Jump to content
Accelerated Evolution

Recommended Posts

What are your thoughts on the woman most likely to be the next member of SCOTUS?

Personally, I'm depressed that the whole thing stems so much from race. I don't know much about her as a judge, but I know I don't like that quote that's been thrown around; I dislike it almost as much as I dislike the fact that it's the main debate about her nomination

Justice O’Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice O’Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.

Now, I know people are talking about how racist it is, but I have another problem. Why does there need to be a universal definition of wise for the Justice O'Connor quote to hold? As long as the same definition of wise is used in both cases, as it clearly is meant to be, then no universal definition is necessary. In fact, one could argue that the individual word there ("wise") is unimportant; the statement gets to a meaning like, a man and a woman who both possess similar qualities relevant to their role as justices will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. Stated one other way, gender is not a quality that should affect how justices find in their cases. I'm not sure I agree with her logic, and that frightens me

Also, is there any way to get the full text of that speech without the NYTimes membership?

Share this post


Link to post

Wait? What?

She said this

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,”

And I think that it is an entirely racist remark and had a white male said it he would have probably been immediately disregarded and tossed to the side to make an example of him.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm still having trouble parsing that sentence. Is she saying I'm going to make a worse vacuum purchase?

+1 Racism points

Seriously though, that sentence is smack dab right in between completely obvious statement and nonsensical racist bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post

Token pick, did anyone really expect less. She seems to probably be qualified and experienced enough. Has a few troubling issues which she needs to try and get better addressed though. Such as the shameful and quite offensive comments about race. Or how she and said views fit into the much, much more disturbing and revolting issue of Obama's "empathy" requirement. But overall, i'd have to say that the jury is still out.

Share this post


Link to post

did you guys ever think that by wise latina woman, she meant herself, or some one like her

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Nothing she said is racist, just because she mentions race, doesnt mean anything. Im really sick of people immediately busting a nut over anything that seems even slightly rascist.

If you don't want racism to be a problem, stop caring so much about what people SAY and care more about WHAT PEOPLE DO.

seriously.

Share this post


Link to post

did you guys ever think that by wise latina woman, she meant herself, or some one like her

Nothing she said is racist, just because she mentions race, doesnt mean anything. Im really sick of people immediately busting a nut over anything that seems even slightly rascist.

If you don't want racism to be a problem, stop caring so much about what people SAY and care more about WHAT PEOPLE DO.

seriously.

So if it was a white male who said a white man could do a better job then a black female that wouldn't be racist?

Share this post


Link to post

So if it was a white male who said a white man could do a better job then a black female that wouldn't be racist?

just because she makes racial distinctions, it still has nothing to do with superiority, not once does she state any prejudice or racial opinion, she only cites real world examples based on reality, and all of this is based in context.

Share this post


Link to post

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/polit...nted=1&_r=2

Upon reading the whole speech I feel that this is, once again, our elected officials taking quotes way out of context for political gain while ignoring more pressing issues at hand.

It is pretty inconsequential. That doesn't mean I agree with it.

she mis-spoke just a little bit, everyone is blowing this way out of proportion.

mis-spoke? What did she mean to say, then?

Token pick, did anyone really expect less. She seems to probably be qualified and experienced enough. Has a few troubling issues which she needs to try and get better addressed though. Such as the shameful and quite offensive comments about race. Or how she and said views fit into the much, much more disturbing and revolting issue of Obama's "empathy" requirement. But overall, i'd have to say that the jury is still out.

Did anyone expect less? No. On the whole she probably will be a decent SCJ

just because she makes racial distinctions, it still has nothing to do with superiority, not once does she state any prejudice or racial opinion, she only cites real world examples based on reality, and all of this is based in context.

she clearly and distinctly uses the word "better." That is definitely a judgment of superiority.

In the end, I think she'll probably be an acceptable Justice, but to be honest I find the logical fallacies in that speech to be more offensive than her statement, which I simply find mildly disconcerting.

Share this post


Link to post

I think she meant that a Latino woman brings a complex experience to the table by virtue of her being female and not white, as opposed to the usual white male we generally get in pretty much all positions of authority. Notice that she says "white male"; she's not talking about white people period, she's talking about white men, the most privileged demographic in America, the ones that can't bring the experience of being less fortunate to the table. She provides a new perspective that a white male can't. I don't think it's racist, I think she said it in an akward way that has been misconstrued, and if she meant what I think she meant, then I agree.

Share this post


Link to post

I think she meant that a Latino woman brings a complex experience to the table by virtue of her being female and not white, as opposed to the usual white male we generally get in pretty much all positions of authority. Notice that she says "white male"; she's not talking about white people period, she's talking about white men, the most privileged demographic in America, the ones that can't bring the experience of being less fortunate to the table. She provides a new perspective that a white male can't. I don't think it's racist, I think she said it in an akward way that has been misconstrued, and if she meant what I think she meant, then I agree.

Faulty, I think it is quite a bold statement to say that white men as you put it "can't bring the experience of being less fortunate". I know plenty of less fortunate white people, that's a racist remark and you are a white male!

And it isn't being misconstrued, you are the one reading into it. Hence the reason you keep using the words "I think she meant", or "if she meant", can't you also agree with the fact that if a white male also made this "slip up" which it REALLY could have been that he would have been thrown to the dogs?

Granted there will always be a swing back effect, since white men generally suppressed non whites for so many years this was bound to happen. Except all it does is perpetuate stereotypes.

