the_dunk_tank
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to [email protected]
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
view the rest of the comments
I think you misunderstand me.
I believe that racism is a problem, especially in medicine. I think that there are many groups who are discriminated medical professionals.
I don't think the information is presented in a good way. But I think it's important to look at this information. Racists don't care about what the data says, that doesn't mean it isn't important for sane people to see the data. It's like the infamous crime statistic, where the conclusion racists draw is black people are not only more likely to commit crime but they are also bad and will be caught, as opposed to thinking for one brief second that the issue is one of unfair enforcement.
I think that suppression of knowledge isn't a good course. Obviously the information was presented in a poor fashion, but there is a difference between it just being racism and being really bad at showing data. But presenting findings can't be considered racist, taking findings out of context can be.
I swear in one ear out the other, real sus shit from our little lemm.ee visitor, there is no "findings" to be presented, there is no "context" to massage the racist drivel in that book, it's all garbage, the actual data (that has already been posted in this thread, which you have ignored) contradicts everything in that trash section
It's not about presentation, there is no "good" fashion for displaying racism, the information itself is bogus and cartoonishly bigoted, how this isn't obvious to you speaks volumes about your ignorance concerning racial subjects, but hey you're
so I guess I have to grade you on a curve
Almost like these sorts of liberals are just frothing at the mouth for the excuse to be racist because "it isn't racist, it's just science! So I can hurl all the slurs I want! The science backs me up!"
You really have to touch grass and actually listen to people who are experts in epistomology and medical science, they will have very contrary opinions to yours.
Focault
did do some good showing some development of medical institutions, you yourself just think that stuff is neutral now and you also think that text book racism is "data" and "knowledge" which it isn't.
You also defend the "data" form a racist text book now and bound much more time than if you had stayed silent and instead read the links and sources in the thread which link to papers and articles challenging the racist ideas of "blacks no pain tolerace".