Posted: Sat May 11, 2013 4:46 pmI agree with them.
Gallup wrote:I agree with them.
Bully for you.
NationStates
Because sometimes even national leaders just want to hang out
https://forum.nationstates.net/
The Economist Says Affirmative Action Is Bad Unsurprise
Page 23 of 23
Posted: Sat May 11, 2013 4:46 pmPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 4:46 pmBully for you.
Posted: Sat May 11, 2013 4:48 pmSaiwania wrote:With regards to the employers choosing White sounding names over Black sounding names bit, here are the top 20 "Black" names for male and female and the top 20 "White" names for male and female:
Black female: Imani, Ebony, Shanice, Aaliyah, Precious, Nia, Deja, Diamond, Asia, Aliyah, Jada, Tierra, Tiara, Kiara, Jazmine, Jasmin, Jazmin, Jasmine, Alexus, Raven.
Black male: DeShawn, DeAndre, Marquis, Darnell, Terrell, Malik, Trevon, Tyrone, Willie, Dominique, Demetrius, Reginald, Jamal, Maurice, Jalen, Darius, Xavier, Terrance, Andre, Darryl.
White female: Molly, Amy, Claire, Emily, Katie, Madeline, Katelyn, Emma, Abigail, Carly, Jenna, Heather, Katherine, Caitlin, Kaitlin, Holly, Allison, Kaitlyn, Hannah, Kathryn.
White male: Jake, Connor, Tanner, Wyatt, Cody, Dustin, Luke, Jack, Scott, Logan, Cole, Lucas, Bradley, Jacob, Garrett, Dylan, Maxwell, Hunter, Brett, Colin.
What do the Black sounding names have in common? Well, they are not proper English names. It appears to me that some employers aren't hiring Black people not because they're Black, but because the names objectively speaking do not sound sophisticated or professional.
Of course you aren't going to be hired with a name like "precious" or "moonbeam." If my parents named me something ridiculous, I would have it legally changed if I thought that my first name hinders more than helps me.
The ignorance!!!!!!! IT BURNS!!!!!
You now there isn't a rule how names go right?
So where exactly is your source for this?
Should I hold my breath?
Posted: Sat May 11, 2013 4:53 pmI know I'm probably too late, but: inb4 everyone blames social-conservatives for being racist hillbillies. I'm socially conservative and believe strongly in Affirmative Action; it's the social progressivists that supported slavery, after all, and then the greedy that used religion as a tool than a means of living a style like the Puritans of the old.
Posted: Sat May 11, 2013 4:56 pmNew Britannia of America wrote:I know I'm probably too late, but: inb4 everyone blames social-conservatives for being racist hillbillies. I'm socially conservative and believe strongly in Affirmative Action; it's the social progressivists that supported slavery, after all, and then the greedy that used religion as a tool than a means of living a style like the Puritans of the old.
Today's progressives are not the progressives of the 17th and 18th centuries. And, after that, those who were for abolition would have been defined as progressives.
Posted: Sat May 11, 2013 4:57 pmNew Britannia of America wrote:I know I'm probably too late, but: inb4 everyone blames social-conservatives for being racist hillbillies. I'm socially conservative and believe strongly in Affirmative Action; it's the socialprogressivistsconservatives that supported slavery, after all, and then the greedy that used religion as a tool than a means of living a style like the Puritans of the old.
You had a typo.
Social progressives wanted the abolition of slavery.
Posted: Sat May 11, 2013 5:02 pmFrisivisia wrote:New Britannia of America wrote:I know I'm probably too late, but: inb4 everyone blames social-conservatives for being racist hillbillies. I'm socially conservative and believe strongly in Affirmative Action; it's the social progressivists that supported slavery, after all, and then the greedy that used religion as a tool than a means of living a style like the Puritans of the old.
Today's progressives are not the progressives of the 17th and 18th centuries. And, after that, those who were for abolition would have been defined as progressives.
Most progressives from the 17th and 18th centuries are dead. Most.
Posted: Sat May 11, 2013 5:02 pmPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 5:04 pmPosted: Sat May 11, 2013 5:31 pmThe Black Forrest wrote:Saiwania wrote:With regards to the employers choosing White sounding names over Black sounding names bit, here are the top 20 "Black" names for male and female and the top 20 "White" names for male and female:
Black female: Imani, Ebony, Shanice, Aaliyah, Precious, Nia, Deja, Diamond, Asia, Aliyah, Jada, Tierra, Tiara, Kiara, Jazmine, Jasmin, Jazmin, Jasmine, Alexus, Raven.
Black male: DeShawn, DeAndre, Marquis, Darnell, Terrell, Malik, Trevon, Tyrone, Willie, Dominique, Demetrius, Reginald, Jamal, Maurice, Jalen, Darius, Xavier, Terrance, Andre, Darryl.
White female: Molly, Amy, Claire, Emily, Katie, Madeline, Katelyn, Emma, Abigail, Carly, Jenna, Heather, Katherine, Caitlin, Kaitlin, Holly, Allison, Kaitlyn, Hannah, Kathryn.
White male: Jake, Connor, Tanner, Wyatt, Cody, Dustin, Luke, Jack, Scott, Logan, Cole, Lucas, Bradley, Jacob, Garrett, Dylan, Maxwell, Hunter, Brett, Colin.
What do the Black sounding names have in common? Well, they are not proper English names. It appears to me that some employers aren't hiring Black people not because they're Black, but because the names objectively speaking do not sound sophisticated or professional.
Of course you aren't going to be hired with a name like "precious" or "moonbeam." If my parents named me something ridiculous, I would have it legally changed if I thought that my first name hinders more than helps me.
The ignorance!!!!!!! IT BURNS!!!!!
You now there isn't a rule how names go right?
So where exactly is your source for this?
Should I hold my breath?
I remember reading that in Freakonomics. Apparently, the author went through all of California's baby names and found the most common ones.