I agree for the most part but what about jobs where 2 people have the same qualifications but one is discriminated against because of a characteristic- in that instance dont you think quotas help. I realise its a niche circumstance in this day and age where most people are accepting of people who are different but still what are your thoughts on this?
"Yeah, you've just kidnapped this person. But what about if you would be kidnapped? Have you ever thought about how you would feel?" Excellent mediator he is. He's missed his calling :p Should've been employed by his local police department as a hostage mediator.
I think there are a few factors for the perfect job. 1: you can do it well. 2: you enjoy doing your job. and 3: it pays enough. (and I'm not saying it needs to be high paying. I mean at least enough to cover your expenses for living.) and there's probably a few more things people can think of.
You should TRY to be as diverse as possible, BUT it also must be best equipped. Diversity is a great thing, but if it becomes Tokenism (hiring people because of being diverse) then it becomes a problem. Diversity of thought and opinion is generally hand-in-hand with diversity of people. Tokenism just seems like you don't care and are doing it for PR or virtue signalling.
I think it makes sense to hire people for the sake of diversity to a certain extent. This extent, I'd say, is to try hire people in such a way that your team accurately represents society. For example, you could try to hire people in such a way that your team is 50% male and 50% female. Say 30% of the population is dark-skinned; you would then try to make it so 30% of the people you hire are dark-skinned. This wouldn't be a productive measure to keep using in the long term; however, when inequality is so high, it would help to even things out a little bit.
Guilherme Ferrão why do you want your work force to reflect the population in terms of appearance? What is even the point? I much rather have the best workers. Appearances are absolutely irrelevant for most jobs. Either as a company owner, a worker or a client, I want the best people for the job, appearance be dammed (including tattoos and piercings and any other prejudice about appearance). Only if I am a competitor I want that company to hire people based on their appearances so they don’t work as effectively and I get the best workers hahah If I owned a company I’d be so happy to see everyone else start judging people by their appearances instead of their real value. Except in the cases where it’s becoming mandatory to choose people by their appearance.
Hey X, since you said you are a viewer of Tom Scott at one point, I was wondering if you’d seen his series Citation Needed. It’s worth a watch if you haven’t seen one of the episodes before. I know it’s not related to the video, but the traffic is quieter here.
I love these videos, especially since america is such a mess rn, but idk why these videos make me feel so much better because it’s explaining something that I may or may not support and maybe shifting my view a little bit
Probably because there's no shouting or throwing cuss words, heck there isn't even an interruption. It's just one guy and his views, you can either agree or disagree but to disagree you would have to comment which is not a loud/obnoxious way to disagree....
You're right X, fixing education is important but the problem is more complex than that. If you want to fix education, you need enough policymakers to want to fix education and if those policymakers have no want to fix the discriminatory/generational/wealth inequality issues then the problems continue. You need policymakers that are from more diverse backgrounds (in terms of race, social class, & wealth) that want to address those issues but how do those policymakers get there if they never have a chance at a solid education?
i think this is a good point but i think that in some cases people will address issues that don't affect them directly just because it's the right thing to do, but i would agree that the ideal scenario is to have diverse policymakers rather than relying on good intentions and effective communication of ideas from those who would be affected by change
@@_-.G.-_ TH-cam may be a job that doesn't technically require education to succeed in, but that doesn't necessarily mean that X, for instance, didn't receive education. That's beside my point, though- I just came here to say that just because someone isn't affected by the events related to the topic of discussion doesn't mean their opinions on it are invalid, so hypocrisy isn't the greatest argument, especially in this case. However, your comment may just a statement and not an argument so I'll stop taking it so seriously (to be honest, I just wanted to take this little opportunity to see how I fare in expressing my opinion! Funny motive, huh.)
I just think that artificially providing jobs to disadvantaged communities is like putting a duct tape on a broken dam. It is very fragile and irresponsible fix for a huge underlying problem. And that we should instead focus on fixing the problem as a whole.
About the thing you said at the end, people are psychologically hardwired to find tall things intimidating, I suppose it helps when there's a massive bear trying to eat you or something like that, but it does play a part in society and everyday life and often people feel uncomfortable in the presence of much taller people.
This is a good video, however, I realized a part of the equation that X might've missed: benefits of diversity. I know that this won't figure into a lot of jobs. In the case of a lumber worker, a log couldn't care less what color your skin is, what gender(s) you're attracted to, what your gender is, or what the average GDP of your hometown was. When it comes to designing, however, diversity can make a big difference. [Essay incoming] Here's an example of what I mean: some companies have developed automatic sensors for public bathrooms (i.e. sinks, soap dispensers...) that can't be activated by people with darker skin. It's unlikely that the designers were trying to discriminate, but they made a machine that doesn't work for a huge chunk of the world's population. If the design team were more diverse, they might've thought to check that the sensor detected a wider range of skin tone. Having more diverse creative teams could also reduce the amount of subtlety offensive commercials that would turn off potential customers. This isn't to say that diversity should be the only consideration in hiring. It would be bad for business, and I for one would HATE it if I were only hired to meet some gender or LGBTQ+ quota. It also shouldn't be the responsibility of disadvantaged groups to correct privileged people's mistakes, but a diverse team is considerably less likely to make those mistakes. Because diversity provides benefits in these cases, it should have at least some consideration. TL;DR: In design, diversity is a quality in its own right that can prevent unconscious bias in products. An unqualified person should never be chosen over a qualified one (framing it in those terms obscures the real issue), but a slightly less experienced person who has a underrepresented background might be more useful than a slightly more experienced person who has an overrepresented background.
Hello, Xisuma. Just finished watching and scrolled down to the comments and it brought up a lot of questions. One I'd like to ask: You've made a video about meming in comment sections but how do you feel about people using it to submit "First", "Second" or "Early" even though they haven't watched a nanosecond of the video as if it is a race and sometimes resulting in short arguments?
This is honestly one of the best series of videos on TH-cam I've been following(along with Hermitcraft of course!). Some really insightful views on all issues. Every video on Xisumasays has way fewer views than it actually should. Great content! Thanks!
Hi x, may I just say that I love to watch this side of you, you have a lot of smart things to say and you change the stereotype of the average youtuber who does reaction videos and weird challenge videos, you are a very wise man and I hope you keep uploading podcasts like this.
Hi X- I appreciate your well-measured and deeply considered videos on these topics. I largely agree with you in this instance, but would like to offer some evidence-based rebuttal, for the sake of challenging perceptions 🙂: A study performed by Northwestern University, Harvard, and the Institute for Social Research in Norway in 2017 found that white applicants received a 36% higher rate of callbacks than black applicants with equal qualifications. They used a combination of in-person interviews and paper applications with racially suggestive names. I would submit that this (and the hundreds of studies akin to it) suggests that in our current climate, having equal opportunity would not be sufficient to combat systemic racism. In this study, on paper all individuals had perceived equal opportunity in the eyes of the employer. Person1 and Person2 went to the same school, have the same GPA, have the same experience from the same companies, but Person1 is 36% more likely to be considered for employment. Now I don’t think every single employer was consciously racist here; let’s presume they all have an unconscious bias. In such a case, wouldn’t a bias erode in the presence of positive representation, even if initially mandated? That is to say, Suzy doesn’t think she’s racist, but she doesn’t choose to hire black people- not out of malevolence, she just never has and hasn’t ever noticed/considered her bias because she is surrounded by people who look like her. People don’t notice the everyday, they notice different. She’s required to hire someone of color, which she does to fill a quota. However, a POC now becomes part of the everyday, and we’ll say for the sake of argument, they’re also a terrific worker. I submit that she is now incrementally more likely to hire another POC, subconsciously, because she has an unconscious positive opinion regarding a POC and she considers a POC to be part of the everyday environment. But also for the record, someone remaining blissfully unaware of their biases is the last thing that could possibly help in any situation- regardless of the type of bias: Suzy should listen to your videos or read better literature, were she not a construct for a hypothetical situation. TLDR; I submit that there is evidence suggesting that until our society is more aware and intent on rooting out unconscious bias, neither equality of outcome nor equality of opportunity are individually capable of overcoming systemic racism. Total meritocracy when we can have it, but we’re not quite there yet.
Some people are disadvantaged when it comes to getting a job in certain industries. They are not given the opportunity to show what they can do. Support them and you get better work. Diversity brings ideas into a company and new perspectives.
The problem is diversity not usually about diversity of ideas. Diversity is about diversity of appearance and genitalia. Do you really value diversity of views and opinion? Do you value free speech? For example if someone believes that there exist genetic and hormonal different between the sexes, or if someone believes that there exist biological differences between the racial groups, even if the cause not understood, if someone believes that the workers should own the factories, if someone believes that taxation is theft, if someone thinks abortions are immoral, do you think it is valuable to have their different views ? The second question is, do you think these views are valuable for, say, a wood chopping company? My opinion different views are relevant, if they are technical views about the job the company does. None of the above views have any relevance to wood chopping, besides maybe the workers owning companies opinion. While I agree diversity is useful, it is diversity in the appropriate subjects, not about irrelevant aspects of life (irrelevant to the workings of the company).