Share this post


Link to post

she clearly and distinctly uses the word "better." That is definitely a judgment of superiority.

:huh:

Oh so now anytime an adjective is used in context with race its racist. shes referring to experience, last time I checked that has nothing to do with race. she doesn't infer that latinas generally have better and richer experiences because they are latina.

why does everyone on AE throw around accusations of racism anytime some one makes a distinction of difference.

I'm done with this thread as it is impossible to argue anything with people that are beating a dead horse/quote with the racism stick.

Share this post


Link to post

I think she meant that a Latino woman brings a complex experience to the table by virtue of her being female and not white, as opposed to the usual white male we generally get in pretty much all positions of authority. Notice that she says "white male"; she's not talking about white people period, she's talking about white men, the most privileged demographic in America, the ones that can't bring the experience of being less fortunate to the table. She provides a new perspective that a white male can't. I don't think it's racist, I think she said it in an akward way that has been misconstrued, and if she meant what I think she meant, then I agree.

Gummy touched on this, but here's my take:

the ones that can't bring the experience of being less fortunate to the table.

I have a friend who happens to be a white male. He sometimes refers to himself as not being a functional human being because of his health problems. He cannot return home because the air quality is so poor he will be in the hospital within 24 hours. His boyfriend was somewhat mad at him when he took a cross country flight, because he easily could have died. He cannot afford health insurance and thus cannot afford treatment that might prolong his life (it might not, one of the possible side effects was listed as "death"). I submit that while there are less fortunate people in other categories, that man, despite being a white male, is less fortunate than 90% of any demographic. White males do not have the experiences of being female or non-white, that is obvious, but to say that they are incapable of experiencing hardship or lack of fortune is wrong.

Also, "if she meant what I think she meant" is something one shouldn't have to say about a judge's words. This wasn't a decision, but she needs to be careful with her words when it matters.

:huh:

Oh so now anytime an adjective is used in context with race its racist. shes referring to experience, last time I checked that has nothing to do with race. she doesn't infer that latinas generally have better and richer experiences because they are latina.

why does everyone on AE throw around accusations of racism anytime some one makes a distinction of difference.

I'm done with this thread as it is impossible to argue anything with people that are beating a dead horse/quote with the racism stick.

anytime someone cites race as a reason for superiority it is racist, yes. I see no reasonable interpretation other than that her hope is that by virtue of being a latina woman, the latina woman will make superior judgements. That is superiority by virtue of race, and I know of no better word for that than racism.

Share this post


Link to post

It is ridiculous to appoint somebody to promote diversity. The job should go to the best qualified rather than it be about appeasing everybody's desires to make everyone else feel like they are equals. Racism isn't really a huge issue now, this whole thing about pushing equality and shit is just promoting discrimination in other ways. Darwinism should play a role in how society works on an individual basis. The strong survive and get what they work for while the others have to deal with taking lower positions. Nothing to do with race or anything else....

And as for the white male never experiencing any hardships.... FUCK THAT! There are people of all ethnicities who experience poverty and some of the more horrible things in life. I just have to say this YOU WORK FOR WHAT YOU GET, DON'T ASK FOR HANDOUTS OR PLAY A FUCKING CARD!

Share this post


Link to post

They're talking about privilege, guys. White privilege. Look it up.

All white people have varying amounts of white privilege. However, class privilege is, of course, more important. What she didn't do was make a class distinction; but everyone hates socialists so that'd probably have backfired more.

Anyway, it is a little racist. But not extremely so. She phrased it badly.

Share this post


Link to post

They're talking about privilege, guys. White privilege. Look it up.

All white people have varying amounts of white privilege. However, class privilege is, of course, more important. What she didn't do was make a class distinction; but everyone hates socialists so that'd probably have backfired more.

Anyway, it is a little racist. But not extremely so. She phrased it badly.

Sure she was. I understand that. That does not make her statement not a statement that she is superior by virtue of her race. Until you tell me how that interpretation is wrong, I will consider her statement racist. Like I said that's not my biggest concern, but it is a point that I find valid.

As I said, the fact that one is white/male/[insert privilege here] does not mean that one cannot experience hardship. And if anyone wants to use white privilege to make a judgement that automatically makes one group superior to another it is racist; the person making that judgement needs to either accept the racism and defend their position as such or back down.

As a final note, there's little more entertaining than two groups debating who has it worse, or whose lack of privilege is more important. not that I'm necessarily disagreeing with your statement about class, I'm just saying that in my experience those discussions tend to be none too productive, and unless I want a flame war I stay out.

Share this post


Link to post

Help me out here.

this is the same woman who made it this huge deal about a couple black guys not getting into the fire department because they failed the state exam right? Didn't she or they say that the test was biased or something, that race was involved?

Share this post


Link to post

Help me out here.

this is the same woman who made it this huge deal about a couple black guys not getting into the fire department because they failed the state exam right? Didn't she or they say that the test was biased or something, that race was involved?

She wanted the test results to get thrown out because of race. This just because in that year of testing no blacks qualified, though they had in previous years. Sotomayor was on the side of the City of New Haven having the right to throw out test results because of race. It went to supreme court and ruled in the favor that race would not dictate any special treatment regarding tests. Therefor Sotomayor's favor was overruled.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, that was a big subject with most of my teachers. They didn't do good on the test, not because the questions were oriented towards a certain race...

they did bad, because they didn't fucking study.

their fault, not the test creators....end of debate.

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...