28-05-2002 03:40									#211
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by orange Kirnwaffen is absolutely spot on with his comments on AA

Says someone in his first year of college who doesn't know what AA is in the real world.

Snowfire, the aboce comment goes for you also. You can spout all the pretty theories you like about racist hiring practices being inefficient, but in the real world, that just isn't the case. It is the very rare job that uses a persons' abilities to their fullest. That means that the differences in abilities is very rarely utilitized, and someone who is 98% efficient isn't much more useful than someone who is 90% efficient.

You give allowance for personal networks, but as any person who's looked for work will tell you, the number one way to get a job is to have a friend on the inside. It is what employment specialists will tell you also. It is something you will learn once you leave school and start looking for a job.

	28-05-2002 04:53									#212
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by MrFun Sikander, I cannot wait until you organize an informational campaign to educate all the white racists, and all the black racists. Let me know how your mission goes -- maybe you will bring about the ethnic-free or race-free utopia that you dream about.

Well it's very difficult to succeed when you are fighting against the efforts of hateful racists on the one hand and ignorant racists on the other. The hateful racists are actually easier to deal with because they tend to isolate themselves with their beliefs and behaviors. The ignorant are the real problem. They are numerous and ensconced into positions where they perpetuate the problem of ethnic and racial identification in the name of ending racism. Amusingly these same people often complain about the logical inconsistancy of using the death penalty to combat murder, yet they are blind to the argument that using discrimination to end discrimination is unlikely to succeed.

quote: Originally posted by MrFun AA is about aggressively seeking qualified minority group members over qualified white members. AA is NOT about aggressively seeking under-qualified minority group members over qualified white members.

This makes a sort of sense if you consider human beings to act in a mechanistic fashion whereby you take an action on a human system and achieve a result. What this fails to take into consideration is that when you take an action on a human system you not only get a result, you also get a reaction. In this case the reaction is multi-faceted, from a negative reaction from those who are now being discriminated against in the name of equality to the sudden demand for a product that is too scarce to meet that demand. The product I am talking about is extremely competent people who happen to be minorities. There are not enough of them to fill the demand for them. This is a simple supply and demand problem, and when there is a shortage that cannot be made good in a short time you end up doing without, or with substitutes. Thus AA may not be about putting under-qualified people into positions, but it's mechanisms in some cases produce that effect nonetheless. Well duh.

This is why most of us who care about having a peaceful society where every group feels that they have a fair shake want to focus the efforts of our society in areas which support our goals in the long run. Discriminating against Peter to repay Paul is not a solution to anything, it merely perpetuates the problem. Giving everyone an opportunity to achieve is not only a great medium to long term solution to the shortage of highly educated Black men (for example), it can and should be race neutral as well, which short-circuits any claims to bias and upholds our race-neutral values. A program like this can be continued indefinitely, because it looks for need rather than color. You can repeat your mantras about AA all you want. Most of the country has seen enough, and AA little by little is going away, despite the rear guard actions of the neo-racists who inhabit our ethnic studies departments and their allies the race-baiting politicians.

	28-05-2002 05:09									#213
	Remove this text

First of all, Sikander, you can stop your trolling.
I am not a racist, or a neo-racist.
AND, I do not advocate using discrimination to end discrimination.
AA is not a form of reverse discrimination when it is used for a good, legitimate purpose.

When a system is imperfect due to abuse or misuse, this not ALWAYS justify throwing out the entire system. FIRST, we would have to try systemic reforms.

Stop distorting my claims and beliefs by using slanderous words, like neo-racists, or claiming I support discrimination to end discrimination, because that is not my platform.

	28-05-2002 06:38									#214
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by MrFun First of all, Sikander, you can stop your trolling. I am not a racist, or a neo-racist. AND, I do not advocate using discrimination to end discrimination. AA is not a form of reverse discrimination when it is used for a good, legitimate purpose. When a system is imperfect due to abuse or misuse, this not ALWAYS justify throwing out the entire system. FIRST, we would have to try systemic reforms. Stop distorting my claims and beliefs by using slanderous words, like neo-racists, or claiming I support discrimination to end discrimination, because that is not my platform.

I would almost agree that calling people racist who have no intention of being racists borders on trolling, except that the term racism has a definition (from dictionary.com):

1) The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.

2) Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Note number 2, discrimination based on race. You contend that AA is not discrimination, because it is used for a good purpose. I disagree with that. Here is the definition of discrimination (also from dictionary.com):

1) The act of discriminating.

2) The ability or power to see or make fine distinctions; discernment.

3) Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice: racial discrimination; discrimination against foreigners.

Note that the definition of discrimination is not based upon the intentions of the one who discriminates. It is not a term like murder which only applies to an unlawful act of homicide, but it's more akin to the term homocide itself, ie it is general. You can repeat your AA mantra all that you want, but at the end of the day it is discrimination based upon race, which is racism.

Come back to the light! You know that you want to do the right thing. Resist the temptation to strike out in anger in retaliation and help us build something new and wonderful, a world which does not look upon it's people as members of various racial groups. It is our only hope in the long run.

	28-05-2002 06:43									#215
	Inflate your Upload Space

What other program would you propose that will create equal opportunity in replace of affirmative action??

