Racism, Sexism, and Homophobia: A Response to Steven Pinker

Author: Kasmic

Posts

Total: 13
Topic's author
#1
Kasmic
Kasmic's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 11
0
0
2
Kasmic's avatar
Kasmic
0
0
2
“An axiom of progressive opinion, Especially in universities, Is that we continue to live in a deeply racist, Sexist, And homophobic society—which would imply that progressivism is a waste of time, Having accomplished nothing after decades of struggle. " (Pinker, Enlightenment Now)

I can hardly believe someone as brilliant as Pinker could make such a statement. The observation that we live in a deeply racist, Sexist and homophobic society does not imply that we have made no progress. Nor could it be inferred from such a position that progressivism is a waste of time. Logical fallacies aside, It seems to me that racism, Sexism, And homophobia are still the norm. That is to say, Each occur frequently in our society; enough so that Pinker"s causal congratulating of societal equality strikes me as pre-mature.

#2
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
An axiom of progressive opinion is that we continue to live in a deeply racist society—which would imply that progressivism is a waste of time, Having accomplished nothing after decades of struggle
Thats some fuckin Weekly Stupid level stupidity right there. How did this guy become a Harvard professor??? 

#3
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,853
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Kasmic
It's really hard to take anyone in Academia seriously when they still hold the 1800's science regarding the existence of human races as anything other than junk science, especially after the mapping of human DNA.
Topic's author
#4
Kasmic
Kasmic's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 11
0
0
2
Kasmic's avatar
Kasmic
0
0
2
-->
@Greyparrot
No kidding. I found myself reading his book after a friend of mine brought it up several times. 
#5
Analgesic.Spectre
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 468
1
1
6
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Analgesic.Spectre
1
1
6
-->
@Kasmic
I agree that Pinker's comment isn't bright, but all three of those terms have been hijacked by Tabula Rasa nonsense from the Progressive left.
#6
Analgesic.Spectre
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 468
1
1
6
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Analgesic.Spectre
1
1
6
-->
@Greyparrot
It's really hard to take anyone in Academia seriously when they still hold the 1800's science regarding the existence of human races as anything other than junk science, especially after the mapping of human DNA.
1) Pinker wasn't referring to the validity of that. 

2) This is dangerously wrong. I will eventually tax myself to explain in detail, but treat this as a taster: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1180234/
#7
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,853
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
Let's just skip over the academic gymnastics and get into the street smarts.

Here is a sample of someone's DNA

Note all the various percentages on the left column. In fact, you will never find any person's DNA test from that site ever with 100% in one category.

In fact we are all mutts, and there is no such thing as a pure "race" anywhere on the globe. Most revisionist racist scientists have a vested interest in claiming there are significant DNA markers in certain people from geographic regions that makes them socially handicapped, but even according to your article, the phenotypes are too varied in populations today to equate people on the basis of phenotypes to any of those DNA markers.

For the layman, a certain shade of skin or a funny nose has zero bearing on your total DNA picture.
#8
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
For the layman, a certain shade of skin or a funny nose has zero bearing on your total DNA picture.

Try telling Belgians or the Hutus and the Tutsi's that
#9
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
It seems to me that Pinker is saying that people who say 'Racism and sexism still exist so we have made no progress' are overlooking the progress that has been made.

In the West we are less racist and sexist than previously - that is good, but not grounds for complacency because obviously there is a long way to go yet.



#10
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,853
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Buddamoose
Try telling Belgians or the Hutus and the Tutsis that
Not saying people don't discriminate on looks or 1 or 2 phenotypes, but that's just pageantism, not racism.


#11
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@Kasmic
The observation that we live in a deeply racist, Sexist and homophobic society does not imply that we have made no progress. Nor could it be inferred from such a position that progressivism is a waste of time. 

Pinker would agree. Here is the quote in context:


"But it's in the nature of progress that it erases its tracks, and its champions fixate on the remaining injustices and forget how far we have come. An axiom of progressive opinion, Especially in universities, Is that we continue to live in a deeply racist, Sexist, And homophobic society—which would imply that progressivism is a waste of time, Having accomplished nothing after decades of struggle.

Like other forms of progressophobia, the denial of advances in rights has been abetted by sensational headlines."

22 days later

#12
dylancatlow
dylancatlow's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 97
0
0
3
dylancatlow's avatar
dylancatlow
0
0
3
-->
@Kasmic
His statement is technically false, in the sense that progressives could claim that society today is much less racist than it was in the past, although still "deeply racist", but it's a ridiculous claim to make. Why, if you're going to describe pre-1950s America as "deeply racist", would you use the same exact description when talking about society today when it is by all measures significantly less racist? Why call it "deeply racist" and not "somewhat racist"? It appears that "racism" has taken on such a negative connotation that any Leftist who uses the term feels compelled to attach "deeply" in front of it, as though to speak of moderate amounts of racism would be to justify racism. It is simply ridiculous to call America "deeply racist", given that racism is a spectrum of belief which ranges from the teeniest tiniest bit of racism to justifications for slavery.
#13
spacetime
spacetime's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 206
0
1
3
spacetime's avatar
spacetime
0
1
3
-->
@Kasmic
Pinker is essentially correct. There's no evidence for the idea that America remains a deeply "racist, sexist, and homophobic society." By all empirical metrics, attitudes towards minorities have improved vastly over the past 50 years, with genuinely bigoted attitudes being confined to a tiny, marginalized segment of the population. Discrimination can no longer be reasonably portrayed as a significant force in modern society.