Do you think there is strength in diversity and something that should be sought

[bshole]

I would really like to hear you actually attempt to explain the massive disparity in the racial makeup of quarterbacks without racism. Are white people just more capable quarterbacks? Is it an incredible feat of probability? What?

My impression of the NFL is that the only thing that matters is winning. The ONLY thing that matters. It is the most brutal meritocracy in America. Non-performance is acted upon almost immediately.

Between 12-15% of NFL starting quarterbacks are black. 12% of the American population is black. That is about as perfect of a representation as you can get. In general, many black quarterbacks in college are not pocket quarterbacks. Pocket quarterbacks are the gold standard in the NFL and are valued much more highly than super athletic quarterbacks with just average pocket skills. Super athletic quarterbacks tend to get crippled with injuries after a couple years.

 

[realibrad]

Not all men. Some men. Don't go all absolutist on me.

Then Jesus, say people sometimes need to be kept away from people. To say men are animals sure seems like an absolute statement.

 

[fskimospy]

Not seeing your point here. Why do you think women choose secretarial work much more often then men do?

Social pressures and sexism, not due to some innate preference to taking notes. I think the idea that secretaries are overwhelmingly female as a result of some sort of woman's love for secretarial work is a ridiculous idea. I mean... really? You really think women just looooove them some menial office work instead of say, being the CEO?

Are blacks more capable running backs and wide receivers? What about defensive linemen?

Do you really think that NFL coaches and managers conspire to keep blacks out of the QB position? Or is it more likely that they hire the best they can and let the racial chips fall where they may? Seriously, which do you think is more likely?

The most likely answer is that they are unconsciously biased against black people. Alternatively, please provide me an explanation that doesn't include race as to why 'the best they can find' is so overwhelmingly white as compared to other positions and has been for the entire history of the NFL?

Less disparate? Blacks make of 13% of the US population but 16% of starting NFL quarterbacks, 22% of NFL coaches, and 70% of NFL players overall. Jesus Christ. The notion that it's all about race is ridiculous.

Two things:

1) This is a very recent development, but one that strongly helps my point that this is racism based. Before recent times those numbers were close to zero. This is actually a great test of your question, if coaches and owners were always just hiring the best people they could did black people suddenly become WAY BETTER at coaching and quarterbacking?

2) You did not think this through. The fact that 70% of NFL players are black and only 16% of quarterbacks are black is a massive, massive disparity. What the US population is as a whole is irrelevant as we're looking at NFL players.

So I will ask you again, can you explain to me what factors other than race explain the large disparity between NFL players as a whole and quarterbacks? Are white people inherently better at being quarterbacks? Is it just dumb luck? Why are they overwhelmingly white? Also to reiterate my question from point #1, why did they used to have basically no black quarterbacks or coaches until recently if not due to racism? Did black people suddenly get better?

And deflections? Most of my argument here has been either a direct answer to your question (people go where their interests lie) or incredulity that you'll countenance no other answer than racism.

No, they have all been deflections. I mean look above: you didn't substantively answer a single one of my questions, there was just more deflecting. I'm perfectly willing to accept answers other than racism but you refuse to provide them. So to repeat: please provide me with a non-race based reason why quarterbacks are so disproportionately white.

I'm fine with discriminating against anyone when done for practical and defensible reasons, such as in my earlier example.

Odd, considering that diversity is shown to improve corporate performance that seems to be a perfectly practical and defensible reason, no? With that in mind I imagine you no longer have an issue with diversity initiatives? (let me guess: you don't.) If that's not a defensible reason, why?

You asked that earlier? I must've missed it.

If you're asking to identify general areas in which racism is predominant, no I can't, because I don't believe it is. Show me an example, and tell me why it's clearly due to racism, and not just the natural effects of free people freely choosing the occupations that interest them.

You don't think there is a single major issue of disadvantage for minorities in the entire United States that is primarily due to racism? Not one? You simply cannot be serious. I'm not going to continue to come up with new examples for you to declare 'not racism' as if you can't even think of a single, solitary area of American life that is a result of racism on your own then your mind is so completely closed on this issue that you are beyond reasoning with.