It's quite hard for *some* companies to represent black people, LGBTQ+ people e.t.c. Sometimes they just don't have the qualifications or they just don't get as many of those people. It's not about purposefully hiring these people, it's about not turning them away for who they are. In my opinion, it's not the job of companies to include people of different cultures and stuff. It's their job to treat people equally. I do agree with you on everyone being racist, it's not a hate it's just a stereotype we have in our brains
Xisuma. I agree for the most part but what about jobs where 2 people have the same qualifications but one is discriminated against because of a characteristic- in that instance dont you think quotas help. I realise its a niche circumstance in this day and age where most people are accepting of people who are different but still what are your thoughts on this?
Most of the time a company has no clue how qualified someone is when they hire someone. I have trouble presenting myself which will make it hard for me to get a job whereas some other people who are actually way less qualified pretend like they're gods at what they're doing and they'll get the job. Also, they do pick people on their past work experience. But without any experience you won't get a job, and without a job you won't get any experience. Someone has to be the first to trust that you're capable of doing the job, and with so many unintentional discrimination around there will be people who can't get a job and they'll get stuck into that loop..
Lets say you have a white man and a black man, both having the same skill level and job experience, by hiring the black man to fill a quota is quite literally hiring him because hes black, making him being black somehow better than someone being white, therefore discriminating against the white man(sorry if this is a confusing response)
Diversity in a workplace is important to cultivate New ideas. Your quality of work should be the only thing that factor in to your hiring. But sometimes, I see the other side of this argumen where the partisipan in question IS from a minority background but saddly, dosen meant the recruitment for said job and but they see it as an attack of there identity they threw a fit and complain on Twitter, calling "The Big Man" the True problem and labeling them and even the whole company, as a racist for not hiring them. I also see a company hiring people for JUST for there Background and minority just for the sake Of PR Stunt and building a narrative of a "Heroic Company" for cash when there work is... Let's say not there best. Granted, I know the reality of people not hiring sertan people because of there backgrounds. but I can't help but bring up those points when talking about diversity in a company. and this is coming from someone who would be considered a minority in America.
Exactly. Representation quotas is basically fighting symptoms instead of fighting the disease. And you're gonna get some negative side effects on top of that. If we do this we will need to keep fighting the symptoms to all eternity. The representation in media is a legitimate argument of course because the best way to get rid of discrimination is to normalise the thing that's being discriminated against. I always find the representation for the person who's being represented a weird thing. I can usually identify much better with people who share my ideals rather than gender, skin colour or sexual orientation. Of course I'm not in any disadvantaged or minority group so I guess that may just be thanks to me never having experienced serious discrimination. So anyway, there's no harm to me if there's representation for others in media, so I say, sure why not.
You discussed how we should fix the problems of inequality in the workplace by allowing for equal access to education, instead of forced representation through quotas.I agree with this as quotas seem like a band-aid fix instead of addressing the actual issue, but i was also wondering about your opinion on forced representation in universities and training courses. Surely that would be vital in creating equal opportunities? Just some food for thought :)
How is it equal opportunities if you force Asians to need to have higher grades than everyone else to get in? That is the opposite of equal opportunity. Having university students reflect the population is only fair if the the population is equally educated. But that’s not the reality. The really is asians have higher grades than other races. Don’t divide people by their appearances. It is not fair for someone to get a harder time getting into university just because the other people that look like them tend to be better than people that don’t look like them. Having race specific entries is just discriminatory, I can’t see how that is fair. Equal opportunities means equal rules for everyone. That’s why justice is represented blind, so no one is favoured over another. What we need is less discrimination, not institutionalised discrimination in universities.
I think people confuse Equality and Equity. If you want equality, there will always be folks who don't benefit even though it's "Equal" because you're distributing said "something" equally even though some are already ahead than others. Equity means distributing goods/wealth based on who needs it to get to baseline with everyone else. For example, 3 people watch a baseball game from the other side of a 6-foot fence. 1 person is 6'3'' tall and needs no help watching, 1 person is 5' 10'' tall and needs to be on his tippy toes to see and the final person is 5'1'' tall and can't watch no matter how much they try. Now let's say you have three 6" high boxes to help them see better, Equality would mean giving them each one, but you'll find only 2 of the three would benefit, so someone still loses out. Equity would mean giving 2 boxes to the shortest person and one to the middle person so now all three people can see over the fence with no problem. Equality will always have a loser no matter because of natural advantages what whereas Equity will make sure that the distribution of benefit will be given out to those who need it more to offset the natural advantages some of us have.
For me, I don't also seek representation for my race in media and such, but then again every single time that my race is represented on media, it's always so exaggerated, wrong and look demeaning to us that we are like "hey, why don't you hire a legit one of us to represent us correctly instead of this blatantly wrong stereotypes?"
I think the conversation should be more focused on opportunities than representation. The opportunities is soemthing that everyone I’ve encountered will acknowledge. But representation for representation sake doesn’t benefit anyone. Ideally, being a minority shouldn’t be soemthing you have to “fly a flag of”. Something more akin to “not seeing color”, but for all minorities (sexual, romantic, gender, race, size, etc.). The conversation comes up in the film industry a lot, and I’ve always looked for character representation instead of physical attributes. I’m a nerd, so I like seeing nerdy characters, not the same overdone bad boy types. I’ve never cared if the character was male or female, one race or another, anything like that. TL;DR: I understand not feeling represented, but we should just normalize our differences, because that’s what equality is (to me)
The thing is, race can factor into character representation. A black person might share similar experiences with an on screen character that is also black and vice versa. Race factors into culture and culture is how we relate to each other.
X i really think you need to read some sociology, you seem to like the topic instinctively, because you touch on a lot of the subjects, but lack the definitions. If you or anyone reads this and think they would like to know more i don't mind that much investing some time into finding some material for you, just throw a topic at me and i will see what i can find.
You know Xisuma, i've discovered your videos in this secondary channel only recently, and i'm really into open discussions. Sometimes i don't agree with you, but in this video i really loved your way of thinking, and I just wanted to say that i really agree with you about the educationnal point. to give you an example, i'm living in France and we also have this issue with the education. The only thing is, the education in france is free, unlike the USA.
In 2021 a new racing series will start called Extreme E. Each team has 2 drivers. One of them is male, and one of them is female. In normal racing pretty much all of the drivers (or should I say 'racists' in the same way someone who plays the guitar is a guitarist :p ) are male. If the teams can pick the best drivers, then they will pick male drivers because male drivers are better. Hardly any women try become a professional driver because the whole scene is dominated by men. And when there is a woman who tries she won't get hired by any team since "male drivers are better" and therefore they don't get the chance to develop. Maybe some low budget team will hire her because all of the other drivers are taken, but those teams can't hire the proper mechanics and the woman will end up at the back of the leaderboard which "confirms" that "woman can't drive". Extreme E will give women an equal chance compared to men. They give the women the chance to develop while still allowing the teams to select the right person for the job. If they succeed then more woman will try to enter the racing scene and more women will get the chance to grow and to show off what they're capable off. Requiring representation will enable whole groups to get on the same level as the currently dominating group because the first ones got the chance to show off what they're really capable of. sure, they might not have been the best person for the job at that time, but they will be given the chance and to serve as a role model for others to do the same thing. Giving people an education won't give them experience, and without experience there will always be someone who's more qualified at the job. The problem is also on the work floor. And I believe that we should have people representing minorities so that more people get the chance to get into the right education and into the right job.
@@guilhermeferrao5968 m.th-cam.com/video/NMsfLJB5S9E/w-d-xo.html And the announcement of male and female drivers: th-cam.com/video/llgAnP2sUy8/w-d-xo.html
I have a counter example that also happened. It is the only reason my grandpa was racist. His job had an “African American quota”, they had to fill. The thing is, the people they hired weren’t qualified because of their limited education. The thing is, due to the already existing racism in the work environment, instead of giving them chances to learn, they were often just given the simplest tasks. My grandpa notice that however, so when he compared the white to the black workers, he thought that white workers were just dumber. This is why, while you should hire a more diverse set of workers, you should not value race or gender more than actual skill.
The whole point of anti-discrimination laws is that you choose the person most qualified for the job, and not the whitest or straightest person for a job, they aren't in place to say you have to hire the gay guy like you alluded to, on the contrary they exist to say, his sexuality should not play a role in your decision making and can not be the reason you fire him. Those decisions should be made based on performance, qualifications, and disciplinary records.
