Quote:
Originally Posted by UGAalum94
I suppose I don't agree with the idea that a Latina's unique experience is as individually valuable judicially as Sotomayor seems to believe it is. I don't regard it as a hindrance, certainly, but the value of different experience, if there is one, exists in terms of what that experience contributes to a diverse body.
|
You mean like a body that's never had a Hispanic woman among its members? I think you're on the right track here - you are certainly allowed to feel she's overrating this (and again, the "I hope..." takes the edge off), but that doesn't change the fact that you're basically validating the comment here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UGAalum94
Bringing a unique set of cultural experiences, which I think we all have no matter what race or ethnicity or culture, isn't an individual asset likely to yield better individual results over some hypothetical person with a different unique set of cultural experiences. You can really only compare this individual with that individual. You can't compare this individual with the richness of her cultural experience with a hypothetical white dude and conclude or reasonably hope that her conclusions are likely to be better because there is no hypothetical white dude who isn't bringing his own decision making assets or deficits as the individual case may be.
|
Yes you can compare.
See how easy that is? Why can't you? I think you certainly can, and to deny it seems very head-in-sand-ish about racial issues in the United States and the comparative differences between being white and being, well, not white.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UGAalum94
The comment is generating the out of context hype is it because it can't be turned around an appear neutral or positive. If it would clearly be "racist" if assert about a white guy, it's suspicious when asserted by someone else. ("I would hope that a white guy with the richness of his experience would more often than not make a better decision than a Latin without the same experience" seems wrong on the face of it.) It appears to be a claim that asserts the superiority of a person based on that person's race or ethnicity, and generally we're not down with that these days.
|
The quotation has nothing at all to do with "superiority."
Besides this, the statement WOULD be ridiculous about a white guy, because it is
literally impossible for the statement, in its context, to apply to a white guy because it is a strict comparison.
This is beside the fact that it apparently CAN be neutral - I think it's exactly neutral.