I sincerely hope you are able to take a step back and think critically as to why you came to that conclusion.

 

[realibrad]

My impression of the NFL is that the only thing that matters is winning. The ONLY thing that matters. It is the most brutal meritocracy in America. Non-performance is acted upon almost immediately.

Between 12-15% of NFL starting quarterbacks are black. 12% of the American population is black. That is about as perfect of a representation as you can get. In general, many black quarterbacks in college are not pocket quarterbacks. Pocket quarterbacks are the gold standard in the NFL and are valued much more highly than super athletic quarterbacks with just average pocket skills. Super athletic quarterbacks tend to get crippled with injuries after a couple years.

I will say this... politics does play a role even in the NFL. Kap is not a top 10, but he should have a job somewhere.

 

[Atreus21]

Then Jesus, say people sometimes need to be kept away from people. To say men are animals sure seems like an absolute statement.

The male sexual instinct, unrestrained, will induce each of us to populate a village. The same can't be said of women. I think that's all he's saying.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Some women are equally evil. I haven't run across them using their power/position for sex (not saying it doesn't happen but I've never encountered it) but I've seen some very slimy stuff from women before, both in a business context as well as social. Men are pigs and women are also.

 

[pcgeek11]

Yep, because discriminating against bigots is bigoted.

I was referencing the "whitey". All white people are not racist as you implied in your bigoted remark.

 

[realibrad]

The male sexual instinct, unrestrained, will induce each of us to populate a village. The same can't be said of women. I think that's all he's saying.

Maybe not rape, but I would say any person unrestrained will do bad things. I would also add that women do a lot of molestation of children.

 

[fskimospy]

My impression of the NFL is that the only thing that matters is winning. The ONLY thing that matters. It is the most brutal meritocracy in America. Non-performance is acted upon almost immediately.

Really. Then why were there no black quarterbacks or coaches for years? Did black people suddenly get better at coaching and quarterbacking sometime in the 90's?

Between 12-15% of NFL starting quarterbacks are black. 12% of the American population is black. That is about as perfect of a representation as you can get.

That's actually an insanely bad representation as a far greater percentage of professional athletes, NFL players in particular, are black. It makes zero sense to use the entirety of America as a denominator when talking about professional athletes. When you use professional athletes as the denominator (as you should), the disparity is enormous.

In general, many black quarterbacks in college are not pocket quarterbacks. Pocket quarterbacks are the gold standard in the NFL and are valued much more highly than super athletic quarterbacks with just average pocket skills. Super athletic quarterbacks tend to get crippled with injuries after a couple years.

Thank you for proving the point I was trying to get at. The idea that black quarterbacks are not or can't be pocket passers is exactly the sort of subconscious, racist myth that leads to the sort of disproportional representation. Are you saying black people are inherently worse at reading defenses? That they have lesser arm strength? That they are less accurate? I imagine you don't think any of those things. So why is it that black people are 'running, athletic' quarterbacks and white quarterbacks are calculating pocket passers? Stereotypes about what races are good at what, of course.

 

[fskimospy]

If a woman is dead set on choosing an occupation that will put her in harm's way unnecessarily, there's good reason to deny it to her. Same goes for men.

If I were hiring for the position of admin assistant to Harvey Weinstein, I'd feel it incumbent upon me to make sure I hire a man or very ugly old lady.

So to be clear you are perfectly fine with denying gainful employment to women because you feel a need to protect them from the unprofessional and/or illegal behavior of their male coworkers.

Do you realize how fucked up that is?

 

[woolfe9998]

Not seeing your point here. Why do you think women choose secretarial work much more often then men do?



Are blacks more capable running backs and wide receivers? What about defensive linemen?

Do you really think that NFL coaches and managers conspire to keep blacks out of the QB position? Or is it more likely that they hire the best they can and let the racial chips fall where they may? Seriously, which do you think is more likely?