At the same time however, you have to wonder if that boss of x company, regardless of their race, biological sex, etc., hired that white male because of bias. Maybe they happened to be more qualified for that job, but as an outsider with a less informed perspective, one would think that perhaps that white male was hired because of racist and sexist reasons, and maybe they would be right. While I personally don't believe that anyone should be hired based on their physical appearance (**with exceptions), I would personally find it more comfortable if a black employee replaced a white one or a female was picked for a promotion or for a job over a male. See my point? (**Examples include movies, plays, video games, and other media. Obviously, you should pick the right person for the job. A person of color should always have the role of playing as a person of color (of matching skin color, etc.) on the big screen, or someone who is gay IRL should be the only possible pick for someone who is gay in a movie or what have you.)
The quotas of black people means schools and workplaces are required to choose the less qualified person because they’re black, just because of the quota. Scary when you consider your doctor being accepted into med school for a quota, rather than skill.
@@xisumavoid I argue that white people cannot be discriminated against, if that was your point. People of color have been oppressed by white people for tens of thousands of years (perhaps longer), and it continues to this day, while white people have not and cannot know what that's like. If a white person is fired from a job and a person of color took their position, and only if it were because they were a person of color, then I don't see a problem; of course however it's a major issue when it's reversed, to say the very least.
Thank you X!!! These videos have been so wonderful to watch. And as a young white male teen it is so awesome to hear everything thing you are saying!!!
being part of the LGBTQ+ comunity myself, seeing so little representation of "people like me" growing up I tought I was the weird one, but now that there is more representation is easier to relate to some people. How you said, for people who already know who they are, it might not change much, but for younger people it might help a lot to feel included.
I don't mind re-examining my beliefs and interrogating them, but I don't like the phrase "the devil's advocate"... because I don't think the devil needs an advocate! And often this phrase is not being used as nicely as you use it.
I think the point is hyperbolic, in the sense that the point is exactly to question just how much of a devil are they, phrased in a way that presents the idea as if it was impossible. It’s like saying, imagine for a second that they really weren’t the devil, stupid I know right?, but if we imagine etc etc and by the end you reach the conclusion that maybe they weren’t the devil at all. It’s about easing into it when the people you are discussing are against open criticism you have to hide your criticism in constructions like these.
Representation is just stupid discrimination. I don’t want a person of my skin color, gender and sexuality to represent me. I want someone with the same values as me to represent me. Those 3 things are just irrelevant.
Representation also helps normalizing and integrate minority groups in society by exposing people to it. I feel like media is the best way to achieve this (TV shows, Books, music etc.) And i full hearthly agree that we as a society need to strive for equal oppertunity for all and aslong as people work towards this, the inequality gap will become smaller overtime.
For true equality society needs to provide everybody with the same opportunities regardless of difference. What won't help is trying to ensure that groups are represented equally in jobs by artificially forcing people in and out of positions and hiring people who are under qualified for jobs just because they come from a more desirable group. This just creates more racism, sexism, classis etc. We all need to have a serious discussion about what the right way is to provide equal opportunity to all and stop closing each other down and name calling when somebody shares an opinion we don't agree with.
"I agree with that, but" Contrary to what most people might think, one does not have the "right" to become a firefighter. that is what a qualification is all about, it is a privilege that must be earned. Education likewise isn't a right, it is a privilege, because it MUST be provided by others. What others provide cannot be your right. Why do people get this wrong so much?
In the middle of this video x was talking to his viewers about feeling represented by people who look like you. And I must say that is a total red hearing. Just because they look like you does not mean they represent you in anyway. We could have all the black representation in the world but just because they're black doesn't mean they represent you. We see this all the time in the US. Both the Republican and Democratic parties are lead by white people. Men most of the time. And I don't feel represented by either ever. I'd argue that most people don't feel represented. This concept of needing representation has always confused me because it seems to me that you'd need to assign worth to someone based on the color of their skin. Something that is inherently racist by every definition. As MLK Jr said "... they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character".
My father was up for a job, and the employer had a quota for race and gender. My father is white, so he didn’t get the job, and the person who got the job had no qualification for the industry she was working in, and was right out of college. While I am biased toward my own father I also know if a person is more qualified more has more experience than another, they should get the job. Not based on religion, sex, or race. I don’t know how good of a job she did, but that job really would’ve helped my family out...
At 2:37 you discuss equal education. In my country church schools used to require a test to enter (which if you passed you would be in a "smart kid's land) and if you failed you would have been put into a sort of school of ignorant people (the ones that don't care) and about 10 yrs ago the law changed to remove the tests and that made all classes suffer from bullying. Equality isn't always necessary. It's quality.
Diversity quotas are usually in place to offset the unconscious bias in hiring staff, which is fine when implemented thoughtfully. What becomes a problem is when the diversity policies don't reflect the bias in the hiring environment. If a job requires a certain qualification, which in your area is mostly held by white people, requiring that position to be given to a non white person will significantly reduce the sample of applicants, and make it less likely that the best person will be available.
Just listening to these talks updates my worldview more than the news at this point Edit: Also the two men analogy thing- my first instinct would be to intimidate them away, no matter how tall they are. Disadvantage of living in a country where rape-culture is prevalent and being female there, I guess.
I agree employers need to look at qualifications but there should still be quotas. Diverse workplaces work better, so until society is truly equal we need supplemental programs.
One very good book about internal biases that I've read is Biased by Jennifer Eberhardt. It covers a lot of very interesting points and goes into a lot more depth then what X has covered here, so if you're interested in this topic check it out.
I think so many problems in society really start at education. racism, Inequality in jobs, Misinformation on political issues, even poverty could well be solved if everyone was well educated. It's such an important part of everyone's lives, I don't think governments give enough recourses to it.
On one hand it is because you can control uneducated populations. Educated populations are more dangerous. But more importantly, it’s because education is a somewhat longterm investment. As a politician, you spend money now to start getting the rewards in 20 years. So you are spending money and the (near sighted) population gets mad because you spend money and they don’t see any value from it. You can just take money out of eduction, no one will see the consequences except the teachers and students, but both of them are usually ignored, and you can spend the money on something else more immediate. 20 years later people complain about why politics and democracy are shit. Turns out that giving power to the people only really works if people are educated.
Things like job applications shouldn’t include information like sex, gender, race, sexual orientation, etc. Unless it’s relevant. If you think about it, the fact these things are included in most applications is somewhat strange. (Of course, there may be exceptions where these factors do matter, but they should only be included in applications to relevant jobs.)
Listening to these are very nice and calming. My mind is becoming more open since just last year as I started listening to these and the live-streams :-)
On the topic of brain feeding you information, i recently found out that your eyes are covered with blood vessels but we dont see them cause our brain edit them out. Also, you can sometime see tiny white dots moving around your eyes those are most likely white blood cells that our brain forgot to edit.
I feel like the paradox where rapresentation is needed but at the same time meritocracy is also needed should be solved by asking people in power not only to have the skills to make decisions and other stuff but also the mindset of being curious and asking people around them for information, to try and understand different situations and different kind of people, we don't necessarily need minorities to be rapresented but we need them to be fully understood
(and with time, hopefully, as people will have more and more access to education and equal opportunities, people of all kinds of backgrounds will be chosen or voted for)
On this topic I HIGHLY recommend reading Akala's 'Race and class in the ruins of an empire', as well as his podcasts etc, he takes on the discussion of tokenism vs meritism really well. It's a tricky situation, but he explains it fantastically- if that's a word. On the topic of apathy, even if coming from a person belonging to a minority, to me, it's someone's moral obligation to care about these things, whether or not they agree with it or not. Even if you don't personally care, you should care about how someone else cares, if that makes sense. And not as an attack, but as you said, you're in a position as a white male where you don't HAVE to care about this. But, if your in a privileged position and you do care, that can be what makes a difference in representation. (Though that bring on the whole other white saviour discussion.) Anyway, love your videos X, they always bring up interesting discussions. :)
Hey X, I love the vid. It made me learn more about our society and how the problems in our society affect people that have a different races or a different skin color even. I would love for you to have a podcast of your own that talks about problems like these and other subject such as Minecraft's evolution for like 1 hour. I watched The Spawn Chunks and listened and I loved it.
Imo, we need to put people in position even if they are not qualified equally. Yet, we need to do this for a few years, so the overall problems are better.
I have an idea! Let’s give people jobs they don’t know how to do! What would happen to those who DO have qualifications? Would they be denied a job because they are already represented? So people who are not traditionally represented will be priority? Sounds like discrimination to me.
