"I want to be treated the same as everyone else"

[draggar]

If I put my feet up on the bus seat I get yelled at. Bring a pet dog on the bus I get told to get off.

If you have a visible disability the rules of the bus no longer apply to you. Want to have a three course meal on the bus when there is no food or drink allowed except in closed containers well if your in a wheel chair it's okay hell doesn't even matter if you make a mess.

I know this makes me sound like an asshole but here is my thing, I can understand ignoring a rule that you are not physically capable of following but ignoring a rule simply because you want to is screwed up and it's worse that everyone endorses this bad behavior.

This sounds a lot like a bait comment but I'll bite anyway.

Federal law states that they have to allow service dogs on the buses. Service dogs are allowed full access where their owner / handlers and trainers are allowed to go.

It's not like they're bringing fluffy shopping with them because she looks good with their outfit or feel bad leaving fluffy at home for a few hours while they ship, a service dog helps someone with a disability live a life. The service dog is considered a piece of equipment - like a crutch or a wheelchair (or do you have an issue with people bringing those onto busses?).

Eating is irrelevant - unless they are diabetic (or some other health issue that requires scheduled food intake) and needs something, no food is no food. If a service dog is considered a nuisance (excessive barking, chewing, peeing, not just because someone doesn't like dogs) the person in charge of where they are can legally remove them from the premises. if they make a mess, they can also legally ask them to leave and/or clean up their mess.

This isn't considered special treatment, this is allowing them to live independently. People who truly need a service dog don't like to use it - I see it with my wife often. Children run up to the dog and distract him from my wife, pet him, grab him, etc. and the parents get pissed at my wife because she tells the children no. Would they allow their children to grab someone's crutch or start playing with the controls on someone's electric wheelchair?

. it is like a police dog.. minus the eat your face part of a police dog's attitude.

Only piss-poorly trained police dogs are like this. In reality, at worst they should be indifferent to people (unless given the command by the police officer). Most of the ones I've met (and ones my wife helped train), and the same goes for well trained protection dogs, you wouldn't know that they had it in them until you saw it - and then it's like a completely different dog. I've met some that were complete teddy bears when introduced with the "safe" word / phrase.

[Hobbs]

That's *exactly* how many minorities (at least locally) seem to feel. They always want to believe that "whitey" has it so easy.

Pardon my French, but fuck that. If that was true, why did my parents struggle financially for the past 25 years? Why did my father have to work multiple part-time jobs to support his children? Why were there no agencies willing to help us? In fact, *nobody* helped us out. In the end, we climbed out of that financial mess by working our goddamn asses off. Even now, many years later...my parents *still* haven't quite recovered

With that said, shouldn't I be eligible for some sort of hand-out?

Back on topic somewhat, as long as programs like affirmative action exist, people will *never* be "equal." All those things (along with reparations for descendants of slaves) aren't really going to accomplish much...other than breed resentment, much like what happened in 1920s Germany.

Unless you're actually a minority, and have been subject to the discrimination that happens on a daily basis, you can never know what it's like to be one. Not all whites may have it easy, but there's usually a lot better help and a lot more willing to if your skin tone is, shall we say, lacking.

[NodmiTheSellout]

But are there any exclusively for white people, not just available to white people? I had a friend in high school who was an immigrant from India (legal). Just because she was a minority she was offered extra grants and scholarships. Just because she was an immigrant she got more grants and scholarships. She took full advantage of her non-citizen status to go to a state university and then a very nice post-graduate school for next to nothing.

Me, being a white male, didn't have these benefits exclusive to me nor were there any exclusive to being a citizen. I had to work hard to put myself though a community college (already mentioned in a previous post).

There don't need to be exclusive scholarships for white men. There are poverty-based loans, grants, etc., that white people can get as well. Schooling is a national thing, and white people aren't a national minority, don't experience the same kind of discrimination nationally, etc..

I don't have an issue with this - people should have to work to earn their living.

So the government should ever help anyone who has a larger burden than his fellow human, through absolutely no fault of his own? If that's your general philosophy I don't think this argument's going to get very far.

I've seen it happen quite a few times. It's hard to consider that it's "occasional" when you see it often.

