That's making the assumption that white people cannot possibly be poor and that black women cannot possibly be rich. I, for one, was poor most of my life and I'm white, albeit not in the US but just across the pond. There are plenty of white people who live in abject poverty. Deprivation of basic needs knows no colour, creed or gender. Why draw lines when it would benefit more people to refrain from doing so?
That's the problem with statistics - they work on large masses and derive means, medians and modes. There are real people who aren't accurately represented by such statistics and making decisions solely on said statistics is unfair to them.
I don't think you're actually reading the words that you're responding to. Saying that "[s]tatistically, white men have a higher chance at being well...everything," does not, in any way, assume "that white people cannot possibly be poor and that black women cannot possibly be rich"
Saying that white men have a better chance of being rich does not imply that white men are never poor.
>That's the problem with statistics - they work on large masses and derive means, medians and modes.
Great lesson, but if what you're saying is that poor people are disadvantaged, the statistics back that up, too. Both of these statements are true:
1) Black people are disadvantaged
2) Poor people are disadvantaged
These are separate problems. A black individual making $60,000 a year still has fewer privileges than a white person making the same.
Maybe you don't think it's as dire a problem as the poor/non-poor problem, but so what? They are still doing something positive. Maybe I think their resources would be better applied to some other problem, but unless I'm going to volunteer to fix it myself, I'll leave them to their work.
> Why draw lines when it would benefit more people to refrain from doing so?
Being rich does not negate all of the issue that people of color face. Class and white privilege are not the same nor mutually exclusive. They are intersectional and related. When a person of color wants to do something to empower other people of color, that doesn't make them a racist. To say that since some people of color are poor means that a program must be for all poor people is a form of moving the goal posts and derailing.
> There are real people who aren't accurately represented by such statistics and making decisions solely on said statistics is unfair to them.
Statistics tell us the same thing people of color do: they are not treated equally and face racial discrimination, micro and macro, all the time. There is a reason why people of color have less access and opportunity to engage in tech.
"There are plenty of white people who live in abject poverty."
Sure, but just by being another race, there is very little if any chance for non-white males to do certain things. A feel-good story like Jim Carrey would NEVER happen for a Asian male in America. Heck there was even a survey that found women estimate Asian men would need to earn about $200k to have the same 'status' as a white male. So yes, while being poor sucks for all, but be a poor minority is even worse.
I've heard my Asian friends make similar remarks about a lack of Asians in Hollywood. I see it as mainly a consequence of the fact that A. they don't traditionally view acting as a noble or lucrative career path and B. they only make up a small percentage of the population (4.5%)
I don't think it's that simple. Notice how there are arguably more Asian women in the media (newscasts, roles in movies, fashion shows) than Asian men. I don't think there is a lack of men who want to go into it, I think it's just a lack of demand.
That's the problem with statistics - they work on large masses and derive means, medians and modes. There are real people who aren't accurately represented by such statistics and making decisions solely on said statistics is unfair to them.