One thing I've found about myself is when I see a person I dont actually think about their appearance like in my mind I dont go "oh that person is black" instead I think "I wonder what they're like" and I dont know if this is ignorance or a good thing
Everyone brought up good points, but there are other factors that are also worth mentioning: People who grew up without a fathre figure Someone who grew up in a abusive houshold What if you were born in a starving country Someone born with some sort of disorder This is the problem with the idea of meritocracy, that no, it isn’t only of “The reason they are on top is becuse they worked hard”, which is a contributing factor, but it is THE only factor that doesn’t have to do with luck. Well, that is my offer to the discussion, I would like to hear if anyone agrees or disagrees, 👍
That is why meritocracy is only fair if you ensure equal opportunity. Real equal opportunity is impossible, but we can at least make strong social services that guarantee a reasonable minimum of opportunity for everyone.
It's really hard to completely get rid of the race factor in things like job applications, but it would be a bit easier if every application was anonymous/not connected to anyone until after they get the job
Well ... if speaking the language of the country isnt listed in the papers and you just assume he she it can speak the countrys language and stuff I wouldnt hire someone like this Just because its a pain on the job and communication is important at work
I understand frustration of hiring people based on race or gender rather than someone who was possibly more qualified. But frankly hiring people based on experience and education doesn't necessarily mean anything either. How many times have we all encountered people who might have met the requirements to get a job, but were totally incompetent at doing it? I know companies who will hire software developers based purely on college education, even though most of them come in on day one and can barely answer basic questions about programming, which makes you wonder what exactly did they just spend the past few years doing. You can ace the testing phase to prove your ability, you can have years of freelance experience, but companies will almost always take the guy who has education and no experience, and then that guy along with his team of fellow incompetents will be the reason a website is down for hours or your internet stops working. There are well-known companies who hire college newbies knowing full well that it will take them years to ever achieve any position of trust beyond the grunt work that a monkey could be trained to do, readily passing over passionate people who are self-taught because they dare not taint their company's reputation with "uneducated" workers. It's all a mess.
My dad works in the film industry, and many companies like Netflix will hire people with *very* little experience, solely because they need to meet the diversity quota. I feel like they should be hiring the people with little experience on the lower-end shows, just like everyone else had to do. My dad started working on-set as a janitor, saving up to make small Indy films. He eventually got noticed and asked to work as an assistant director. Fast foreword to today and he’s got 20 years of experience as a director. He wasn’t given some free pass straight to a high position like many people think white men did, he had to work his way up. I believe that even if you’re part of a diverse group, you should still have to start small before you can go big. (P.S. I totally support diversity in the workplace, but I think many companies are over-compensating.)
Representation to me, as someone whose gender (ftm) and sexuality (asexual) isn’t often represented in media, seeing someone that represents me takes me a bit off guard, but in a nice validating way. I don’t go around demanding representation however I know it’s extremely important in shaping people’s perceptions. For instance, in my experience, the few times asexuality, or something similar, is shown in media it’s often associated with being a psychopath or being less human in the sense your unable to feel love, which isn’t true, and that can create issues, and stigma when I talk to people about it. Representation normalises people of all backgrounds, brings up issues they face and educate people, which is especially important to those who may just be learning about lgbtq+ ideas or going in with prejudice or causally racist predispositions.
little help from a person from a few minority groups: you as a person dont care about representation and dont care that youre white because you are white. you would be a different person and it would bother you if you were under represented in media. it can be really hard to understand if you havent experienced these kinds of things for yourself but it makes me happy that you are trying to empathize!! we've all had our issues that we've felt alone in and a lot of minority groups are born with a thing like that sewn into their being
I think it's likely a psychological thing that some people would care about and others would not. For under represented people who care about that, it may be catastrophic. For those who don't, they might not even notice it. But the problem is still there
@@guilhermeferrao5968 it might depend heavily on where you live and how and when. in many places its basically illegal to be trans etc. im a lesbian and havent really experienced homophobia in my life but its still hard to live in a hetero normative society where my attractions feel othered
@@lordx9808 it might depend heavily on where you live and how and when. in many places its basically illegal to be trans etc. im a lesbian and havent really experienced homophobia in my life but its still hard to live in a hetero normative society where my attractions feel othered. maybe its different being black (sorry i copy pasted this so i could tag you aswell)
If people can't get over the fact that a TV character, worker, show host etc.. Is not their kind of skin colour, sexually or gender and cant or don't want to like it then they are pretty racist or sexist themselves.
Because they were all successful minecraft TH-camrs before being invited on to hermit craft, and minecraft TH-camrs, particularly successful ones, are predominantly white and male.
X I don't think that racism as a bias comes from the same place as others though like height etc, the stereotypes our brains innately go to is caused by society's views of non-white people that's been built from years of colonialism
Its the bias that is exploited. Imagine if colonialism had something to do with eye color (because it changes based on where you are on the planet), then that becomes the issue. Its all superficial but yes colonialism plays a massive part in why it is skin tone and race.
You know what there needs to be like copper wiring and and machinery a bit like redstone but makes stuff automatically and that. Could go alongside the cave update and so forth. If they add copper there’s endless possibilities. Plus yet another community.
I liked the video, because I think Xisuma's a thinker and a learner. But this feels like a collection of thoughtful excuses for current behavior and not actual empathy or attempt to learn about people unlike him. I'm disappointed.
Representation is a win for employers because it helps them get over useless biases, and a win for employees because it gives you more confidence in exploring job options. By itself, representation can be fixed relatively easily with culture change, e.g. women in gaming or atheism in politics. Of course for many groups this is in conjunction with crippling wealth inequality that robs them of proper access to training and education. But even when affirmitive action chooses minority representation over another overqualified, rich white male, it’s for the greater good in the long run because it opens up a larger pool of people for employers/consumers to choose from, who will be just as well educated in the future.
Representation really isn't about how you want to be perceived, and even tho most minorities want to be included and it feels amazing to be included, they know that representation isn't for them at the end of the day, it's for the bigoted, homophobic, transphobic and so on, people that will see the characters or actors on TV, and become more comfortable with the idea with living them in real life. In some instances representation helps minorities feel more comfortable and that they are not alone, let's say people with disabilities seeing someone with a disability on screen, of lgbtq folk seeing someone from the lgbtq on screen.
when i first moved to arizona the apparent prejudice here comparatively to north california was so vast i had to conceal it from myself because it does no good here to stand for any kind of political correctness. not to say there arent good people here but when the majority keeps pre conceived perceptions of who you based off stereotypes the nuance of socializing at work becomes hard mode. so moving up in work with integrity is easily negated by prejudice gossip. nuances like this are always overlooked but it can make the strongest question wtf the point of trying is.
consider this. lets say you're not racist and you're looking to hire new management for your store which is comprised of employees who are prejudice against color. you have 2 employees of completely equal qualifications 1 white 1 brown. the hire ups are pressuring preformance over equality, who are you gonna pick? just pick the one who will preform best right?
![[Live] ศึกมหึมันส์มวยไทยสังเวียนเดือด เวทีมวยชั่วคราวสวนสยาม | จันทร์ 30 กันยายน 2567](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/pM1k6f7JXUc/mqdefault.jpg)
Xisumas philosophy talks are very relaxing
I agree for the most part but what about jobs where 2 people have the same qualifications but one is discriminated against because of a characteristic- in that instance dont you think quotas help. I realise its a niche circumstance in this day and age where most people are accepting of people who are different but still what are your thoughts on this?
KlubbyPlays :( why did you change your comment?
I agree
Yves Isnotaname I didn’t? Lol😂
same
Xisuma can talk someone out of a hostage situation, love your commentaries ;)
"Yeah, you've just kidnapped this person. But what about if you would be kidnapped? Have you ever thought about how you would feel?"
Excellent mediator he is. He's missed his calling :p
Should've been employed by his local police department as a hostage mediator.
I wonder if he actually did that once
You should do a job you can do well, and that should matter above all else.
Not only should you excel at your job, but also feel comfortable and happy working it.
I think there are a few factors for the perfect job. 1: you can do it well. 2: you enjoy doing your job. and 3: it pays enough. (and I'm not saying it needs to be high paying. I mean at least enough to cover your expenses for living.) and there's probably a few more things people can think of.
You should TRY to be as diverse as possible, BUT it also must be best equipped. Diversity is a great thing, but if it becomes Tokenism (hiring people because of being diverse) then it becomes a problem. Diversity of thought and opinion is generally hand-in-hand with diversity of people. Tokenism just seems like you don't care and are doing it for PR or virtue signalling.
I think it makes sense to hire people for the sake of diversity to a certain extent. This extent, I'd say, is to try hire people in such a way that your team accurately represents society. For example, you could try to hire people in such a way that your team is 50% male and 50% female. Say 30% of the population is dark-skinned; you would then try to make it so 30% of the people you hire are dark-skinned.
This wouldn't be a productive measure to keep using in the long term; however, when inequality is so high, it would help to even things out a little bit.
