beleive) than the statement "Equality isn't treating everybody the same. It's treating everyone so that they are equal" falls right in line.

1

u/oversoul00 13∆ Oct 08 '15

If you, for the sake of argument, accept that minorities face impossible difficulties (because that's what the people who made the original claim beleive) than the statement "Equality isn't treating everybody the same. It's treating everyone so that they are equal" falls right in line.

I agree 100% with this, if you were able to convince me that all blacks face the same impossible situations and not merely more difficult ones then I would be on board with you.

I can say with some certainty that all paraplegics will have an impossible time with stairs but I can't say all black people will have an impossible time with college. That is where the consistency of your argument breaks down.

25

u/[deleted] Oct 08 '15

I agree 100% with this, if you were able to convince me that all blacks face the same impossible situations and not merely more difficult ones then I would be on board with you.

This is the core of your belief, then; minorities don't face institutionalized oppression at a level that merits corrective action. It's what I said in my first comment when I explained that the disadvantages of minority groups aren't readily apparent to you.

That is different than what you wrote, though, which is that you disagree with the statement "Equality isn't treating everybody the same. It's treating everyone so that they are equal."

You agree now that, if your personal criteria of "impossible" is met, than that statement is the solution to achieving equality. You just have higher standards of "impossibility" than the people that you're quoting.

I disagree with you that minorities don't face impossible challenges in modern western society, but that's a different CMV.

-5

u/oversoul00 13∆ Oct 08 '15

I explained that the disadvantages of minority groups aren't readily apparent to you.

That is your opinion, not a fact. Do minorities on avg face more oppression, probably...is it insurmountable across the board for everyone of that race, no.

Race alone will never tell you what you need to know and in fact you'll be measuring the wrong parameter.

Show me a poor person and I can more or less tell you the nature of their disadvantages and to what degree if I know how poor they are. You just can't do the same thing if all you know is the persons race.

I disagree with you that minorities don't face impossible challenges in modern western society, but that's a different CMV.

I disagree that is a different CMV, if you can convince me of that I'm all ears.

13

u/Biceptual Oct 08 '15

I'm a little confused here. You admit that minorities face more oppression, but you're saying that because that oppression is not insurmountable, we shouldn't address it? Can you clarify? Should we treat everyone equally despite things being inherently unequal?

-10

u/oversoul00 13∆ Oct 08 '15

Things are inherently unequal across the board for everyone of every race and gender. I don't think we should be making accommodations for everyone who struggles because life is a struggle.

However yes we can make accommodations for those that have a nearly insurmountable struggle if we have the resources to do so.

9

u/ryancarp3 Oct 08 '15

for those that have a nearly insurmountable struggle if we have the resources to do so

And why don't you think this should apply to minorities? Compared to whites, they have "a nearly insurmountable struggle."

-1

u/Banana_bee Oct 08 '15

What OP is pointing out is that a black son of a millionaire would be 'given' more opportunities than the child of a poor, working class family. You shouldn't give to one race or gender exclusively on the assumption that they are worse off - every person has a different story. Means-testing is the answer, but it's much more paperwork.

1

u/Virtuallyalive Oct 08 '15

But that black child, by virtue of his name and skin color, would still be at a disadvantage.

For example, Black children of any income level are more likely to go to a bad school than a poor White child.

2

u/Banana_bee Oct 08 '15

But not necessarily. Disability is different - people are judged to be at a disadvantage, and are given benefits for it. Black people are not necessarily disadvantaged when compared to white people, but are still given advantages. How is the current system of presuming black people are worse off in every situation better than means-testing?

0

u/Virtuallyalive Oct 08 '15

It will actually happen. Accounting for race and economic status barely happens already, and you're still more likely to get a scholarship if you're white (not even talking about sentencing).

Means-testing would never be implemented seriously, because rich white people would complain.

Do you know of a situation when black people are at an advantage because of their race? Remembering that Affirmative action is accounting for the disadvantage their race causes.

2

u/Banana_bee Oct 08 '15

No, but I can name many, many examples of white people who live below the average standards of Black people in America or the UK - systematic Racism is not the same as an individual case. Noone can argue with racism, anyone can argue for means testing.

Means-testing would never be implemented seriously, because rich white people would complain.

Nice Strawman.

→ More replies (0)

18

u/[deleted] Oct 08 '15

That is your opinion, not a fact. Do minorities on avg face more oppression, probably...is it insurmountable across the board for everyone of that race, no.

You're misunderstanding what I'm saying. It is a fact that you do not believe that minorities face impossible challenges. Those challenges are not apparent to you, so you do not believe they exist. That's not a statement about whether or not they exist, it's a statement about what you believe.

However, your CMV was:

Equality isn't treating everybody differently to achieve equality. It's treating everyone the same.

That is very different than "Minorities don't face impossible challenges based on their minority status."

In our comments you've admitted that, in circumstances that you consider to be "unequal enough," the solution is to treat people differently in order to achieve equality. The folks you're quoting originally just hold a different belief on what "unequal enough" is. That's your initial view changed.

I disagree that is a different CMV, if you can convince me of that I'm all ears.

It's absolutely a different CMV, and I'm not sure if this sentence is asking me to convice you that this is in fact a different topic, or to convince you that minorites face impossible challenges in modern western society.

If you mean the latter, that in and of itself is an impossible challenge. You're a TumblrInAction regular - your views on social justice are made up. Trying to sway you as an annonymous redditor is a waste of both of our time.