	28-05-2002 06:50									#216
	Support Apolyton

che, re hiring practices & leaving college: Don't worry, I know that already. The way I got my first summer job was because of multiple friends on the inside, and part of the reason why I've come up empty in previous years is lack of friends in other places ('cause the FAA- where I do know people- isn't hiring as many kids for summer programs now that, well, erm, aren't minorities. General cuts as well, so not even as many of them are hired now. Didn't want to bring that up, but you seem to be questioning my experiences with this). And I happen to have a job interview tommorow in a place where I don't know anybody, so we'll see if I can break the trend.

Now, that said. Concerning "pretty theories." All I can say is that we have to have pretty theories, or else we have nothing. Is racism some kind of act of God? There have to be reasons behind it, strengths of it, different varieties... Are people just irrational? Will they be racist no matter what, and only government force will cure the problem?

I don't think so. I think that racism has causes and can be defeated, and I think you agree. Just as an example, I know that there are multiple groups at Oberlin who are constantly boycotting various corporations, trying to get them to change their practices. These don't work generally, but some of the more widespread ones do. And when they pressure the college itself, it often does work (our food contract changed a year early because of accusations to Sodexho-Marriot on mistreatment in private prisons, two years ago). I know there's a movement now to try and get the college to divest itself from all businesses involved with Israel, imitating the divestment from South Africa thing back in the late 70's and 80's. If nothing else, would you not agree that a violently racist company might lose some sales from various protest groups? Heck, Jesse Jackson goes after only semi-racist companies with threats of boycotts and other fun things.

Just that aspect of racism being inefficient I don't think is a pretty theory- if you had the time and resources to ask people, I'm sure you could put a cold hard number on sales lost due to people protesting a corporation for reason X. It won't be terribly big for most companies today, but it certainly exists.

And this is where the dispute comes in. I agree that racism doesn't make a BIG difference. Which is why in "the real world" there is still some racism in hiring practices and promotions. However, the kind of racism we have today is hardly the kind of racism that we had 125 years ago, which I do believe if somebody tried to pull nowadays, with our conciousness like it is, would get run out of town on a rail in no time flat. Nobody would want to work there and nobody would buy their goods, even if they somehow managed to bribe the cops from not being shut down by them.

So it's a continuum. Maybe racism from 75 years ago would just put a dent into your sales and morale of your workers, and maybe racism from 25 years ago is even harder to detect- but I don't doubt that it's there. And that's all I ask for. You may not think it matters enough and that AA is still neccessary, but captialism is working against racism as well.

	28-05-2002 06:56									#217
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by MrFun What other program would you propose that will create equal opportunity in replace of affirmative action??

Programs aimed at reforming poor performing schools (which btw disproportionally effect minority students), scholarship programs aimed at aiding students whose parents did not attend college (which btw will disproportionally aid minority students), an end to the war on drugs (which btw will disproportionally help minorites who are incarcerated at a phenomal rate by the drug war) and replace it with treatment programs for addicts (which btw will not disproportionally aid minorities except perhaps for American Indians). There are problems aplenty, and we can get to work right away at alleviating them. None of this has to include dividing people according to their government approved racial label, which means that no one can be singled out by race and have their accomplishments called into question. People who need help should get it (within reason of course). All this race stuff does is keep everyone arguing about nothing and replaces compassion with suspicion.

	28-05-2002 08:29									#218
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by GP Tingkai, I'm not trying to argue the counter argument. Merely trying to show how thin yours is. Do you have any real scientific evidence that women do better in training or that women who make it through tend to be a cut above the men in their squadrons? Do you have even aenecdotal evidence from discussion with fighter pilots (male and female) to back up your theory? It sounds like you just dreamed this up. Give me something meatier.

Very interesting post, re; the F-14 pilot's comment.

The accident is being used as ammunition for a political battle over women in the military so it is hard to know what to believe. Maybe Hultgreen has an easy ride, maybe she didn't.

I saw one report from the Navy News Service that states: "As a result of this accident, the report recommends the Navy implement additional checks on the engine and add this type of emergency to the Navy's F-14 flight simulator training syllabus."

If that is true, then at least something good has come out of the accident.

With regards to my initial comments, it is based on conversations with a female CF-18 pilot. She stated that given the amount of controls placed on the joy stick of a modern fighter aircraft, reflexes become extremely important (reflexes are also extremely important for reacting to other information, e.g. engine failure). Since women tend to develop faster reflexes then men, women should be able to perform at a high level as fighter pilots.

I don't have any scientific studies to back up that claim. I doubt that this has been studied intensively given the limited number of female fighter pilots.

The pilot also told me that women have to work twice as hard to be accepted as qualified pilots at the squadron level. Higher rank officers are looking for any reason to get rid of female pilots. This is because most male pilots either believe that women don't have what it takes, or that women get an easy ride. She wasn't complaining about this, but simply stating it as a fact of life.

In her case, she was finally accepted within the squadron after a joint exercise with American pilots. During the exercise she scored a "kill." The guy she "shot down" was furious about the fact that he was taken out by a woman. When the Canadian pilots saw that reaction, they all started using a high voice and her call sign whenever they radioed in a kill.