Guilherme Ferrão why do you want your work force to reflect the population in terms of appearance? What is even the point?
I much rather have the best workers. Appearances are absolutely irrelevant for most jobs. Either as a company owner, a worker or a client, I want the best people for the job, appearance be dammed (including tattoos and piercings and any other prejudice about appearance).
Only if I am a competitor I want that company to hire people based on their appearances so they don’t work as effectively and I get the best workers hahah
If I owned a company I’d be so happy to see everyone else start judging people by their appearances instead of their real value. Except in the cases where it’s becoming mandatory to choose people by their appearance.
Hey X, since you said you are a viewer of Tom Scott at one point, I was wondering if you’d seen his series Citation Needed. It’s worth a watch if you haven’t seen one of the episodes before. I know it’s not related to the video, but the traffic is quieter here.
i’ve seen a comment of his on one of tom scott’s videos
I love these videos, especially since america is such a mess rn, but idk why these videos make me feel so much better because it’s explaining something that I may or may not support and maybe shifting my view a little bit
Probably because there's no shouting or throwing cuss words, heck there isn't even an interruption. It's just one guy and his views, you can either agree or disagree but to disagree you would have to comment which is not a loud/obnoxious way to disagree....
You're right X, fixing education is important but the problem is more complex than that. If you want to fix education, you need enough policymakers to want to fix education and if those policymakers have no want to fix the discriminatory/generational/wealth inequality issues then the problems continue. You need policymakers that are from more diverse backgrounds (in terms of race, social class, & wealth) that want to address those issues but how do those policymakers get there if they never have a chance at a solid education?
i think this is a good point but i think that in some cases people will address issues that don't affect them directly just because it's the right thing to do, but i would agree that the ideal scenario is to have diverse policymakers rather than relying on good intentions and effective communication of ideas from those who would be affected by change
He's a TH-camr which requires no education, so kinda hypocritical.
@@_-.G.-_ TH-cam may be a job that doesn't technically require education to succeed in, but that doesn't necessarily mean that X, for instance, didn't receive education. That's beside my point, though- I just came here to say that just because someone isn't affected by the events related to the topic of discussion doesn't mean their opinions on it are invalid, so hypocrisy isn't the greatest argument, especially in this case. However, your comment may just a statement and not an argument so I'll stop taking it so seriously (to be honest, I just wanted to take this little opportunity to see how I fare in expressing my opinion! Funny motive, huh.)
I just think that artificially providing jobs to disadvantaged communities is like putting a duct tape on a broken dam. It is very fragile and irresponsible fix for a huge underlying problem. And that we should instead focus on fixing the problem as a whole.
About the thing you said at the end, people are psychologically hardwired to find tall things intimidating, I suppose it helps when there's a massive bear trying to eat you or something like that, but it does play a part in society and everyday life and often people feel uncomfortable in the presence of much taller people.
You make a very good point, so true
Sometimes there can be small people who are imtimidating but your point is valid
This is a good video, however, I realized a part of the equation that X might've missed: benefits of diversity.
I know that this won't figure into a lot of jobs. In the case of a lumber worker, a log couldn't care less what color your skin is, what gender(s) you're attracted to, what your gender is, or what the average GDP of your hometown was. When it comes to designing, however, diversity can make a big difference. [Essay incoming]
Here's an example of what I mean: some companies have developed automatic sensors for public bathrooms (i.e. sinks, soap dispensers...) that can't be activated by people with darker skin. It's unlikely that the designers were trying to discriminate, but they made a machine that doesn't work for a huge chunk of the world's population. If the design team were more diverse, they might've thought to check that the sensor detected a wider range of skin tone.
Having more diverse creative teams could also reduce the amount of subtlety offensive commercials that would turn off potential customers.
This isn't to say that diversity should be the only consideration in hiring. It would be bad for business, and I for one would HATE it if I were only hired to meet some gender or LGBTQ+ quota. It also shouldn't be the responsibility of disadvantaged groups to correct privileged people's mistakes, but a diverse team is considerably less likely to make those mistakes. Because diversity provides benefits in these cases, it should have at least some consideration.
TL;DR: In design, diversity is a quality in its own right that can prevent unconscious bias in products. An unqualified person should never be chosen over a qualified one (framing it in those terms obscures the real issue), but a slightly less experienced person who has a underrepresented background might be more useful than a slightly more experienced person who has an overrepresented background.
Hello, Xisuma. Just finished watching and scrolled down to the comments and it brought up a lot of questions. One I'd like to ask:
You've made a video about meming in comment sections but how do you feel about people using it to submit "First", "Second" or "Early" even though they haven't watched a nanosecond of the video as if it is a race and sometimes resulting in short arguments?
I don't think his reaction to that would be very different from other meme comments
So many TH-cam comments are just
Nobody
Littrerally nobody
Not a SINGLE soul
A TH-camr: something they did
This is honestly one of the best series of videos on TH-cam I've been following(along with Hermitcraft of course!). Some really insightful views on all issues. Every video on Xisumasays has way fewer views than it actually should. Great content! Thanks!
Hi x, may I just say that I love to watch this side of you, you have a lot of smart things to say and you change the stereotype of the average youtuber who does reaction videos and weird challenge videos, you are a very wise man and I hope you keep uploading podcasts like this.
I support equality of opportunity but not the current trend of trying to force equality of outcome.
Hi X- I appreciate your well-measured and deeply considered videos on these topics. I largely agree with you in this instance, but would like to offer some evidence-based rebuttal, for the sake of challenging perceptions 🙂:
A study performed by Northwestern University, Harvard, and the Institute for Social Research in Norway in 2017 found that white applicants received a 36% higher rate of callbacks than black applicants with equal qualifications.
They used a combination of in-person interviews and paper applications with racially suggestive names.
I would submit that this (and the hundreds of studies akin to it) suggests that in our current climate, having equal opportunity would not be sufficient to combat systemic racism.
In this study, on paper all individuals had perceived equal opportunity in the eyes of the employer. Person1 and Person2 went to the same school, have the same GPA, have the same experience from the same companies, but Person1 is 36% more likely to be considered for employment.
Now I don’t think every single employer was consciously racist here; let’s presume they all have an unconscious bias. In such a case, wouldn’t a bias erode in the presence of positive representation, even if initially mandated?
That is to say, Suzy doesn’t think she’s racist, but she doesn’t choose to hire black people- not out of malevolence, she just never has and hasn’t ever noticed/considered her bias because she is surrounded by people who look like her. People don’t notice the everyday, they notice different.
She’s required to hire someone of color, which she does to fill a quota. However, a POC now becomes part of the everyday, and we’ll say for the sake of argument, they’re also a terrific worker.
I submit that she is now incrementally more likely to hire another POC, subconsciously, because she has an unconscious positive opinion regarding a POC
and she considers a POC to be part of the everyday environment.
But also for the record, someone remaining blissfully unaware of their biases is the last thing that could possibly help in any situation- regardless of the type of bias: Suzy should listen to your videos or read better literature, were she not a construct for a hypothetical situation.
TLDR;
I submit that there is evidence suggesting that until our society is more aware and intent on rooting out unconscious bias, neither equality of outcome nor equality of opportunity are individually capable of overcoming systemic racism. Total meritocracy when we can have it, but we’re not quite there yet.
I agree with you that the 36% difference needs to be addressed if applicants are of equal qualification for the job :-)
I always come away from these videos with something new to ponder that I’d never thought of before
great video
You didn't even watch the whole thing
in my opinion increasing oppurtunity should be giving people
access to training so that we can get a system with no quotas
and equal chances
Some people are disadvantaged when it comes to getting a job in certain industries. They are not given the opportunity to show what they can do. Support them and you get better work. Diversity brings ideas into a company and new perspectives.
The problem is diversity not usually about diversity of ideas. Diversity is about diversity of appearance and genitalia.
Do you really value diversity of views and opinion? Do you value free speech?
For example if someone believes that there exist genetic and hormonal different between the sexes, or if someone believes that there exist biological differences between the racial groups, even if the cause not understood, if someone believes that the workers should own the factories, if someone believes that taxation is theft, if someone thinks abortions are immoral, do you think it is valuable to have their different views ?
The second question is, do you think these views are valuable for, say, a wood chopping company?
My opinion different views are relevant, if they are technical views about the job the company does. None of the above views have any relevance to wood chopping, besides maybe the workers owning companies opinion. While I agree diversity is useful, it is diversity in the appropriate subjects, not about irrelevant aspects of life (irrelevant to the workings of the company).
Does this guy have a podcast?
It's quite hard for *some* companies to represent black people, LGBTQ+ people e.t.c.
Sometimes they just don't have the qualifications or they just don't get as many of those people. It's not about purposefully hiring these people, it's about not turning them away for who they are.