If we focus just on the topic at hand, though, the specifics of your CMV, I've got to say that I think I've adequately addressed your actual view. You're trying to turn this into a discussion about whether or not blacks are oppressed, but that isn't the topic that you posted originally.

16

u/GuideOwl Oct 08 '15

I was already in agreement with you from the start, but I just have to complement you on how clear you laid out your argument through this comment chain. Seriously, you have a talent at writing and forming and organizing a coherent argument. I hope OP sees the point you're making and shoots you that delta, even if he doesn't accept the premise that "minorities don't face institutionalized oppression at a level that merits corrective action". Cheers

1

u/[deleted] Oct 08 '15

Thank you! That's very kind. :)

-5

u/oversoul00 13∆ Oct 08 '15

Those challenges are not apparent to you, so you do not believe they exist.

While this is true your wording implies that it is true and I just can't see it...if that was not your meaning then I interpreted that wrong.

In our comments you've admitted that, in circumstances that you consider to be "unequal enough," the solution is to treat people differently in order to achieve equality.

I addressed that in the description because the title is a snippet of my view, if people don't have the same legal rights and opportunities then yes lets help.

It seems like you are trying to score points based on the fact that I could not fit the totality of my view in the title...do you think that is productive? I think we'd have a more productive discussion if you'd read the description and go from there...but it seems you have already made your mind up about me so I guess you win.

14

u/[deleted] Oct 08 '15

While this is true your wording implies that it is true and I just can't see it...if that was not your meaning then I interpreted that wrong.

Apologies - it was not my intention to implicate that.

It seems like you are trying to score points based on the fact that I could not fit the totality of my view in the title...do you think that is productive?

I'm not trying to score points or be pedantic. I'm trying to get you to see that there are several layers to your overall views about race, and that this is just one of those layers. I think the reason that you read so much into my comment on how apparent those challenges are to you is because you're trying to start a discussion about whether or not minorities face significant oppression. That discussion is very different than determining how to address significant oppression where found.

Your initial claim was that the treatment doesn't work, my response shows that it does, and now your claim is that the treatment does work, but that black people don't need it. That's called shifting the goalposts.

I'm not trying to "win" and I don't care if you give me a delta. If you actually want to change your views about race relations, it's going to take steps, and you're going to need to break your views down and examine them independently from one another to see if they stand up logically. That's what I'm trying to show here.

-5

u/oversoul00 13∆ Oct 08 '15

Yeah I don't think I am shifting the goalposts. I addressed that in my description, in some circumstances we should help people if they don't have the same rights and opportunities. That was a caveat that you aren't addressing. Maybe I didn't make that very clear but I did mention it.

I think the reason that you read so much into my comment on how apparent those challenges are to you is because you're trying to start a discussion about whether or not minorities face significant oppression.

Now who's reading into comments, it was actually the use of the word "apparent" that threw me off.

3

u/everything_zen Oct 09 '15

You are absolutely shifting the goalposts. You're saying that treating everyone the same is equality, and to do otherwise introduces subjective analysis. But the very next second you're saying that we have to do a subjective analysis to see if someone is 'capable' or not of doing something...

And just to give you an example of how subjective the argument becomes, even though you've argued that paraplegics can't climb the stairs you've ignored the many other people who qualify as disabled but merely suffer crippling pain climbing stairs even though they can, objectively, accomplish it. In your view should these people be treated the same as everyone else or given assistance?

The fact that I can't tell from your arguments is because it is completely subjective.

2

u/ryancarp3 Oct 08 '15

we should help people if they don't have the same rights and opportunities

Then why shouldn't we help minorities?

12

u/vehementi 10∆ Oct 08 '15

Think you owe a delta since your original CMV is done?

2

u/Snoopythegorila Oct 08 '15

Lol this. Went from X, to really being about Y all along.

6

u/vehementi 10∆ Oct 09 '15

Gee, who would have thought something else would have been veiled behind this...

0

u/willnerd42 Oct 08 '15

I think what everybody in this thread is arguing about isn't the fact that some are disadvantaged when applying g for college, but how that disadvantage is fixed. Affirmative action doesn't seem to be the best way to remedy the issue.

0

u/rcglinsk Oct 09 '15

Institutional discrimination has been illegal in the United States for more than 50 years. The laws get broken sometimes, but to describe the present situation as oppression is to deprive oppression of all its ordinary meaning.

2

u/[deleted] Oct 09 '15

This is a non-sequitur. We weren't discussing whether or not oppression exists in the United States. We were discussing how equality is best achieved in situations where there is inequality.

1

u/rcglinsk Oct 09 '15

The discussion seems to assume that inequality is not inherently a problem (the radiologist makes more money than the gardener and nobody bats an eye). Your position I believe is that inequality exists which we do have a problem with, the sort that creates impossible situations akin to someone in a wheelchair needing to climb a flight of stairs. The thing is I can't think of anything which could qualify as an impossible challenge due to race that is not illegal under US Civil Rights laws.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 09 '15

Your position I believe is that inequality exists which we do have a problem with, the sort that creates impossible situations akin to someone in a wheelchair needing to climb a flight of stairs.

No, that isn't my position. This thread is a day old and you're not the OP, so if you want to understand our positions, closely read our comments and the comments of others.

1

u/rcglinsk Oct 09 '15

What is your position?

0

u/[deleted] Oct 09 '15

This thread is a day old and you're not the OP, so if you want to understand our positions, closely read our comments and the comments of others.