She also became accepted as one of the guys when the American pilots made comments about her flying abilities. Naturally, the Canadians pilots stuck up for their own, and in doing so, recognized that she did have what it takes.

That's one pilot's story, but it fits into the attitudes I have seen in the military.

	28-05-2002 08:52									#219
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Tingkai,

I served in the U.S. Army in a branch with a relatively high percentage of women. They were treated very well IMO. I have heard from numerous sources that fighter pilots are real clanny (like a fraternity), and very hard to break into, especially for women. My brother in law (who is Armenian) finally got tired of the frat boy atmosphere, and realizing that even if he were accepted into the group, he didn't want to spend his time there, so he transferred. It was actually a good career move, as he spends his time on an admiral's staff travelling the world setting up naval excercizes with allied navies.

That old boy's club is destined to be a thing of the past as piloted planes become obsolete. It will all be dexterity or AI driven once the robotic aircraft take over, there will be no need to account for the G-Forces physically. What a come-down. Will there be any real men left in the Air Force?

	28-05-2002 08:55									#220
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Real men or women left in the Air Force??

	28-05-2002 08:57									#221
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Air Force? Real men? Huh?

	28-05-2002 09:00									#222
	Remove this text

I found the MIR for Hulgreen's accident. It looks authentic.

Quite an interesting read.
http://www.panix.com/~baldwin/hultgreen_mir.txt

	28-05-2002 09:01									#223
	Remove this text

Sik,

Yeah pilots have that sort of "my **** doesn't stink" attitude. They tend to be overgrown colleg boys. I have a theory on this. I think they don't get the same (real) leadership experience that you get when you lead a division day to day on a submarine...or when you stand OOD on a ship. (I imagine USMC/USA gives even more direct leadership experience.)*

My roomie, Bum, didn't fit in either. He was a decent pilot though. Just not into going drinking with the skipper at the O club.

*But being a pilot isn't fundamentally about small unit leadership. It's about controlling the aircraft. A pretty hard and dangerous task.

Last edited by TCO on 28-05-2002 at 09:31

	28-05-2002 09:41									#224
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by GP My room-mate, who was VERY sorry about Hultgren's loss, gave me his detailed take on the casualty after watching the landing footage and listening to the recording of the LSO's comments.** FYI: He had the same casualty on a landing approach and said it was one of the scariest things that ever happened to him. He was particularly irked on final landing that he got no kudos for saving the plane. *His words: "standing on the rudder with both feet." **These were made publicly available. BTW, he also faulted the LSO for not retaining calm and for the order to retract her gear. (Both distracting to the pilot when in extremis and trying to recover the aircraft, as he had done.)

If the MIR on the website is accurate, Hultgreen applied full right rudder two seconds after getting wave off.

The problem was she let the aircraft's angle of attack to rise above safe levels. That contributed to a failure to successfully recover from the single engine failure. So pilot error.

MIR says Hultgreen use of rudder during approach helped cause the engine stall, but it was also caused by a technical problem in the engine. Still, pilot error.

Edit: The MIR rejected the idea that Hultgreen was given an easy ride during training.

	28-05-2002 09:58									#225
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Tingkai, don't repeat the error of the people who went running around with the JAGMAN, before this came to light.

If you read the preface by one of the board members, he states that wether she got an easy ride through is not known from the report. The report does say that she attended and passed the required courses.

	28-05-2002 10:04									#226
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai Edit: The MIR rejected the idea that Hultgreen was given an easy ride during training.

Could you cite the section that says this?

I find this illuminating:

"You won't find too many answers to the really hard questions in here:
Was Hultgreen passed along before she was ready, in order to satisfy a
politically mandated "quota"? No one knows for sure except her FRS
instructors and LSOs and they're not really talking."

Actually this is not from a board member. (my bad) presumably it is from an aviator.

	28-05-2002 10:11									#227
	Increase the size of your Attachments

X. Supervisory factor - FRS failed to disqualify MP for substandard
performance. Rejected. MP successfully completed all phases of FRS training and met all qualifying standards. MP disqualified during first CQ attempt. Between Jun 92 to Sep 94 25 percent of CAT I pilots disqualified during initial CQ attempt. All qualified on subsequent attempts. MP qualified during second CQ attempt and was ranked number three of seven CAT I pilots in landing grades. FRS LSO stated mp was slightly above average and that MP ``should perform well in the fleet.''

FRS = Fleet Replacement Squadron
MP = mission pilot (Hultgreen)
CQ= carrier qualification
I'm not sure what CAT I means.

Edit: also from the report

From Jun 92 to Sep 94, 69 pilots attempted CQ at VF-124. qualification results as follows: 51 pilots qualified during initial
attempt, 17 pilots disqualified first attempt and qualified second attempt, one pilot required third attempt to qualify. First attempt DQ rate is approximately 25 percent. each pilot successfully completed FRS syllabus. East coast FRS percentages are nearly identical.

There's more stuff, but I can't say whether it means she was sub-standard, average, or above average.

	28-05-2002 10:16									#228
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

NP. I would withhold judgement than.