Less disparate? Blacks make of 13% of the US population but 16% of starting NFL quarterbacks, 22% of NFL coaches, and 70% of NFL players overall. Jesus Christ. The notion that it's all about race is ridiculous.

And deflections? Most of my argument here has been either a direct answer to your question (people go where their interests lie) or incredulity that you'll countenance no other answer than racism.



I'm fine with discriminating against anyone when done for practical and defensible reasons, such as in my earlier example.



You asked that earlier? I must've missed it.

If you're asking to identify general areas in which racism is predominant, no I can't, because I don't believe it is. Show me an example, and tell me why it's clearly due to racism, and not just the natural effects of free people freely choosing the occupations that interest them.

I know I'm insinuating myself into this discussion, but I think you and he may be thinking of different things when you're talking about "racism." I actually don't know precisely what he means by it, but I'll tell you what I think it means in the context of QB's versus other positions in football, or coaching vs. playing. It isn't mainly about discrimination at the hiring level. I agree if the black guy who tries out for QB in high school is the best candidate for the position, the team will probably take him because they want to win. So the reason must be that fewer blacks are trying out for the position. But this is where you have a problem, because you have no explanation for that. Do you honestly think that black people are somehow genetically pre-disposed to be less interested in playing QB than, say RB or WR?

Society reinforces stereotypes. One of the most common, which dates back literally hundreds of years, is that black people are stronger and faster, but less intelligent, than white people. To deny that this stereotype still exists in society would be absurd. But this is the key point: we're all affected by these messages because we all live in the same culture. Black people are affected as well. It's quite probably why so many black people don't even bother to think about certain intellectually based career paths from very early on, and see themselves as either athletes, musicians, or drug dealers. If society keeps telling you that you're only good for certain things, chances are that on some level you're going to believe it. It's hard to conceive of any reason that black players are somehow less interested in playing the most glamorous and well paid position in the game.

BTW, these stereotypes probably work both ways. They may also explain why fewer white players will try out for positions like RB or WR.

 

[Paladin3]

Then Jesus, say people sometimes need to be kept away from people. To say men are animals sure seems like an absolute statement.

"You are ignoring human nature if you don't think something like this, in at least some circumstances, could cause a lot of trouble. We sometimes separate men and women in extreme situations, mostly because men are animals, not because women are incompetent."

Sorry, I could have said "some men are animals" and "some women are incompetent", but I though the point of my comment was clear without it.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Do you think there is strength in diversity and something that should be sought

Yes, as history shows, there is and it should

 

[urvile]

To answer your question, I think women are overrepresented as secretaries because they prefer it much more than men d

I tend to agree. I think there are a number of factors. Societal being one, the capability of the person being another and their drive and ambition as well.

I think the male equivalent would be a labourer on a construction site. Both are unskilled to semi skilled positions that don't pay a lot, don't really require qualifications and will attract a certain type of person.

Now this is going to make me sound self important....... I am a fucking smart guy. However I have worked with people that are smarter than I am and I was OK with that. Do you know what I mean?

 

[Paladin3]

Maybe not rape, but I would say any person unrestrained will do bad things. I would also add that women do a lot of molestation of children.

For many the threat of punishment is all that keeps them lawful. It's the barbarian in us fighting with our civilized training. Many have a self-inflicted moral code to some degree, but the fear of god(s) and/or authority is all that keeps some from abusing others. These people need the rules spelled out in bold letters and come in all genders.

 

[Atreus21]

Social pressures and sexism, not due to some innate preference to taking notes. I think the idea that secretaries are overwhelmingly female as a result of some sort of woman's love for secretarial work is a ridiculous idea. I mean... really? You really think women just looooove them some menial office work instead of say, being the CEO?

So you think the only possible answer is sexism, correct?

The most likely answer is that they are unconsciously biased against black people.

Nonsense. The most likely answer is that these guys care nothing about skin color and everything about winning games.

Alternatively, please provide me an explanation that doesn't include race as to why 'the best they can find' is so overwhelmingly white as compared to other positions and has been for the entire history of the NFL?

