Earlier quoted context omitted.
Advocating for the condemnation of casteism is only anti-India if you think casteism is an essential property of India that cannot and should not be changed. Do you think casteism is an essential property of India that should not be changed, throwaway_1928?
India itself condemns casteism by, among other things, granting 60% job reservations ("affirmative action") to its 'lower' castes. Does the US condemn the mass murder of and continent-sized land theft from Native Americans and the mass kidnapping and centuries-long enslavement of Africans by granting them 60% of all jobs at every level of government?
Google cancelled a talk on caste bias
911–920 of 1001 posts
Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias
#912Earlier quoted context omitted.
anti-India? Do you mean anti-highest-Indian-caste or something? both the OP and your citation are her complaining about a tech CEO being Brahmin and avoiding the caste conversation...
Why is the Indian American CEO obligated to discuss caste? Must the Jewish founders of the FAANG companies share their views on the Israel-Palestine conflict?
Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias
#913Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's touches of that elsewhere too (hiding race or ethnicity with a name change.) I have an extremely unusual surname in Canada, and most North Americans don't recognize it as European in origin, which has led to assumptions in the past. My grandfather said he considered changing it to something English in the 50s, but ultimately he kept it. I know that, at least historically, some Christian Arabs, Jewish people,…
I used to wonder if the name Yingling was Asian, but it turns out to be the same as Yuengling the beer, which is an odd but phonetically correct rendering of Jungling with the umlaut. ("Youngling")
Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias
#914Earlier quoted context omitted.
This Soundarajan is a known anti-India baiter. She also trolled Twitter and its CEO for his caste [1]. Google did the right thing by keeping her out. [1] https://twitter.com/dalitdiva/status/1465358123640655875
anti-India? Do you mean anti-highest-Indian-caste or something? both the OP and your citation are her complaining about a tech CEO being Brahmin and avoiding the caste conversation...
Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias
#915Earlier quoted context omitted.
My advice is to use your commonsense. Almost all of what you have seen/experienced can be explained by one Human Animal trying to "eat" another within our Cultural/Social frameworks using whatever means is available at hand. Thus you can have Nepotism, Favouritism, Spitefulness, Back-stabbing, Victim role-playing etc. You have to figure it out based on the person and the context. Don't jump to preconceived notions li…
>by one Human Animal trying to "eat" another within .... This sums up your world view. I am sitting here thinking we are all debating with someone who wants to improve society for all humans...
Reminds me of one of my favourite passages from The Sea-Wolf by Jack London;
“Do you know, I sometimes catch myself wishing that I, too, were blind to the facts of life and only knew its fancies and illusions. They’re wrong, all wrong, of course, and contrary to reason; but in the face of them my reason tells me, wrong and most wrong, that to dream and live illusions gives greater delight. And after all, delight is the wage for living. Without delight, living is a worthless act. To labour at living and be unpaid is worse than to be dead. He who delights the most lives the most, and your dreams and unrealities are less disturbing to you and more gratifying than are my facts to me.”
He shook his head slowly, pondering.
“I often doubt, I often doubt, the worthwhileness of reason. Dreams must be more substantial and satisfying. Emotional delight is more filling and lasting than intellectual delight; and, besides, you pay for your moments of intellectual delight by having the blues. Emotional delight is followed by no more than jaded senses which speedily recuperate. I envy you, I envy you.”
He stopped abruptly, and then on his lips formed one of his strange quizzical smiles, as he added:
“It’s from my brain I envy you, take notice, and not from my heart. My reason dictates it. The envy is an intellectual product. I am like a sober man looking upon drunken men, and, greatly weary, wishing he, too, were drunk.”
“Or like a wise man looking upon fools and wishing he, too, were a fool,” I laughed.
“Quite so,” he said. “You are a blessed, bankrupt pair of fools. You have no facts in your pocketbook.”
“Yet we spend as freely as you,” was Maud Brewster’s contribution.
“More freely, because it costs you nothing.”
“And because we draw upon eternity,” she retorted.
“Whether you do or think you do, it’s the same thing. You spend what you haven’t got, and in return you get greater value from spending what you haven’t got than I get from spending what I have got, and what I have sweated to get.”
Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias
#916Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your write-up is quite simplistic and hence is very much open to misinterpretation by non-Indians. I highly suggest that you consult the works of Patrick Olivelle and Susan Bayly to get at the real History of "Caste" (Varna vs. Jati etc.). That way you can present what is actually stated in the Hindu Scriptures vs. Their misinterpretation and later practice within Indian Society. Excerpt from https://en.wikipedia.org…
>That way you can present what is actually stated in the Hindu Scriptures vs. Their misinterpretation and later practice within Indian Society. Whether or not Hindu scriptures really support these practices is a matter for believers, the concern here is how it's actually practiced in the real world and the resulting discrimination harming actual people.
That's why i said in another comment that it makes sense to discuss this in the Indian Workplace more than the American Workplace.
Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias
#917Earlier quoted context omitted.
About education, it’s a hard choice. option 1:No affirmative action: 50% of white are legacy and all other student art there on merits option 2: affirmative action: 100% of white students are legacy 0% are on merits and 50% of all other race are accepted because of merit I picked some random number for option 2 but i assume you see the problem.
The problem here is that you think you can come to a reasonable conclusion without actual numbers AFTER actual numbers were given clearly. The current situation is that we have massive affirmative action for white people and no plans on getting rid of it.
If this is done you cannot say the university are racist anymore.
If they decide to do this, there will be a lot more asian at Ivy league university because on average they score much better.
As someone who is not asian I would still be 100% OK with this because this would be they only accept base on merit.
But people will still complain there is an equal proportion of student from each race.
Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias
#918Earlier quoted context omitted.
you just confirmed my assumption, by saying “it will on average net out”. I agree that “on average” the white population will still not be disadvantaged. But it’s still morally wrong because for one particular individual it would not. It the same thing as laws making it illegal to own a pit bull dogs in some city. Maybe it’s true the majority of pitbull are dangerous! but is it still fair to the pitbull owner that ha…
It doesn't merely average out in terms of population it averages out even in the case of individuals because a single individual in the course of putting out many job applications will deal with far more employers who will give them preference because they are white than those that will give a minority preference.
So your probability of getting hired will become less than a minority.
Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias
#919Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How do you know it is “cultural bias” Because gender disparities are changing every year (very quickly in historical terms), and because they are different from country to country, that rules out the possibility that the cause has anything to do with intrinsic differences between men and women, it disproves the idea that there’s a “natural disposition” that is purely based on sex, at least as the primary reason for…
> because they are different from country to country, that rules out the possibility that the cause has anything to do with intrinsic differences between men and women, it disproves the idea that there’s a “natural disposition” that is purely based on sex, at least as the primary reason for the distribution today. There is a broad trend that as women are more empowered, they are less likely to go into STEM: https://w…
I’m rather skeptical that it’s truly “broad” in historical terms, it’s still changing much too fast. I’m skeptical that trend for 1 or 2 decades is likely to continue and not change direction again, since it’s already changed direction in the last century. Women going into STEM went way up from the 40s to the 80s. In computer science it’s gone down since the 80s in the US, while in India it’s continued going up, and even exceeded 50% one or two years. The numbers in the US vary wildly from field to field, it’s different in CS than it is in biology or math. All of this is further undeniable proof that today’s causes are primarily social and not sex based.
The deeper problem with this article is that it flirts with some vague concept of different interests between men and women without addressing the well known fact that social norms influence interests. You simply cannot separate attitudes from cultural biases, it’s not possible, and it’s either ignorant or willfully misleading to suggest otherwise.
Re: Google cancelled a talk on caste bias
#920Earlier quoted context omitted.
>That way you can present what is actually stated in the Hindu Scriptures vs. Their misinterpretation and later practice within Indian Society. Whether or not Hindu scriptures really support these practices is a matter for believers, the concern here is how it's actually practiced in the real world and the resulting discrimination harming actual people.
Agreed. That's why i said in another comment that it makes sense to discuss this in the Indian Workplace more than the American Workplace .
The issue is that Indian (or Indian-American) workers are bringing these prejudices into American workplaces. People in Indian workplaces know about these issues, non-Indians in American workplaces very likely don't, which allows the discrimination to go unchecked.