In my opinion, it's not the job of companies to include people of different cultures and stuff. It's their job to treat people equally.
I do agree with you on everyone being racist, it's not a hate it's just a stereotype we have in our brains
Xisuma. I agree for the most part but what about jobs where 2 people have the same qualifications but one is discriminated against because of a characteristic- in that instance dont you think quotas help. I realise its a niche circumstance in this day and age where most people are accepting of people who are different but still what are your thoughts on this?
Most of the time a company has no clue how qualified someone is when they hire someone.
I have trouble presenting myself which will make it hard for me to get a job whereas some other people who are actually way less qualified pretend like they're gods at what they're doing and they'll get the job.
Also, they do pick people on their past work experience. But without any experience you won't get a job, and without a job you won't get any experience. Someone has to be the first to trust that you're capable of doing the job, and with so many unintentional discrimination around there will be people who can't get a job and they'll get stuck into that loop..
Lets say you have a white man and a black man, both having the same skill level and job experience, by hiring the black man to fill a quota is quite literally hiring him because hes black, making him being black somehow better than someone being white, therefore discriminating against the white man(sorry if this is a confusing response)
Diversity in a workplace is important to cultivate New ideas. Your quality of work should be the only thing that factor in to your hiring. But sometimes, I see the other side of this argumen where the partisipan in question IS from a minority background but saddly, dosen meant the recruitment for said job and but they see it as an attack of there identity they threw a fit and complain on Twitter, calling "The Big Man" the True problem and labeling them and even the whole company, as a racist for not hiring them. I also see a company hiring people for JUST for there Background and minority just for the sake Of PR Stunt and building a narrative of a "Heroic Company" for cash when there work is... Let's say not there best. Granted, I know the reality of people not hiring sertan people because of there backgrounds. but I can't help but bring up those points when talking about diversity in a company. and this is coming from someone who would be considered a minority in America.
Exactly. Representation quotas is basically fighting symptoms instead of fighting the disease. And you're gonna get some negative side effects on top of that. If we do this we will need to keep fighting the symptoms to all eternity.
The representation in media is a legitimate argument of course because the best way to get rid of discrimination is to normalise the thing that's being discriminated against.
I always find the representation for the person who's being represented a weird thing. I can usually identify much better with people who share my ideals rather than gender, skin colour or sexual orientation. Of course I'm not in any disadvantaged or minority group so I guess that may just be thanks to me never having experienced serious discrimination. So anyway, there's no harm to me if there's representation for others in media, so I say, sure why not.
You discussed how we should fix the problems of inequality in the workplace by allowing for equal access to education, instead of forced representation through quotas.I agree with this as quotas seem like a band-aid fix instead of addressing the actual issue, but i was also wondering about your opinion on forced representation in universities and training courses. Surely that would be vital in creating equal opportunities? Just some food for thought :)
How is it equal opportunities if you force Asians to need to have higher grades than everyone else to get in?
That is the opposite of equal opportunity.
Having university students reflect the population is only fair if the the population is equally educated. But that’s not the reality. The really is asians have higher grades than other races.
Don’t divide people by their appearances. It is not fair for someone to get a harder time getting into university just because the other people that look like them tend to be better than people that don’t look like them.
Having race specific entries is just discriminatory, I can’t see how that is fair.
Equal opportunities means equal rules for everyone. That’s why justice is represented blind, so no one is favoured over another. What we need is less discrimination, not institutionalised discrimination in universities.
I think people confuse Equality and Equity. If you want equality, there will always be folks who don't benefit even though it's "Equal" because you're distributing said "something" equally even though some are already ahead than others. Equity means distributing goods/wealth based on who needs it to get to baseline with everyone else.
For example, 3 people watch a baseball game from the other side of a 6-foot fence. 1 person is 6'3'' tall and needs no help watching, 1 person is 5' 10'' tall and needs to be on his tippy toes to see and the final person is 5'1'' tall and can't watch no matter how much they try. Now let's say you have three 6" high boxes to help them see better, Equality would mean giving them each one, but you'll find only 2 of the three would benefit, so someone still loses out. Equity would mean giving 2 boxes to the shortest person and one to the middle person so now all three people can see over the fence with no problem.
Equality will always have a loser no matter because of natural advantages what whereas Equity will make sure that the distribution of benefit will be given out to those who need it more to offset the natural advantages some of us have.
For me, I don't also seek representation for my race in media and such, but then again every single time that my race is represented on media, it's always so exaggerated, wrong and look demeaning to us that we are like "hey, why don't you hire a legit one of us to represent us correctly instead of this blatantly wrong stereotypes?"
I think the conversation should be more focused on opportunities than representation. The opportunities is soemthing that everyone I’ve encountered will acknowledge. But representation for representation sake doesn’t benefit anyone. Ideally, being a minority shouldn’t be soemthing you have to “fly a flag of”. Something more akin to “not seeing color”, but for all minorities (sexual, romantic, gender, race, size, etc.). The conversation comes up in the film industry a lot, and I’ve always looked for character representation instead of physical attributes. I’m a nerd, so I like seeing nerdy characters, not the same overdone bad boy types. I’ve never cared if the character was male or female, one race or another, anything like that.
TL;DR: I understand not feeling represented, but we should just normalize our differences, because that’s what equality is (to me)
The thing is, race can factor into character representation. A black person might share similar experiences with an on screen character that is also black and vice versa. Race factors into culture and culture is how we relate to each other.
X i really think you need to read some sociology, you seem to like the topic instinctively, because you touch on a lot of the subjects, but lack the definitions. If you or anyone reads this and think they would like to know more i don't mind that much investing some time into finding some material for you, just throw a topic at me and i will see what i can find.
You know Xisuma, i've discovered your videos in this secondary channel only recently, and i'm really into open discussions. Sometimes i don't agree with you, but in this video i really loved your way of thinking, and I just wanted to say that i really agree with you about the educationnal point.
to give you an example, i'm living in France and we also have this issue with the education. The only thing is, the education in france is free, unlike the USA.
I love his voice very calming
In 2021 a new racing series will start called Extreme E. Each team has 2 drivers. One of them is male, and one of them is female. In normal racing pretty much all of the drivers (or should I say 'racists' in the same way someone who plays the guitar is a guitarist :p ) are male. If the teams can pick the best drivers, then they will pick male drivers because male drivers are better. Hardly any women try become a professional driver because the whole scene is dominated by men. And when there is a woman who tries she won't get hired by any team since "male drivers are better" and therefore they don't get the chance to develop. Maybe some low budget team will hire her because all of the other drivers are taken, but those teams can't hire the proper mechanics and the woman will end up at the back of the leaderboard which "confirms" that "woman can't drive".
Extreme E will give women an equal chance compared to men. They give the women the chance to develop while still allowing the teams to select the right person for the job. If they succeed then more woman will try to enter the racing scene and more women will get the chance to grow and to show off what they're capable off. Requiring representation will enable whole groups to get on the same level as the currently dominating group because the first ones got the chance to show off what they're really capable of. sure, they might not have been the best person for the job at that time, but they will be given the chance and to serve as a role model for others to do the same thing. Giving people an education won't give them experience, and without experience there will always be someone who's more qualified at the job. The problem is also on the work floor. And I believe that we should have people representing minorities so that more people get the chance to get into the right education and into the right job.
Do you have any sources for this Extreme E thing?
Funny cos women are the majority, arent they?
Like 51% of Earth’s population?
@@guilhermeferrao5968
m.th-cam.com/video/NMsfLJB5S9E/w-d-xo.html
And the announcement of male and female drivers:
th-cam.com/video/llgAnP2sUy8/w-d-xo.html
@@guilhermeferrao5968 (I hardly ever seen comments with links in them. Please tell me if you don't see a comment with the sources).
I have a counter example that also happened. It is the only reason my grandpa was racist. His job had an “African American quota”, they had to fill. The thing is, the people they hired weren’t qualified because of their limited education. The thing is, due to the already existing racism in the work environment, instead of giving them chances to learn, they were often just given the simplest tasks. My grandpa notice that however, so when he compared the white to the black workers, he thought that white workers were just dumber. This is why, while you should hire a more diverse set of workers, you should not value race or gender more than actual skill.
The whole point of anti-discrimination laws is that you choose the person most qualified for the job, and not the whitest or straightest person for a job, they aren't in place to say you have to hire the gay guy like you alluded to, on the contrary they exist to say, his sexuality should not play a role in your decision making and can not be the reason you fire him. Those decisions should be made based on performance, qualifications, and disciplinary records.
At the same time however, you have to wonder if that boss of x company, regardless of their race, biological sex, etc., hired that white male because of bias. Maybe they happened to be more qualified for that job, but as an outsider with a less informed perspective, one would think that perhaps that white male was hired because of racist and sexist reasons, and maybe they would be right. While I personally don't believe that anyone should be hired based on their physical appearance (**with exceptions), I would personally find it more comfortable if a black employee replaced a white one or a female was picked for a promotion or for a job over a male. See my point?