1. Because blacks make up a smaller portion of the applicant pool because:
a. Blacks are more interested in other positions versus whites, and
b. Because blacks represent a smaller portion of the US population.

That seems to me much more sensible then ascribing it to racism.

And again, why does this logic not apply to wide receivers, running backs, and defensive linemen? Do you think that there are lines of rejected white applicants for these positions because of coaches wanting to keep blacks where they belong? This is beginning to devolve into conspiracy-mongering.

1) This is a very recent development, but one that strongly helps my point that this is racism based. Before recent times those numbers were close to zero. This is actually a great test of your question, if coaches and owners were always just hiring the best people they could did black people suddenly become WAY BETTER at coaching and quarterbacking?

If NFL hiring practices were racially-motivated 30 or so years ago then that's reprehensible. We're talking about the NFL as it is currently.

2) You did not think this through. The fact that 70% of NFL players are black and only 16% of quarterbacks are black is a massive, massive disparity. What the US population is as a whole is irrelevant as we're looking at NFL players.

Whereas whites make up 30% of NFL players and 0% of cornerbacks. Seriously, there's not a single one. Is that also due to racism?

So I will ask you again, can you explain to me what factors other than race explain the large disparity between NFL players as a whole and quarterbacks? Are white people inherently better at being quarterbacks? Is it just dumb luck? Why are they overwhelmingly white? Also to reiterate my question from point #1, why did they used to have basically no black quarterbacks or coaches until recently if not due to racism? Did black people suddenly get better?

I answered #1 above, as well as the whole of this question in the bolded above.

And I'll ask you the same question that you haven't yet answered directly. Are blacks just intrinsically better at running backs, wide receivers, and defensive linemen?

No, they have all been deflections. I mean look above: you didn't substantively answer a single one of my questions, there was just more deflecting.

Uh, I've directly answered every one of your questions.

I'm perfectly willing to accept answers other than racism but you refuse to provide them. So to repeat: please provide me with a non-race based reason why quarterbacks are so disproportionately white.

See bolded above.

Odd, considering that diversity is shown to improve corporate performance that seems to be a perfectly practical and defensible reason, no? With that in mind I imagine you no longer have an issue with diversity initiatives? (let me guess: you don't.) If that's not a defensible reason, why?

You think that introducing diversity by having a young attractive woman brought into an isolated environment comprised entirely of rough men is an "improvement in corporate performance"? I don't.

You don't think there is a single major issue of disadvantage for minorities in the entire United States that is primarily due to racism? Not one? You simply cannot be serious.

Well, give me an example, and I'll tell you what I think. The NFL's hiring practices are not racist, and I think most reasonable people agree with that.

Furthermore, getting back to the point before this silly diversion, perfectly non-racist entities may have wildly disparate racial makeups having done nothing but hire people on the merits. You can't ascribe primarily racist motives to racial disparities, because people are not neatly categorized machines. Their interests vary. All blacks don't like football, all women don't like nursing, and some men like ballet. People are not reducible to their race, sex, or any other superficiality.

 

[fskimospy]

So you think the only possible answer is sexism, correct?

Of course not, what gave you such a ridiculous idea? It would be insane to think that sexism isn’t part of it though.

Nonsense. The most likely answer is that these guys care nothing about skin color and everything about winning games.

Of course they do. Not sure what your point is here.

1. Because blacks make up a smaller portion of the applicant pool because:
a. Blacks are more interested in other positions versus whites, and
b. Because blacks represent a smaller portion of the US population.

That seems to me much more sensible then ascribing it to racism.

1) Now what on earth would make black people less interested in the position where you make the most money, face fewer long term injuries, and are the most famous? Are you saying there’s something inherent in black people that makes them dislike fame, money, and health? If not, what’s the reason? (Hint: racial stereotypes)

2) Black people represent a very large proportion of the professional athlete population however, which is the pool from which all quarterbacks are drawn. This further proves my point.

