Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Networking and connections really help. I am not upset with anyone who has an established network. Good for them. If I do not have a network, should I complain about it or do something about it? Some people have it harder, some have it easier. I will never be as fast as Usain Bolt and I will never be upset about that either. In the end the question to ask is, "So what?" She has it harder than the guy so what? He doesn't have to work as hard as her.......so we're led to believe, so what? Life is hard, so what?
Networking and connections really help. I am not upset with anyone who has an established network. Good for them. If I do not have a network, should I complain about it or do something about it? Some people have it harder, some have it easier. I will never be as fast as Usain Bolt and I will never be upset about that either. In the end the question to ask is, "So what?" She has it harder than the guy so what? He doesn't have to work as hard as her.......so we're led to believe, so what? Life is hard, so what?
less whinging?
I don't like the cartoon.
I don't like that it assumes a) that the kid growing up with more opportunities doesn't appreciate how lucky he's had it - if that kid grows up spoiled, it's on the parents, not somehow the fault of society, and b) that no matter how hard the poor kid works, she's never going to be able to get ahead - it's just not true. A lot of people come up from relatively little to work hard, never quit and make themselves successful - all with the goal of putting themselves and their family in the first kid's shoes for the future.
I guess if the point of the cartoon is to bash the first kid's parents for failing him and not teaching him to understand the benefits that he had, and how to use them to try and create a better world around him, then sure, I guess I get that. But it seems like the point of the cartoon is to bash a system that allows one kid to start off with one advantage, and assume that poor kids will always be stuck being poor. It's not accurate.
Yes, I understand that it's purely anecdotal, but it's MY anecdote. I certainly grew up much closer to the second kid than the first. I got accepted to better schools, but I went to the one that my family could afford based solely on student loans - there was no 529, trust fund, etc waiting on me when I graduated. So I went to the smaller no-name school, but I graduated, then I stuck around (took out more loans) and got a Masters. I then had to start out at a crappy, low-level job because my school didn't have internships at big companies, and my parents didn't have connections they could leverage for me. So, it took me a little longer, but I'm in a spot now where my daughter is on a track a lot more similar to the first kid's. That's the goal. That's what I've worked so hard to be able to attain. The difference is that she knows fully well that she's being given opportunities that a lot of other kids don't have. She also knows that it's her job, and her responsibility, to take advantage of the opportunities she's been given. My whole goal is to put her in a position, and give her the tools, so that she can do better than her mom and I have done, and to realize her full potential.
It seems like assuring your children's success should be the goal for everyone that has kids, and that little is gained by "success-shaming" those that didn't have to live in slums or overcome disease and crime as part of their childhood.
If you grew up a white, male, heterosexual, American... you've had an advantage over those who didn't. That doesn't mean you have to feel guilty.
Because that's exactly what the cartoon is suggesting, that you should feel guilty for your whiteness.... riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiightSeemingly every time privilege comes up there is always one of these. Your story is irrelevant. The commentary is not that poor kids can never get ahead. The point of the cartoon is simply that this idea of a meritocracy is a myth. Privilege does not describe an individual, it describes a population.
If you grew up a white, male, heterosexual, American... you've had an advantage over those who didn't. That doesn't mean you have to feel guilty. But pretending otherwise makes you look absurd. If you are shamed because of your success, then that sounds like your problem. I grew up with lots of privilege and have had success in part due to that and in other part due to merits. I don't feel bad for any of it.
Only because it doesn't fit into the narrative that you're trying to sell.Your story is irrelevant.
If it was a myth, then there wouldn't be any documented examples of people who succeeded due to hard work and determination, rather than purely on their last name, skin color, etc. But there are. Maybe you don't understand what a "myth" is?The point of the cartoon is simply that this idea of a meritocracy is a myth.
Do you have any idea at all how many poor, white, hetero males there are in America?If you grew up a white, male, heterosexual, American... you've had an advantage over those who didn't.
I don't disagree with your numbers. I question the actual cause of the number, rather than just the perceived cause of the number.Russ, you know you're my boy, but you just supported the point of the comic.