This number pales in comparison to the number of minorities who would not be able to get work or schooling without this system. Discrimination is not easy to prove, particularly instances of discrimination that the hiring personnel might not even realize they're doing (half-conscious bias is much more widespread than blatant, malicious discrimination). People as a whole in this country clearly do not view one another as equal, not in desirability, not in intelligence, not in work ethic, etc., so discrimination based on ethnicity, gender and so on are bound to continue happening. What do you propose to remedy this?

I was never propped up by wealth (hell, my parents used to sit sown the night before grocery shopping to see if they could budget in a bag of potato chips or some other cheap snack for my sister and I). The best connections my parents had was a manager at a local grocery store that my father worked at or some salesperson in the office my mom was a secretary at (when she worked). I was happy to have a roof over my head. I was happy to be able to go to school. Did I have the best childhood? Far from it but I know my parents did the best that they could with what they had.

This is not about you. I, as a white woman, am privileged in ways that minority women are not. I, too, grew up poor, poor enough for public assistance, but don't fail to recognize areas I'm privileged in that wouldn't be true if I was a minority. I can apply for a job and they won't look at me like a potential thief. I can apply for a loan, once I have a full-time job, and they won't wonder if I'll keep up payments. I'm privileged in that I have a grandmother to loan me money to take a class that'll get me a better job in the next few months, rather than me needing to save for six months, then wait for the next class. And that's just off the top of my head, as someone who really isn't that great at recognizing her own privilege.

Again, I am not saying that every individual white man has it better than every individual minority. I'm not saying that your life is automatically easy because you're a white man. I'm saying that, if your circumstances were identical but you were black instead, it would have been even more difficult for you.

So then since I didn't have all that- by the logic of these programs, shouldn't I get at least half of it? Shouldn't I get some handouts because of it? You don't see me shouting that I need more handouts, that I need an advantage over other people. You see me working harder to overcome it. You see me working harder to prove myself to my supervisors and co-workers.

No. You're not systemically discriminated against in a variety of different ways. What made your life difficult was poverty--not race, not gender. As for calling this kind of thing "handouts", that's just something we're going to disagree on no matter what. It's my belief that a government exists to benefit the people it governs, and that it's a very reasonable thing to have this extend to what's ultimately an effort at improving social conditions for oppressed peoples. I don't think it's wrong of a government to offer help to those who need it, and no amount of arguing to that end will change my mind (believe me, people have triiiiied over the last few months!).

Not once did I say my life was as bad as some people but it seems that society thinks that being a "majority" puts you at this all high and mighty pedestal on the social ladder and in many cases that is far from the truth.

You're thinking of it wrong. I, at least, won't say being a white man puts you on a "high and mighty pedestal". Considering your family's poverty, I'll readily say you're not at the top of the food chain. It's wealthy, white, able-bodied, cisgendered, heterosexual men that occupy the top. Particularly if they're thin and good-looking, though those things aren't as big as the others. It's more like, you're walking on relatively solid ground, and minorities must wallow through all sorts of discriminatory muck to walk at your side. But change one or more of those things (obviously I made some assumptions with "heterosexual", "cisgendered" and "able-bodied") about yourself, IN ADDITION to poverty, and your life would be more difficult in various ways. That's what I mean.

Yes, but are you saying that by "artificially propping up" minorities, we'll end up with equality faster?

Yes. Seeing minorities in equal positions should logically help in regarding minorities as equals.

A note about quotas being filled--the thought that an employer will tell someone, flat out, "I haven't filled my ___ quota and hired too many white men already" doesn't sit right with me. It makes me think that perhaps those employers are exactly the kinds that need to be forced to hire minorities. I'll admit I don't know much about quotas, though. I'm hoping that said quota is relative to the minority population in the area--if it's a solid percentage regardless of locale, then that's ridiculous.

[jackfaire]

Ok First off hun a guide dog is more then "a pet" it is a lifeline for those that need them. From the blind to people with seizures... it is like a police dog.. minus the eat your face part of a police dog's attitude.

And it is a Federal Law... not to be mean to you.. but to be fair to those who need such assistance.

A guide dog is a trained mature dog. A puppy that is not yet fully grown and not trained or in training is a pet.

I have no issue with guide dogs. It wasn't a guide dog. Heck when boarding the guy carried the puppy. I had earlier in the week witness the same bus driver tell a passenger that they couldn't bring their puppy on.


