White liberals talk down to blacks

[Dan Stubbs]

The Liberals have always talked down to Minorities because the think we are stupid and uneducated class of Americans. This is so stupid, some of us are the same as stupid white people, and some of us have gotten educated to whatever levels that we wanted or needed for our jobs. Yet they see us as Plantation workers following orders one what to say and act and vote. They need to grow up and smell the roses.

 

[jc456]

They do it to whites too..."Can I get me a huntin' license heah?"

That sounds more like code switching.

sounds like bigotry.

 

[Pogo]

That's not necessarily "down"; it's called (again) "mirroring".

Actually the OP article, which is quite interesting, isn't about speech, it's about vocabulary used in emails to unknown persons and the ass-sumptions made on the basis of the unknown's name.

It's not mirroring when you have no idea that the other person speaks in such a manner, which would require you yo interact with them for more time than Lurch did with the clerk at the sporting goods store in this example.

Again, it's a prime example of leftist snobbery and the perceived need to talk down to people the fell are beneath their lofty station in life.

"Lurch"?

Don't get the reference at all.

Anyway, no, mirroring is not what's going on in the OP article. Mirroring is what's going on in your huntiung license post.

 

[Oddball]

They do it to whites too..."Can I get me a huntin' license heah?"

That sounds more like code switching.

Different nomenclature, same behavior.

 

[Wyatt earp]

A hot girl " hey baby"


A judge or cop " yes sir"

A friend " you stupid fuck head"

and a white liberal would tell the blacks to get in fking line. Can you say Kanye?

Well it does remind me about my asshole ex brother in law match box lawyer.


We used to argue like hell , he tried to be a pompous snob and I used to clean his clock with zingers..





.

 

[jc456]

A hot girl " hey baby"


A judge or cop " yes sir"

A friend " you stupid fuck head"

and a white liberal would tell the blacks to get in fking line. Can you say Kanye?

Well it does remind me about my asshole ex brother in law match box lawyer.


We used to argue like hell , he tried to be a pompous snob and I used to clean his clock with zingers..





.

just like in here.

 

[Oddball]

"Lurch"?

Don't get the reference at all.

Anyway, no, mirroring is not what's going on in the OP article. Mirroring is what's going on in your huntiung license post.

"Lurch" is John Kerry....He actually said that in a sporting goods store to a clerk, in front of a hot mic.

 

[Oddball]

Related....

 

[Godboy]

Interesting study. Not really a surprise to anyone.


White Liberals Present Themselves as Less Competent in Interactions with African-Americans


The team found that Democratic candidates used fewer competence-related words in speeches delivered to mostly minority audiences than they did in speeches delivered to mostly white audiences.The difference wasn’t statistically significant in speeches by Republican candidates, ..."

“It was really surprising to see that for nearly three decades, Democratic presidential candidates have been engaging in this predicted behavior.”

With this preliminary evidence in hand, the researchers set out to further test their ideas..."



On regular individuals.




"The researchers found that liberal individuals were less likely to use words that would make them appear highly competent when the person they were addressing was presumed to be black rather than white. No significant differences were seen in the word selection of conservatives based on the presumed race of their partner. “It was kind of an unpleasant surprise to see this subtle but persistent effect,” Dupree says. “Even if it’s ultimately well-intentioned, it could be seen as patronizing.” "





Excellent finding on soft racism, or "low expectations".

---- so you're saying these "white Liberals" don't have a great relationship with "the blacks"?

Send one to Baltimore and youll see how good their relationships are.

 

[easyt65]

Interesting study. Not really a surprise to anyone.


White Liberals Present Themselves as Less Competent in Interactions with African-Americans


The team found that Democratic candidates used fewer competence-related words in speeches delivered to mostly minority audiences than they did in speeches delivered to mostly white audiences.The difference wasn’t statistically significant in speeches by Republican candidates, ..."

“It was really surprising to see that for nearly three decades, Democratic presidential candidates have been engaging in this predicted behavior.”

With this preliminary evidence in hand, the researchers set out to further test their ideas..."



On regular individuals.




"The researchers found that liberal individuals were less likely to use words that would make them appear highly competent when the person they were addressing was presumed to be black rather than white. No significant differences were seen in the word selection of conservatives based on the presumed race of their partner. “It was kind of an unpleasant surprise to see this subtle but persistent effect,” Dupree says. “Even if it’s ultimately well-intentioned, it could be seen as patronizing.” "





Excellent finding on soft racism, or "low expectations".