And again, why does this logic not apply to wide receivers, running backs, and defensive linemen? Do you think that there are lines of rejected white applicants for these positions because of coaches wanting to keep blacks where they belong? This is beginning to devolve into conspiracy-mongering.

I think woolfe is right that you fundamentally misunderstand the conversation. This isn’t about people evilly twirling their mustaches to keep black people in their place, it’s about endemic racism in our society that leads to these outcomes.

If NFL hiring practices were racially-motivated 30 or so years ago then that's reprehensible. We're talking about the NFL as it is currently.

So to be clear when there were virtually no black quarterbacks that was racism but now that they are just severely under-represented it’s a meritocracy? Seriously?

Whereas whites make up 30% of NFL players and 0% of cornerbacks. Seriously, there's not a single one. Is that also due to racism?

In part almost certainly. See above.

I answered #1 above, as well as the whole of this question in the bolded above.

And I'll ask you the same question that you haven't yet answered directly. Are blacks just intrinsically better at running backs, wide receivers, and defensive linemen?

Answered above as well.

Uh, I've directly answered every one of your questions.

You really, really haven’t. I’ve repeatedly asked you for any plausible theory that would explain the disparity which does not involve race. Your best attempt so far has been that black people don’t want to play the position with the most money, power, and glory, which is facially absurd.

You think that introducing diversity by having a young attractive woman brought into an isolated environment comprised entirely of rough men is an "improvement in corporate performance"? I don't.

Don’t deflect again. You said you were okay with discrimination if it served a good purpose. Better business performance is a good purpose, no? If so, do you now agree with diversity initiatives?

Well, give me an example, and I'll tell you what I think. The NFL's hiring practices are not racist, and I think most reasonable people agree with that.

I sincerely doubt most reasonable people agree with that.

 

[Paratus]

You think that introducing diversity by having a young attractive woman brought into an isolated environment comprised entirely of rough men is an "improvement in corporate performance"? I don't.



Well, give me an example, and I'll tell you what I think. The NFL's hiring practices are not racist, and I think most reasonable people agree with that.

Furthermore, getting back to the point before this silly diversion, perfectly non-racist entities may have wildly disparate racial makeups having done nothing but hire people on the merits. You can't ascribe primarily racist motives to racial disparities, because people are not neatly categorized machines. Their interests vary. All blacks don't like football, all women don't like nursing, and some men like ballet. People are not reducible to their race, sex, or any other superficiality.

So people are not “reducible to their sex or any other superficiality ” but that job is comprised entirely of “rough men” so much so you would deny qualified women a job but not the “rough men”.

And you don’t see how this is discriminatory?

 

[mect]

All white people are not racist

No shit Sherlock.

as you implied in your bigoted remark.

My post in no way implied all white people are racist. My post implied that whites that feel like they are the great victims of society and yet despite all the oppression they experience they still come out as the master race are racist. If it made you feel guilty, that's your problem.

 

[urvile]

I worked for a company that served food to men aboard oil rigs, and they systematically discriminated against hiring young attractive women.

Down here in aus we have a huge resources industry. Women work on mine sites in various roles. From driving Cat mining trucks* to cleaning. It pays really well regardless of role because it is fly in fly out work on remote sites.

Also mine sites run 24/7 so it's 12 hour shifts and depending on the length of the swing it can be 7 days followed by 7 nights with a shift change in between. None of the female employees ever come home pregnant. I am not really sure what you are getting at. Because they are attractive they are sluts? All women are sluts? A woman's place is to give birth and rear children? I don't get it.

*A buddy of mine sent me an incident report where a Cat mining truck had run over a toyota land cruiser troop carrier and squashed it like a pancake. It had the pictures attached and when I saw them I couldn't believe the worst injury was a broken collar bone. Probably a woman driver who was trying to apply her makeup while driving. Right?

 

[herm0016]

Down here in aus we have a huge resources industry. Women work on mine sites in various roles. From driving Cat mining trucks* to cleaning. It pays really well regardless of role because it is fly in fly out work on remote sites.

