Study finds State Legislatures Dominated By white Men

[The Reformed American Republic]

What sort of ignorant ass shit is this? No one is suggesting this is anything approaching a conspiracy. White people and men hold power due to structural-historical reasons which have left them dominant culturally, politically and economically.


The policies they impose are shaped by their views, which are in turn shaped by their different experiences in life. Being a woman means you're going to have insight into the concerns of women; likewise for men, but they occupy the dominant position already.

Most politicians being men hasn't always led to male concerns (problems) being addressed despite their insight and dominance.

Judging from that post, I don't think that poster is here to debate in good faith.

[Duvniask]

Holy shit, all the thoughtless people coming out the woodwork in this thread.

"Why should we care"

Do you guys not understand why it's good to have governments that are representative and in touch with the concerns of the public? What the fuck.

Seeing as how wealth is almost always a necessity to actually be in government, I fail to see how their genitals or skin color would make them all that representative of the common people.

Is there some definition of representativeness that excludes wealth? It's not like I specified it.

I'm not suggesting some enlightened centrist bullshit where all we need to do is have more female CEOs of color, I'm saying government by and for the people is good (emphasis mine). How is that controversial?

[Shofercia]

Ok, why should we care exactly?

Legislatures ought to look like the electorate and the provinces they represent

According to...?

Well, I mean, it's not the state's fault that less women are represented, nor ethnic minorities. They may not have the same incentive to run for office, yes, and the FPTP nature of elections makes it harder for women and minorities to get elected. If the US switched to PR or something like that, they'd probably be a spike in representation for women and minorities.

But Lumen would oppose that, since that'll lead to third parties gain strength at the expense of both major parties.

We needed a study to confirm this?

We did a taxpayer funded study on frisky quails on crack, so why not a study on this? Next we'll have a study on how many dogs like bacon.

[Ethel mermania]

Best person for an office should be elected. As long as the oppertunity to run is equal, I dont care about the result.

If someone says "vote for me because I am X", they have lost my vote.

[Major-Tom]

I think we're making progress in terms of seeing women feeling more empowered to run for political positions, ditto for ethnic minorities who might not have representation equal to their population.

The thing is - we can't exactly force it in terms of political offices, we can't have a mandate on who runs and who doesn't, who party leaders go for in terms of their top choices etc etc. This cultural shift where women and minorities feel more eager to run for something just needs to continue if equal(ish) representation is something we want to strive for.

Also, the fuck, we needed a study for this? I mean, couldn't any jackass with a lot of free time and a ton of Wikipedia tabs figure this out?

[Duvniask]

Most politicians being men hasn't always led to male concerns (problems) being addressed despite their insight and dominance.

Judging from that post, I don't think that poster is here to debate in good faith.

There isn't going to be a debate if you think anyone calling out White male privilege is suggesting it's a conspiracy or even deliberate.

[Stellar Colonies]

Most politicians being men hasn't always led to male concerns (problems) being addressed despite their insight and dominance.

Judging from that post, I don't think that poster is here to debate in good faith.

Not necessarily.

They just have a different opinion than me on how to solve the same issue.

[Dresderstan]

Best person for an office should be elected. As long as the oppertunity to run is equal, I dont care about the result.

If someone says "vote for me because I am X", they have lost my vote.

Yeah pretty much this in spades.

[Duvniask]

Having someone whose black in the legislature would know more about issues facing their demographic and community then someone whose white

Would they though? I wouldn’t say some rich white dude in office would really understand how I, a somewhat poor white dude, live and what issues I face. Why would a rich black woman understand the life and issues a poor black woman faces?

Because these issues intersect? It doesn't all come down to one or the other.

[Major-Tom]

Seeing as how wealth is almost always a necessity to actually be in government, I fail to see how their genitals or skin color would make them all that representative of the common people.

Is there some definition of representativeness that excludes wealth? It's not like I specified it.