 

[Pogo]

The Liberals have always talked down to Minorities because the think we are stupid and uneducated class of Americans. This is so stupid, some of us are the same as stupid white people, and some of us have gotten educated to whatever levels that we wanted or needed for our jobs. Yet they see us as Plantation workers following orders one what to say and act and vote. They need to grow up and smell the roses.

Actually that's not what the article says. And here's where the OP would have been well advised to read his own link.

What it actually says is, confronted with conversing with a(n assumed) black correspondent the subjects tended to use less challenging language:

>> The researchers found that liberal individuals were less likely to use words that would make them appear highly competent when the person they were addressing was presumed to be black rather than white. No significant differences were seen in the word selection of conservatives based on the presumed race of their partner.< <​

In other words the opposite of an attempt to dazzle somebody as a know-it-all. And the reasoning follows in the next paragraph:

>> Dupree and Fiske suspect that the behavior stems from a liberal person’s desire to connect with other races. One possible reason for the “competence downshift,” as the authors describe it, is that, regardless of race, people tend to downplay their competence when they want to appear likeable and friendly. But it’s also possible that “this is happening because people are using common stereotypes in an effort to get along,” Dupree says. <<

Oopsie. Cooperation? Can't have that.

When interacting with a new person we ALL feel out the level of 'competence', education, social class, linguistic background, etc etc upon our first clues in order to "mirror" or match them accordingly. We don't want to presume to talk down to those less educated (or trained) any more than we want to look ignorant to those more educated (or trained). We size up the other person in the first sentence or two. But that's assuming we're speaking, hearing the voice plus seeing the visual cues. In this case none of those cues are present so the subjects are making assumptions based on names, and erring on the side of caution. Immediately challenging a just-met person with one's most eloquentarian verbosity can easily be seen as a subtle act of aggression.

 

[g5000]

Interesting study. Not really a surprise to anyone.


White Liberals Present Themselves as Less Competent in Interactions with African-Americans


The team found that Democratic candidates used fewer competence-related words in speeches delivered to mostly minority audiences than they did in speeches delivered to mostly white audiences.The difference wasn’t statistically significant in speeches by Republican candidates, ..."

“It was really surprising to see that for nearly three decades, Democratic presidential candidates have been engaging in this predicted behavior.”

With this preliminary evidence in hand, the researchers set out to further test their ideas..."



On regular individuals.




"The researchers found that liberal individuals were less likely to use words that would make them appear highly competent when the person they were addressing was presumed to be black rather than white. No significant differences were seen in the word selection of conservatives based on the presumed race of their partner. “It was kind of an unpleasant surprise to see this subtle but persistent effect,” Dupree says. “Even if it’s ultimately well-intentioned, it could be seen as patronizing.” "





Excellent finding on soft racism, or "low expectations".

---- so you're saying these "white Liberals" don't have a great relationship with "the blacks"?

/----/ Yes, you are correct.
Big African-American Support for GOP in Florida and Georgia Enrages the Left
Nov 26, 2018

RUSH: Oh. A couple interesting stories here, too, related to the elections in Georgia and Florida. In Florida, an analysis of exit poll data shows that Ron DeSantis, the Republican and winner, got a far greater percentage of the African-American vote and Hispanic vote than anybody can believe. In Georgia, Kemp got more African-American votes than anybody imagined, and African-American organizations in Georgia are ticked and livid about this. They’re calling these black people that voted for Kemp traitors and who knows, Uncle Toms.

By "big" support by blacks for the Republican, you mean ten percent.

Sad.

 

[Wyatt earp]

A hot girl " hey baby"


A judge or cop " yes sir"

A friend " you stupid fuck head"

and a white liberal would tell the blacks to get in fking line. Can you say Kanye?

Well it does remind me about my asshole ex brother in law match box lawyer.


We used to argue like hell , he tried to be a pompous snob and I used to clean his clock with zingers..





.

just like in here.

You're right I talk to different people differently in here..


See this study is stupid.

.

 

[Pogo]

Interesting study. Not really a surprise to anyone.


White Liberals Present Themselves as Less Competent in Interactions with African-Americans


The team found that Democratic candidates used fewer competence-related words in speeches delivered to mostly minority audiences than they did in speeches delivered to mostly white audiences.The difference wasn’t statistically significant in speeches by Republican candidates, ..."

“It was really surprising to see that for nearly three decades, Democratic presidential candidates have been engaging in this predicted behavior.”

With this preliminary evidence in hand, the researchers set out to further test their ideas..."



On regular individuals.