(**Examples include movies, plays, video games, and other media. Obviously, you should pick the right person for the job. A person of color should always have the role of playing as a person of color (of matching skin color, etc.) on the big screen, or someone who is gay IRL should be the only possible pick for someone who is gay in a movie or what have you.)
@@DarkSunGameplay that's why anti-discrimination laws require proof you were discriminated against, so we don't get just an outsider deciding.
The quotas of black people means schools and workplaces are required to choose the less qualified person because they’re black, just because of the quota. Scary when you consider your doctor being accepted into med school for a quota, rather than skill.
In the video I believe I was talking about forced equality and positive-discrimination :-)
@@xisumavoid I argue that white people cannot be discriminated against, if that was your point. People of color have been oppressed by white people for tens of thousands of years (perhaps longer), and it continues to this day, while white people have not and cannot know what that's like. If a white person is fired from a job and a person of color took their position, and only if it were because they were a person of color, then I don't see a problem; of course however it's a major issue when it's reversed, to say the very least.
Thank you X!!! These videos have been so wonderful to watch. And as a young white male teen it is so awesome to hear everything thing you are saying!!!
being part of the LGBTQ+ comunity myself, seeing so little representation of "people like me" growing up I tought I was the weird one, but now that there is more representation is easier to relate to some people.
How you said, for people who already know who they are, it might not change much, but for younger people it might help a lot to feel included.
I don't mind re-examining my beliefs and interrogating them, but I don't like the phrase "the devil's advocate"... because I don't think the devil needs an advocate! And often this phrase is not being used as nicely as you use it.
I think the point is hyperbolic, in the sense that the point is exactly to question just how much of a devil are they, phrased in a way that presents the idea as if it was impossible.
It’s like saying, imagine for a second that they really weren’t the devil, stupid I know right?, but if we imagine etc etc
and by the end you reach the conclusion that maybe they weren’t the devil at all. It’s about easing into it when the people you are discussing are against open criticism you have to hide your criticism in constructions like these.
I love this video
A very noice
Representation is not equality of opportunity, the only equality that matters.
Representation is just stupid discrimination.
I don’t want a person of my skin color, gender and sexuality to represent me.
I want someone with the same values as me to represent me. Those 3 things are just irrelevant.
Representation also helps normalizing and integrate minority groups in society by exposing people to it.
I feel like media is the best way to achieve this (TV shows, Books, music etc.)
And i full hearthly agree that we as a society need to strive for equal oppertunity for all and aslong as people work towards this, the inequality gap will become smaller overtime.
I prefer your streams to your videos
For true equality society needs to provide everybody with the same opportunities regardless of difference. What won't help is trying to ensure that groups are represented equally in jobs by artificially forcing people in and out of positions and hiring people who are under qualified for jobs just because they come from a more desirable group. This just creates more racism, sexism, classis etc. We all need to have a serious discussion about what the right way is to provide equal opportunity to all and stop closing each other down and name calling when somebody shares an opinion we don't agree with.
Hey X, something important you should check out is r/The10thDentist. I think it is a better version of UnpopularOpinion.
"I agree with that, but"
Contrary to what most people might think, one does not have the "right" to become a firefighter. that is what a qualification is all about, it is a privilege that must be earned. Education likewise isn't a right, it is a privilege, because it MUST be provided by others. What others provide cannot be your right. Why do people get this wrong so much?
In the middle of this video x was talking to his viewers about feeling represented by people who look like you. And I must say that is a total red hearing. Just because they look like you does not mean they represent you in anyway. We could have all the black representation in the world but just because they're black doesn't mean they represent you. We see this all the time in the US. Both the Republican and Democratic parties are lead by white people. Men most of the time. And I don't feel represented by either ever. I'd argue that most people don't feel represented. This concept of needing representation has always confused me because it seems to me that you'd need to assign worth to someone based on the color of their skin. Something that is inherently racist by every definition. As MLK Jr said "... they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character".
My father was up for a job, and the employer had a quota for race and gender. My father is white, so he didn’t get the job, and the person who got the job had no qualification for the industry she was working in, and was right out of college. While I am biased toward my own father I also know if a person is more qualified more has more experience than another, they should get the job. Not based on religion, sex, or race. I don’t know how good of a job she did, but that job really would’ve helped my family out...
At 2:37 you discuss equal education. In my country church schools used to require a test to enter (which if you passed you would be in a "smart kid's land) and if you failed you would have been put into a sort of school of ignorant people (the ones that don't care) and about 10 yrs ago the law changed to remove the tests and that made all classes suffer from bullying. Equality isn't always necessary. It's quality.
Diversity quotas are usually in place to offset the unconscious bias in hiring staff, which is fine when implemented thoughtfully.
What becomes a problem is when the diversity policies don't reflect the bias in the hiring environment. If a job requires a certain qualification, which in your area is mostly held by white people, requiring that position to be given to a non white person will significantly reduce the sample of applicants, and make it less likely that the best person will be available.
Just listening to these talks updates my worldview more than the news at this point
Edit: Also the two men analogy thing- my first instinct would be to intimidate them away, no matter how tall they are. Disadvantage of living in a country where rape-culture is prevalent and being female there, I guess.
I agree employers need to look at qualifications but there should still be quotas. Diverse workplaces work better, so until society is truly equal we need supplemental programs.
One very good book about internal biases that I've read is Biased by Jennifer Eberhardt. It covers a lot of very interesting points and goes into a lot more depth then what X has covered here, so if you're interested in this topic check it out.
I think so many problems in society really start at education. racism, Inequality in jobs, Misinformation on political issues, even poverty could well be solved if everyone was well educated. It's such an important part of everyone's lives, I don't think governments give enough recourses to it.
On one hand it is because you can control uneducated populations. Educated populations are more dangerous.
But more importantly, it’s because education is a somewhat longterm investment. As a politician, you spend money now to start getting the rewards in 20 years. So you are spending money and the (near sighted) population gets mad because you spend money and they don’t see any value from it. You can just take money out of eduction, no one will see the consequences except the teachers and students, but both of them are usually ignored, and you can spend the money on something else more immediate.
20 years later people complain about why politics and democracy are shit. Turns out that giving power to the people only really works if people are educated.
Things like job applications shouldn’t include information like sex, gender, race, sexual orientation, etc. Unless it’s relevant. If you think about it, the fact these things are included in most applications is somewhat strange.
(Of course, there may be exceptions where these factors do matter, but they should only be included in applications to relevant jobs.)
In what kind of jobs would such information matter? Just curious because I couldn’t think of anything myself at the moment.
@@Alex-02 any job that has you communicate with your colleagues who may or may not accept certain things about you
@Gabe 18 Science would beg to differ.
I have always thought that it is more about the economy than representation; and in this case, culture.
This helped me work out a more elegant way of saying what I think. Thank you
Merit matters. Anything else is just special pleading.
How you cwn see shulkers without placing them on the ground
Listening to these are very nice and calming. My mind is becoming more open since just last year as I started listening to these and the live-streams :-)
On the topic of brain feeding you information, i recently found out that your eyes are covered with blood vessels but we dont see them cause our brain edit them out. Also, you can sometime see tiny white dots moving around your eyes those are most likely white blood cells that our brain forgot to edit.
You can see the blood vessels if you shine a light in your eyes through a tiny hole. It's a rather trippy experience!
I feel like the paradox where rapresentation is needed but at the same time meritocracy is also needed should be solved by asking people in power not only to have the skills to make decisions and other stuff but also the mindset of being curious and asking people around them for information, to try and understand different situations and different kind of people, we don't necessarily need minorities to be rapresented but we need them to be fully understood
(and with time, hopefully, as people will have more and more access to education and equal opportunities, people of all kinds of backgrounds will be chosen or voted for)
Loved being part of this discussion! :-) Thank you for taking on this topic and thinking about it from multiple perspectives!
i thought you were gaming not current events
this is so cool
4:02 Thats because you are not a racist.
On this topic I HIGHLY recommend reading Akala's 'Race and class in the ruins of an empire', as well as his podcasts etc, he takes on the discussion of tokenism vs meritism really well. It's a tricky situation, but he explains it fantastically- if that's a word.
On the topic of apathy, even if coming from a person belonging to a minority, to me, it's someone's moral obligation to care about these things, whether or not they agree with it or not. Even if you don't personally care, you should care about how someone else cares, if that makes sense. And not as an attack, but as you said, you're in a position as a white male where you don't HAVE to care about this. But, if your in a privileged position and you do care, that can be what makes a difference in representation. (Though that bring on the whole other white saviour discussion.)
