If they do that in other places do you really think that POTUS candidates wouldn’t do it? Is America somehow morally superior to the rest of the world?
That’s not my objection, really. In the end, my objection is, so? Why do white liberals feel the need to hire writers who competence down for black audiences?
Melania Trump’s speech that seems to have been plagiarized by Michelle Obama:
Probably because they believe that is the best way to get their message to their target audience. I’m not saying that it’s right, but most black Americans voted for Hillary, right?
Now, let me ask you what it has to do with white liberals giving competence down shifted speeches to black audiences? They consistently hire writers who do so? I don’t see how that disputes the conclusions of the study’s author. It only serves to concede to it.
The whole point that I was making was that politicians often don’t write their own speeches, so it can be assumed that this is the case with POTUS candidates. Is there something questionable about my statement?
To the largest black audience. But then the study is vindicated if true. White lIberals competence down shift to blacks to signal their desire to be an ally.
What is questionable is the relevance. White liberals then, over and over and over again, are specifically hiring competence down shifting writers for black audiences. See, it doesn’t matter if the candidate wrote it or not.
I don’t disagree. But it’s not just liberals that are pulling some bullshit to get votes, remember Trump’s speech in Little Haiti, Miami? He was said that regardless of how the vote, he “wants to be a champion of the Haitian people”. You can be sure that he did get some votes from Haitians who are US citizens because they all hate the Clintons after what they did to Haiti, but once he got elected he decided to start deporting those who were allowed to stay after the earthquake and didn’t go after Hillary like he said he would. She should be in jail for racketeering, among other charges. Trump is just another hypocrite, but what do you expect in politics?
But, overall, the study did find that conservatives speak the same, regardless of black or white.
Edit: I am more concerned with how fellow citizens interact and view each other. Again, the actual experiments were conducted with non-politicians.
Yeah, I don’t see any evidence of him talking down to them or anything like that, he just tricked them into supporting him. Apparently Haitian-Americans were one of the main groups of black Trump voters, and he didn’t wait long to sell them out. All these politicians are pieces of shit as far as I’m concerned.
I live in Canada, not the US, so I can’t really comment on the racial bullshit going on over there. Over here there is no real racial tension, and most white guys are pussies these days so if they talk shit they get beaten and stabbed.
I see. Sounds healthy.
[quote=“Sloth, post:497, topic:248376, full:true”]
[quote=“chris_ottawa, post:496, topic:248376, full:true”]
This is a bit trolly, but maybe this says more about the average conservatives default level of language than their equality.
Did the study say the conservatives spoke to white folks with the same level of language as the liberals did?
It did not. It just used a ranking of words based on how ‘intelligent’ they are.
Edit: although to be fair, GW wasn’t given a fair shake. He didn’t even give a speech to minorities so there’s really nothing to compare (not that it would have helped much).
They designed a series of experiments in which white participants were asked to respond to a hypothetical or presumed-real interaction partner. For half of these participants, their partner was given a stereotypically white name (such as “Emily”); for the other half, their partner was given a stereotypically black name (such as “Lakisha”). Participants were asked to select from a list of words for an email to their partner. For some studies, this email was for a work-related task; for others, this email was simply to introduce themselves. Each word had been previously scored on how warm or competent it appears. The word “sad,” for example, scored low for both warmth and competence. “Melancholy,” on the other hand, scored high for competence and low on warmth.
The difference is in how those who identified as liberal communicated to whites vs. blacks. The conservatives tended to use the same competence level of words for both. The words that could be used in the communications were provided. The subjects then were able to choose from those words.
Oh, and it would seem that whites (disproportionately liberals) are doing this based partly on stereotypes about black intelligence.
Initial data from follow-up studies suggest that describing a black person as highly intelligent, thus reversing the stereotype, or as already highly motivated to get along with whites, thus removing the need to prove goodwill, can reduce the likelihood that a white person will downplay their competence in their interactions with the black person… She is also testing the efficacy of this possibly strategic behavior: for example, do black receivers of white liberals’ competence downshift see this behavior as demeaning or endearing?.
But, hey, there we go. A significant group of whites do in fact treat blacks differently–based partly on stereotypes about black intelligence-than they do their fellow whites. White privilege exists.
I’m asking the question if conservatives used the low competence words on the white girl emails as compared to liberals. And if so why.