Plaid my issue isn't whether rules are enforced or not it's that they are enforce fairly. If your going to yell at me for doing something you should yell at everyone equally for the same thing.

[draggar]

A guide dog is a trained mature dog. A puppy that is not yet fully grown and not trained or in training is a pet.

A service dog in training has the same rights as a service dog when they are with their trainer - how else would the dog get trained? Our vlcak puppy, Luna, has been conditioned to be a service dog ever since we got her. In the beginning its all about socialization (meeting people, being comfortable in public places, etc.). Things like that you cannot train in a facility and is extremely critical especially in the "fear" stage of a puppy's development (usually around 8-12 weeks of age, generally immediately after a puppy is adopted out).

It is a lot easier to make it a routine for the dog from the beginning than it is to start as they're an adult / juvenile.

Granted - not all dogs make the cut and any responsible trainer would not put any dog in a situation that would stress the dog out too much or put the dog or any people in harm's way. Dogs that don't make the cut are adopted out as pets.

(Just an FYI - my wife is a professional dog trainer and has been for 20 years, is a certified DVG judge as well as a certified CGC / STAR puppy evaluator).

All service dogs are not guide dogs. There are also hearing-ear dogs (for deaf people), seizure alert dogs, mobility assistance (for various movement related disabilities). Companion and therapy dogs are not considered service dogs, though.

[Plaidman]

Plaid my issue isn't whether rules are enforced or not it's that they are enforce fairly. If your going to yell at me for doing something you should yell at everyone equally for the same thing.

Agreed to that, though rarely is it enforced. Goes back to schooling and bullying. Bullies can make you eat dog shit, but if you dare try to defend yourself its your ass not theirs. It just one of the many stupidity of life.

That being said, I still agree about yelling at people who hog more seats then they need. I hate seeing people with disabilities, or crippled with age and some smart ass is laying across three-four seats and won't move.

[jackfaire]

That being said, I still agree about yelling at people who hog more seats then they need. I hate seeing people with disabilities, or crippled with age and some smart ass is laying across three-four seats and won't move.

Yeah I saw a jerk on the Max laid out on one of the middle sections.

[Plaidman]

Yeah I saw a jerk on the Max laid out on one of the middle sections.

Another Portlander? Yay

[Wingates_Hellsing]

Only propping up minorities doesn't place them on equal ground. It just pretties up the lower ground that they're on. Telling everyone that minorities need help to do anything reinforces the idea that they are less than whites. If race isn't important, the best way to send that message is to, quite simply, not care.

I don't deny that a greater percentage of minorities come from less advantaged situations. However, we already have a system in place that helps those at the bottom of the barrel. That covers the poverty angle, so, moving on to the discriminatory angle:

If said discrimination is subconscious, then there's no way to prove it, or even know that it's happening at all. Since there can be no proof, the most sensible course of action is most definitely not to assume it's present and punish people for it. Overt discrimination is another story. If you can prove that it's happening, go ahead and file a suit. But why punish people for something you don't know is happening?

Innocent until proven guilty. I've seen too many cases in which someone cried wolf and without any proof whatsoever the receiver get's the shaft. Maybe, if you can't prove something it's because it isn't happening.

What about minority employers? do they need to have a quota of whites to hire? what about other minorities?

How can you make a system fair, by forcing it to be unfair?

[NodmiTheSellout]

Since when is hiring a reasonable percentage of minority people a "punishment"? You're working under the assumption that a minority employee hired to fill a quota is, 100% of the time, going to be stupid, with no work ethic. It's not a punishment to see a black face now and again. That IS the only way to combat that sort of subtle discrimination, and it deserves to be combated. Not to mention that it'd be easy as hell for an employer to purposely avoid hiring minority workers and then say "Well, none were qualified!", without leaving proof.

As for perpetuating the 'lesser' stereotype. . .eh. What's better? "Pfft, he's only here because of affirmative action" or "Look at those [expletive]s, all they're fit for is cleaning floors!" One can be disproven through good work--another, well, not much to be done if an employer takes one look at your ethnicity and invents an excuse not to hire you, without even taking your credentials into account.