Anyway, love your videos X, they always bring up interesting discussions. :)
Have a great day!
We meet again
My grain-y friend
this situation might go awrye
Hey X, I love the vid. It made me learn more about our society and how the problems in our society affect people that have a different races or a different skin color even. I would love for you to have a podcast of your own that talks about problems like these and other subject such as Minecraft's evolution for like 1 hour. I watched The Spawn Chunks and listened and I loved it.
One of the best of youre videos👍
Xisuma is the chosen one, you must see it.
Imo, we need to put people in position even if they are not qualified equally. Yet, we need to do this for a few years, so the overall problems are better.
Answer: if you never had a black teacher, would you feel motivated?
I have an idea! Let’s give people jobs they don’t know how to do! What would happen to those who DO have qualifications? Would they be denied a job because they are already represented? So people who are not traditionally represented will be priority? Sounds like discrimination to me.
Make this a podcast
TED Talk time!
One thing I've found about myself is when I see a person I dont actually think about their appearance like in my mind I dont go "oh that person is black" instead I think "I wonder what they're like" and I dont know if this is ignorance or a good thing
Non discrimination is a good thing. Is that not clear?
Everyone brought up good points, but there are other factors that are also worth mentioning:
People who grew up without a fathre figure
Someone who grew up in a abusive houshold
What if you were born in a starving country
Someone born with some sort of disorder
This is the problem with the idea of meritocracy, that no, it isn’t only of “The reason they are on top is becuse they worked hard”, which is a contributing factor, but it is THE only factor that doesn’t have to do with luck. Well, that is my offer to the discussion, I would like to hear if anyone agrees or disagrees, 👍
That is why meritocracy is only fair if you ensure equal opportunity.
Real equal opportunity is impossible, but we can at least make strong social services that guarantee a reasonable minimum of opportunity for everyone.
i love this channel so much i enjoy listening to xisuma’s talks and i love listening to his thoughts.
It is an interesting topic. And I thin’ that the person who can do the job best should get it.
It's really hard to completely get rid of the race factor in things like job applications, but it would be a bit easier if every application was anonymous/not connected to anyone until after they get the job
Well ... if speaking the language of the country isnt listed in the papers and you just assume he she it can speak the countrys language and stuff
I wouldnt hire someone like this
Just because its a pain on the job and communication is important at work
I understand frustration of hiring people based on race or gender rather than someone who was possibly more qualified. But frankly hiring people based on experience and education doesn't necessarily mean anything either. How many times have we all encountered people who might have met the requirements to get a job, but were totally incompetent at doing it? I know companies who will hire software developers based purely on college education, even though most of them come in on day one and can barely answer basic questions about programming, which makes you wonder what exactly did they just spend the past few years doing. You can ace the testing phase to prove your ability, you can have years of freelance experience, but companies will almost always take the guy who has education and no experience, and then that guy along with his team of fellow incompetents will be the reason a website is down for hours or your internet stops working. There are well-known companies who hire college newbies knowing full well that it will take them years to ever achieve any position of trust beyond the grunt work that a monkey could be trained to do, readily passing over passionate people who are self-taught because they dare not taint their company's reputation with "uneducated" workers. It's all a mess.
Capitalism Always Wins
I cri everytime
My dad works in the film industry, and many companies like Netflix will hire people with *very* little experience, solely because they need to meet the diversity quota. I feel like they should be hiring the people with little experience on the lower-end shows, just like everyone else had to do. My dad started working on-set as a janitor, saving up to make small Indy films. He eventually got noticed and asked to work as an assistant director. Fast foreword to today and he’s got 20 years of experience as a director. He wasn’t given some free pass straight to a high position like many people think white men did, he had to work his way up. I believe that even if you’re part of a diverse group, you should still have to start small before you can go big. (P.S. I totally support diversity in the workplace, but I think many companies are over-compensating.)
Representation to me, as someone whose gender (ftm) and sexuality (asexual) isn’t often represented in media, seeing someone that represents me takes me a bit off guard, but in a nice validating way. I don’t go around demanding representation however I know it’s extremely important in shaping people’s perceptions. For instance, in my experience, the few times asexuality, or something similar, is shown in media it’s often associated with being a psychopath or being less human in the sense your unable to feel love, which isn’t true, and that can create issues, and stigma when I talk to people about it. Representation normalises people of all backgrounds, brings up issues they face and educate people, which is especially important to those who may just be learning about lgbtq+ ideas or going in with prejudice or causally racist predispositions.
Keep doing what your doing!
If you want representation
Join your union!
First! How are you x you are wise
@@captainfordo556 not really
@@coolbluetunes9885 leave.
little help from a person from a few minority groups: you as a person dont care about representation and dont care that youre white because you are white. you would be a different person and it would bother you if you were under represented in media. it can be really hard to understand if you havent experienced these kinds of things for yourself but it makes me happy that you are trying to empathize!! we've all had our issues that we've felt alone in and a lot of minority groups are born with a thing like that sewn into their being
I think it's likely a psychological thing that some people would care about and others would not.
For under represented people who care about that, it may be catastrophic. For those who don't, they might not even notice it. But the problem is still there
@@guilhermeferrao5968 it might depend heavily on where you live and how and when. in many places its basically illegal to be trans etc. im a lesbian and havent really experienced homophobia in my life but its still hard to live in a hetero normative society where my attractions feel othered
@@lordx9808 it might depend heavily on where you live and how and when. in many places its basically illegal to be trans etc. im a lesbian and havent really experienced homophobia in my life but its still hard to live in a hetero normative society where my attractions feel othered. maybe its different being black (sorry i copy pasted this so i could tag you aswell)
Is this a re-upload or is a lot of footage re-used?
These are usually bits of a live stream that was broadcast earlier
If people can't get over the fact that a TV character, worker, show host etc.. Is not their kind of skin colour, sexually or gender and cant or don't want to like it then they are pretty racist or sexist themselves.
the problem arises when EVERYONE you see on TV is, say, white, and you are Asian. It makes you feel like you’re the odd one out.
Why are all the hermits white
Because they were all successful minecraft TH-camrs before being invited on to hermit craft, and minecraft TH-camrs, particularly successful ones, are predominantly white and male.
11th
X I don't think that racism as a bias comes from the same place as others though like height etc, the stereotypes our brains innately go to is caused by society's views of non-white people that's been built from years of colonialism
Its the bias that is exploited. Imagine if colonialism had something to do with eye color (because it changes based on where you are on the planet), then that becomes the issue. Its all superficial but yes colonialism plays a massive part in why it is skin tone and race.
You know what there needs to be like copper wiring and and machinery a bit like redstone but makes stuff automatically and that. Could go alongside the cave update and so forth. If they add copper there’s endless possibilities. Plus yet another community.
I liked the video, because I think Xisuma's a thinker and a learner. But this feels like a collection of thoughtful excuses for current behavior and not actual empathy or attempt to learn about people unlike him. I'm disappointed.
Representation is a win for employers because it helps them get over useless biases, and a win for employees because it gives you more confidence in exploring job options. By itself, representation can be fixed relatively easily with culture change, e.g. women in gaming or atheism in politics. Of course for many groups this is in conjunction with crippling wealth inequality that robs them of proper access to training and education. But even when affirmitive action chooses minority representation over another overqualified, rich white male, it’s for the greater good in the long run because it opens up a larger pool of people for employers/consumers to choose from, who will be just as well educated in the future.
Representation really isn't about how you want to be perceived, and even tho most minorities want to be included and it feels amazing to be included, they know that representation isn't for them at the end of the day, it's for the bigoted, homophobic, transphobic and so on, people that will see the characters or actors on TV, and become more comfortable with the idea with living them in real life. In some instances representation helps minorities feel more comfortable and that they are not alone, let's say people with disabilities seeing someone with a disability on screen, of lgbtq folk seeing someone from the lgbtq on screen.
when i first moved to arizona the apparent prejudice here comparatively to north california was so vast i had to conceal it from myself because it does no good here to stand for any kind of political correctness. not to say there arent good people here but when the majority keeps pre conceived perceptions of who you based off stereotypes the nuance of socializing at work becomes hard mode. so moving up in work with integrity is easily negated by prejudice gossip. nuances like this are always overlooked but it can make the strongest question wtf the point of trying is.
consider this. lets say you're not racist and you're looking to hire new management for your store which is comprised of employees who are prejudice against color. you have 2 employees of completely equal qualifications 1 white 1 brown. the hire ups are pressuring preformance over equality, who are you gonna pick? just pick the one who will preform best right?
thank you for bringing up topics like this x. even if im just venting into the void of the internet. i still feel some what heard.
first!
Jai the creator 4th. I was first I think
Who cares?
I’m first I think anyways
That Grain Character you were first
ioisblocked really? Wow first time being first!