I'm not suggesting some enlightened centrist bullshit where all we need to do is have more female CEOs of color, I'm saying government by and for the people is good (emphasis mine). How is that controversial?

I think that's largely understood, from my point of view, it's a question of implementation. There's no mandate out there in the US that can solve this, if we wanna say "solve," equal representation can only really come about through both cultural and socio-economic changes.

[Ors Might]

Seeing as how wealth is almost always a necessity to actually be in government, I fail to see how their genitals or skin color would make them all that representative of the common people.

Is there some definition of representativeness that excludes wealth? It's not like I specified it.

I'm not suggesting some enlightened centrist bullshit where all we need to do is have more female CEOs of color, I'm saying government by and for the people is good (emphasis mine). How is that controversial?

What I’m saying that calls for greater representation in government in effect almost exclusively entails that “representation” being selected from the wealthy and representing a community is always more complicated than just looking like said community. The representative should ideally have gone through similar experiences as a member of that community

What you’re saying isn’t controversial. It just seems as though most people calling for representation don’t stop to think what representing a people actually means.

[Ors Might]

Would they though? I wouldn’t say some rich white dude in office would really understand how I, a somewhat poor white dude, live and what issues I face. Why would a rich black woman understand the life and issues a poor black woman faces?

Because these issues intersect? It doesn't all come down to one or the other.

The life of a rich minority is going to be radically different than a poor minority in most circumstances. The life of a rich white dude is going to be radically different than a poor white dude in most circumstances. Do you think the wealthy can adequately represent those with less?

[Cyng]

Ok? So are most states. Contrary to what some on the left seem to believe, the entire country doesn't look like LA.

[Federal Republic Of America And The Cari]

No that's not how it works.

Exactly. A black politician can be just as corrupt and out of touch as a white politician.

facts

[Duvniask]

Because these issues intersect? It doesn't all come down to one or the other.

The life of a rich minority is going to be radically different than a poor minority in most circumstances. The life of a rich white dude is going to be radically different than a poor white dude in most circumstances. Do you think the wealthy can adequately represent those with less?

That's not what I said, though. I said the issues intersect.

The wealthy will, even if they are well intentioned, probably tend to be concerned with issues which are important to and impact the wealthy. Likewise for the poor, who unfortunately get the short end of the stick because they're poor and can't spend their way into office and lobby as much for policies beneficial to their interests. But this will also, to some extent, be true for people's race or sex etc.

Now, with that said, let's take some examples to illustrate what I mean by the issues intersecting: do you think a poor White in the Jim Crow-era would, if their voice was to be heard, necessarily advocate for ways to advance the interests of poor Blacks? Will a poor young man necessarily be concerned with, or even understand, the issues facing poor-single mothers who are socially expected to both be home makers yet also work and pull themselves up by their bootstraps? Not necessarily. We cannot reduce everything to class alone, I'm afraid.

[Duvniask]

What I'm stating above is essentially a rather roundabout description of intersectionality, or the idea that people's advantages and disadvantages can intersect in uniquely different combinations: a poor white can be better off than a poor black, because they might not be beat up by the police or arrested as much on average, and a poor woman might end up financially worse off than a poor man due to gender roles that downplay women's role in the workplace. Obviously all of these people suffer the disadvantage of being poor, but their experiences are still different.

[Shofercia]

What I'm stating above is essentially a rather roundabout description of intersectionality, or the idea that people's advantages and disadvantages can intersect in uniquely different combinations: a poor white can be better off than a poor black, because they might not be beat up by the police or arrested as much on average, and a poor woman might end up financially worse off than a poor man due to gender roles that downplay women's role in the workplace. Obviously all of these people suffer the disadvantage of being poor, but their experiences are still different.