It's not about shame or guilt, that has little to do with it.
If I use your same logic and resources for African Americans:
38M X .27 = 10.26M and 10.26M x 48.5 = 4.976M and 4.976M x 97.8% = 4.87M
If I then take those numbers and compare their relative percentages, what are the chances a white male will be living in poverty, versus that of a black male:
White 9.34M / 95.5M (total males) = 9.77% chance
Black 4.87M / 18.4M (total males) = 26.4% chance
Nearly triple the chances of living in poverty.
Only because it doesn't fit into the narrative that you're trying to sell.
If it was a myth, then there wouldn't be any documented examples of people who succeeded due to hard work and determination, rather than purely on their last name, skin color, etc. But there are. Maybe you don't understand what a "myth" is?
Do you have any idea at all how many poor, white, hetero males there are in America?
The good thing about your argument is that it's impossible to disprove. You throw out unsubstantiated generalities that have no basis in anything other than your opinions.A person's success is almost never only about how hard they've worked. There is almost always an element of privilege.
But I did describe the population. I went out of my way to provide you with over 9 million examples to support my point, along with the sources of my information, and you counter with coin flips.Your story just doesn't make any difference in terms of describing a population.
I think some of you are missing the point.
Some people are born on third, thinking they hit a triple, and never realize how advantageous their life is in comparison to others; and it is that lack of realization that prevents them from supporting anything that might help someone else be born with at least no outs and a 0-0 count, instead of no balls 2 strikes and 2 outs.
The good thing about your argument is that it's impossible to disprove. You throw out unsubstantiated generalities that have no basis in anything other than your opinions.
How do you quantify how hard someone has worked? How do you identify elements of privilege? You don't, and you can't. So instead you just use vague phrasing that supports what you already believe to be true.
But I did describe the population. I went out of my way to provide you with over 9 million examples to support my point, along with the sources of my information, and you counter with coin flips.
Your analogy is appropriate though - since it relies on the randomness of the outcomes, rather than any predetermined outcomes based on factors other than the coins. You'd think the randomness out my story and the stories of others - in contrast to what you think the narrative should be - would be enough to show you that what you think is true and absolute really isn't. People can and do succeed without being born into it, and without being given certain advantages by others over everyone else because they were born white, or male, or hetero, or whatever. And that people that were born with those characteristics sometimes still don't succeed. And that sometimes people that don't succeed were actually undermined by their own choices, rather than by any concerted effort of the Man to keep them down. But you don't care - you only want to continue believing what you believe: I guess because you got to where you did because of your family, you must assume that everyone else got to where they are the same way.
I think some of you are missing the point.
Some people are born on third, thinking they hit a triple, and never realize how advantageous their life is in comparison to others; and it is that lack of realization that prevents them from supporting anything that might help someone else be born with at least no outs and a 0-0 count, instead of no balls 2 strikes and 2 outs.
Doesn't the most racist show on TV (Scandal) beat us over the head that rich is spoiled.
Do we need it on a cartoon?
There is a very real prejudice against white guys in athletics, particularly in this country. Regardless of athletic ability white guys are discouraged from certain positions and actively held back. I have experience it personally. The crazy thing is much of the problem comes from white coaches.We know there is a wind. We also know that there is a higher percentage of white males perusing the positions you outlined. Therefore there will be a high percentage hired.
What about the NFL, or NBA. I'm 5-9 175 and wanted to be a basketball player. I had no wind. I want a wind for the NBA because my small white rear couldn't make it. It's cause I'm short, and white. I'm at a total disadvantage. It's not fair.
What would happen tomorrow, if a law was outlined and passed. This said law would state that every single professional playing sport had to employee a equal amount of people from all racial, and economic backgrounds from the offices to the playing field? It'll never happen. Because some people are better, have more talent, and God given ability than others. It's called competition and it's a good thing.
There is always a curve. Always a wind. I'm just saying mine is no better than anyone else's.
I persue what I'm good at, and what I know I can be successful at. Bottom line.
What people need to figure out is what their ownwind is and stop complaining about someone else's wind blowing harder.