Also mine sites run 24/7 so it's 12 hour shifts and depending on the length of the swing it can be 7 days followed by 7 nights with a shift change in between. None of the female employees ever come home pregnant. I am not really sure what you are getting at. Because they are attractive they are sluts? All women are sluts? A woman's place is to give birth and rear children? I don't get it.

*A buddy of mine sent me an incident report where a Cat mining truck had run over a toyota land cruiser troop carrier and squashed it like a pancake. It had the pictures attached and when I saw them I couldn't believe the worst injury was a broken collar bone. Probably a woman driver who was trying to apply her makeup while driving. Right?

None? Lol... I worked in moomba for 2 years. None is wrong.

I am fully supportive of anyone getting hired on skills and experience. We don't get many women applying for field jobs and we hire those that are qualified. Yet somehow we are discriminating due to not having many women in the field. Sometimes groups self select.

 

[jackstar7]

What sort of context and would that apply in a societal/government setting as well as in business?

I would argue that different socioeconomic backgrounds provide a much more distinct variance in life experiences than anything else to be honest. An upper middle-class white and black guy are going to think more similarly to each other than an upper middle-class white guy and a lower class white guy. Should we use economic background rather than race or gender to create the melting pot of diversity?

As far as my hidden agenda it's 8 pages in and you haven't said the magic word yet so I'm not ready to pounce. Rest assured though I'm being intentionally obtuse in order to snare you in my trap.

What makes you certain of these assertions?

 

[bshole]

Really. Then why were there no black quarterbacks or coaches for years? Did black people suddenly get better at coaching and quarterbacking sometime in the 90's?

That's actually an insanely bad representation as a far greater percentage of professional athletes, NFL players in particular, are black. It makes zero sense to use the entirety of America as a denominator when talking about professional athletes. When you use professional athletes as the denominator (as you should), the disparity is enormous.

Thank you for proving the point I was trying to get at. The idea that black quarterbacks are not or can't be pocket passers is exactly the sort of subconscious, racist myth that leads to the sort of disproportional representation. Are you saying black people are inherently worse at reading defenses? That they have lesser arm strength? That they are less accurate? I imagine you don't think any of those things. So why is it that black people are 'running, athletic' quarterbacks and white quarterbacks are calculating pocket passers? Stereotypes about what races are good at what, of course.

I don't think any rational person would argue that there wasn't discrimination against black qbs in the NFL in the past. I certainly wouldn't,

Regarding blacks as pocket quarterbacks. It is kind of catch-22 isn't it? The NCAA does not value them nearly as much as the NFL. Scrambling QBs excel and dominate in the NCAA.

Regarding the NFL, I am saying that blacks qbs do not have an advantage over whites. They are about equal. I think that would also hold for the offensive line (which is also largely white). Where blacks have a material advantage, they dominate the position (wide receivers, cbs, defensive line, etc...).

The metric I would use to evaluate this is QB rating. There are two black qbs in the top 10 and 2 in the bottom 10. This indicates that black qbs are performing at the same level as white qbs overall. Clearly they are not dominating the category as they do in other positions. I would tend to agree with you if the top 5 qbs every year were black.

Please remember that all of these guys are genetic freaks of nature. The chances of being a starting NFL qb are 1 in ten million.

 

[jackstar7]

Yes, as history shows, there is and it should

Almost like it's not a mystery at all.

 

[urvile]

None? Lol... I worked in moomba for 2 years. None is wrong.

I am fully supportive of anyone getting hired on skills and experience. We don't get many women applying for field jobs and we hire those that are qualified. Yet somehow we are discriminating due to not having many women in the field. Sometimes groups self select.

Hey don't ruin it for me. Of course that's just your experience.Anyway. I remember this place I worked and they bought in some kind of diversity consultants. To gauge the attitude of management. One of the guys said a female consultant asked him in an interview if he would have a problem with a female fitter.

He said to her no but would you have a problem getting grease under those long fingernails? He said she just glared at him.