IMHO, a poor white is more likely to connect with a poor black than a wealthy black with a poor black. One of the main issues in the black community is the lack of a strong father in many families. Similarly, if their city was wrecked, poor white fathers might end up falling into depression and alcoholism or depression and opioid abuse. If you're wealthy or even middle class, you don't typically experience those pitfalls, i.e. growing up with an actual father and/or a potential replacement, as you have access to tutors, school guidance counselors, friends having time to watch the kids, grandparents being able to help out, including help out financially, etc.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Judging from that post, I don't think that poster is here to debate in good faith.

There isn't going to be a debate if you think anyone calling out White male privilege is suggesting it's a conspiracy or even deliberate.

Here we go with the "white male privilege" bullshit again.

There is no such thing. I can assure you that I, a white male, have zero fucking privilege. I can also assure you that most white males in America are in the exact same boat.

It's not "white privilege". It's not "male privilege". It's rich privilege. Get it right.

[Diarcesia]

There isn't going to be a debate if you think anyone calling out White male privilege is suggesting it's a conspiracy or even deliberate.

Here we go with the "white male privilege" bullshit again.

There is no such thing. I can assure you that I, a white male, have zero fucking privilege. I can also assure you that most white males in America are in the exact same boat.

It's not "white privilege". It's not "male privilege". It's rich privilege. Get it right.

Fax

Change the US to any other country, and you can accurately substitute "white" privilege to "insert politically dominant ethnicity" privilege there.

[Dresderstan]

Judging from that post, I don't think that poster is here to debate in good faith.

There isn't going to be a debate if you think anyone calling out White male privilege is suggesting it's a conspiracy or even deliberate.

Because there is no such thing, grow up and get over it.

[Duvniask]

There isn't going to be a debate if you think anyone calling out White male privilege is suggesting it's a conspiracy or even deliberate.

Here we go with the "white male privilege" bullshit again.

There is no such thing. I can assure you that I, a white male, have zero fucking privilege. I can also assure you that most white males in America are in the exact same boat.

It's not "white privilege". It's not "male privilege". It's rich privilege. Get it right.

There is a wealth of data that disagrees with your childish assertions, some of it being shared right on this forum (courtesy of Gravlen).

I swear, you people have zero understanding of what's meant by privilege as a social tendency; it's precisely that, a tendency, not an absolute proclamation that all men have power or that all men have higher status than women (or in the case of race, that whites by neccesity have these things). Get it right, and don't make these stupid mischaracterizations another time.

[La Xinga]

Here we go with the "white male privilege" bullshit again.

There is no such thing. I can assure you that I, a white male, have zero fucking privilege. I can also assure you that most white males in America are in the exact same boat.

It's not "white privilege". It's not "male privilege". It's rich privilege. Get it right.

There is a wealth of data that disagrees with your childish assertions, some of it being shared right on this forum (courtesy of Gravlen).

I swear, you people have zero understanding of what's meant by privilege as a social tendency; it's precisely that, a tendency, not an absolute proclamation that all men have power or that all men have higher status than women (or in the case of race, that whites by neccesity have these things). Get it right, and don't make these stupid mischaracterizations another time.

Those are scars from slavery, no "privilege."

[Duvniask]

There isn't going to be a debate if you think anyone calling out White male privilege is suggesting it's a conspiracy or even deliberate.

Because there is no such thing, grow up and get over it.

The evidence is literally being given to you on a platter in the form of this thread, and you refuse to engage with it, like a child.

[Duvniask]

There is a wealth of data that disagrees with your childish assertions, some of it being shared right on this forum (courtesy of Gravlen).

I swear, you people have zero understanding of what's meant by privilege as a social tendency; it's precisely that, a tendency, not an absolute proclamation that all men have power or that all men have higher status than women (or in the case of race, that whites by neccesity have these things). Get it right, and don't make these stupid mischaracterizations another time.

Those are scars from slavery, no "privilege."

Those "scars" are precisely that privilege. Jesus Christ. What do you think is meant by privilege? Do you even know what the word means?

[Grenartia]

In other news, sky blue. Story at 10.