I don't know about minority employers, I don't run a business and know exactly how it works, and I'm guessing many people here don't either, they just have the same anecdotal and "well let's give it a good think" evidence as I do.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

That would be a valid rebuttal if that's in any way what I said. I said nothing about hiring minorities being a punishment on the employer, I said forcibly giving jobs to one group instead of another in spite of qualification to be a punishment, for being that group. If you're well qualified for a position, better than the other applicants, how is it not a punishment for someone to give what should be your job to someone else because of the color of your skin or religion?

You make it sound as if those are the only two options. While people likely do exist that would fire someone because of their race or religion, they probably aren't as numerous as some like to think. Furthermore, your second example can be proven wrong as well, and evidence for the first can be ignored. Furthermore, while a white may get away with racism by pulling something our of their ass, so too can minorities when they shout racism and pull something out of theirs. Bullshitting is something that happens on both sides of any conflict and it's nothing short of prejudiced to assume otherwise. We should be identifying and punishing to bullshitters themselves, not the groups they happen to belong to.

It sounds like there's very little evidence to be had anywhere on this, just rationale. Rationally speaking, I ask again: How do you expect to create an equal society, by using racist laws and programs?

[Fryk]

Unless you're actually a minority, and have been subject to the discrimination that happens on a daily basis, you can never know what it's like to be one. Not all whites may have it easy, but there's usually a lot better help and a lot more willing to if your skin tone is, shall we say, lacking.

And unless you're a poor white person, you can't know what it's like to be one, either. No one knows what it's like to be anything other than what they are. And that leads into why the whole mess, to me, is just stupid. Programs like this are based on blanket assumptions, that because you are of x race, you must be a, b, and c. How is that not stereotyping? And I guess that all of us white, underpriviledged people, when skipped over or ignore in times of need, should actually feel HAPPY to know that our suffering is helping to bring the average suffering of each race closer together.

[NodmiTheSellout]

It sounds like there's very little evidence to be had anywhere on this, just rationale. Rationally speaking, I ask again: How do you expect to create an equal society, by using racist laws and programs?

The end result is an illusion of equality. Make minorities more visible in equal positions, it will become normal to see a minority of [given occupation], they will not seem so separate, etc.. I don't see why that's any less sound than saying affirmative action means minorities are lesser than the majority on some essential - biological?? I don't know what the hell people think when they look at a minority person and, knowing nothing about them, assume they're not as good as some white guy - level. Affirmative action acknowledges that the nature of current society gives a false impression that minorities aren't deserving of certain things. Given that it's something false, that has nothing to do with the individual, why shouldn't the solution be something equally outside the individual? This situation isn't going to change itself, and the consequences of dropping affirmative action to see how things play out would be greater than anything bad that's happening now.

And unless you're a poor white person, you can't know what it's like to be one, either. No one knows what it's like to be anything other than what they are. And that leads into why the whole mess, to me, is just stupid. Programs like this are based on blanket assumptions, that because you are of x race, you must be a, b, and c. How is that not stereotyping? And I guess that all of us white, underpriviledged people, when skipped over or ignore in times of need, should actually feel HAPPY to know that our suffering is helping to bring the average suffering of each race closer together.

Or just know that it's something that happens to poor people regardless of race, gender, etc.. I really do not see a situation where white people are systemically oppressed by affirmative action, that they try and try but no matter what they do, there's always going to be a minority person getting the job they want or getting the school spot they want. It's just not on the same level, at all. So while it's unfortunate, the alternative is worse.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

Being poor is being poor, and losing a job is losing a job, for all races. White people lose their job opportunities to quotas and such a lot. Probably to the point where it rivals the number of minorities who would be effected.

Lots of situations in society have fixed themselves, once the system encouraging said situation is taken down. With racism, however, it seems the only 'solution' is just more racism. As if there isn't any racism against whites (newsflash, it comes in spades) Affirmative Action literally tells us, point blank "Minorities aren't capable of working like whites, so we have to make it easier for them at white people's expense".

It's my summation that for every white supremacist there's also at least one cracker killin' gang banger. There are places where it's dangerous to be black, and there are places it's dangerous to be white. White is just another race, not a group of evil bogeymen that can't ever move forward as a people.

[HYHYBT]

On the bus/train seats: when there are plenty for everyone, do you still object to someone putting their feet or bags up?