Race is a poor proxy metric. Economic status would be a more accurate metric as well as helping people who weren’t necessarily systemically disadvantaged, just really unlucky. It’d be sort of like declaring the whole race unfair and giving everyone who did poorly some bonus time.
So you disagree with my more accurate analogy because it leads to a conclusion that doesn’t fit your agenda? Rich black people and poor white people exist. Not sure why you’re trying to say they don’t. I don’t know why people are so obsessed with dividing things up by race. The us vs them split is not about race or any other demographic except wealth and ownership. It’s the ruling class vs the rest of us and only propping up some poor people depending on the color of their skin is racist and vile.
Or instead of focusing on skin color, you could just try to balance out the times so that the next leg of the race is more even for everyone who had a disadvantage.
The analogy would be more accurate if everyone started at a random time, but darker-skinned runners started later on average. Then, the event organizers decide to deduct an hour from every dark-skinned runner’s time regardless of when they actually started.
Nobody mentioned that specifically, actually. That does add more context.
Ohh, thanks. I can see why that would cause a lot of anger.
I’ve noticed that lemmy.world is delisted from most instance lists, so it’s interesting that they’d choose that one. Thank you for the answer!
Tankies are so annoying. Authoritarians in general, really.
Having racial diversity at all levels of performance doesn’t mean that you’ve made it fair, just that the unlucky late-start white racers got absolutely screwed and the lucky early-start black racers got an even bigger advantage. The whole event should just be declared unfair and breaking the analogy, economically struggling people of any race should receive equal support, while wealthy people of any race don’t need to be further propped up based on the color of their skin.