"The researchers found that liberal individuals were less likely to use words that would make them appear highly competent when the person they were addressing was presumed to be black rather than white. No significant differences were seen in the word selection of conservatives based on the presumed race of their partner. “It was kind of an unpleasant surprise to see this subtle but persistent effect,” Dupree says. “Even if it’s ultimately well-intentioned, it could be seen as patronizing.” "





Excellent finding on soft racism, or "low expectations".

---- so you're saying these "white Liberals" don't have a great relationship with "the blacks"?

I'm posting a link to a scientific study showing that liberals talk to blacks at a lower level than to whites.


I made no comment about how this effects teh relationship the liberals have with blacks.

Good point. I was of course paraphrasing and trying to stay as close to the original as possible.

So what do you think of "talking to blacks at a lower level" such as "look at my African American over here" or "I have a very good relationship with the blacks"?


Meanwhile --- you do know what "mirroring" means, right?

My interest in this study is the difference between liberals who talk down to blacks and conservatives who do NOT.


I think it shows that liberals have a lower opinion of blacks than conservatives do.



And no, I'm not familiar with "mirroring". You are welcome to inform me, if you wish.

See the link to "code switching" above as well as the LBJ quote.

See also this thread, which is why the topic immediately called you-know-who to mind.

>> The Globe reviewed the language used by 19 presidential candidates, Democrats and Republicans, in speeches announcing their campaigns for the 2016 presidential election. The review, using a common algorithm called the Flesch-Kincaid readability test that crunches word choice and sentence structure and spits out grade-level rankings, produced some striking results.

The Republican candidates — like Trump — who are speaking at a level easily understood by people at the lower end of the education spectrum are outperforming their highfalutin opponents in the polls. Simpler language resonates with a broader swath of voters in an era of 140-character Twitter tweets and 10-second television sound bites, say specialists on political speech.

.... His vocabulary is filled with words like “huge,” “terrible,” “beautiful.” He speaks in punchy bursts that lack nuance. It’s all easily grasped, whether it’s his campaign theme (“Make America Great Again”), words about his wealth (“I’m really rich”), or his disparagement of the Washington culture (“Politicians are all talk, no action”).

“Trump is talking about things that are emotional, simple, and angry,” said Rick Wilson, a Florida-based Republican consultant. <<​

 

[well named]

Different nomenclature, same behavior.

Similar behavior, definitely, but I think probably different underlying psychological mechanisms. So for example I grew up in a rural area of western Maryland and people there have a pretty specific accent. I haven't lived there for nearly 20 years and I don't really have that accent at all anymore... except when I visit for some extended period of time. I subconsciously switch back to it a little bit, especially with family members with strong accents. There's nothing particularly condescending about that. Code switching is almost automatic for people who participate in multiple distinct sub-cultures, essentially. If anything it signals a sort of in-group connection.

On the other hand, the interpretation of the study given by its authors makes sense to me:

'Dupree and Fiske suspect that the behavior stems from a liberal person’s desire to connect with other races. One possible reason for the “competence downshift,” as the authors describe it, is that, regardless of race, people tend to downplay their competence when they want to appear likeable and friendly. But it’s also possible that “this is happening because people are using common stereotypes in an effort to get along,” Dupree says.

Initial data from follow-up studies suggest that describing a black person as highly intelligent, thus reversing the stereotype, or as already highly motivated to get along with whites, thus removing the need to prove goodwill, can reduce the likelihood that a white person will downplay their competence in their interactions with the black person.'
​

Here the "downshifting" is more about implicit biases and a sort of uncomfortableness based in political and social views about race and racism, leading to the desire to appear friendly. You might call it a manifestation of what people often pejoratively describe as "white liberal guilt." I would suggest that rather than signifying participation in multiple groups or comfortable familiarity with black people, it signals much more about a lack of social interaction, so that the more abstract notions that follow from a liberal worldview have a greater impact, i.e. by making them uncomfortable. That's why it seems more condescending than a liberal with a southern background switching into a southern drawl when buying a fishing license.

I think it speaks to the idea of ongoing segregation in society as a root cause of a lot of problems, since I would expect more social interaction to reduce the measured effect. It shows how difficult implicit biases can be to overcome just by conscious effort in the absence of meaningful social interaction. It reminds me a little of research on "benevolent sexism" in that way.

 

[Pogo]

Related....

Tsk tsk. Still trotting out debunked mythology. As if a message board were some kind of competition to see who can come up with the stupidest most moronic shit.

Once AGAIN, as exposed years ago, she's citing the lyrics of a gospel song, verbatim (which is exactly why the audience starts whooping --- they recognize the lyrics --- DUH) and what's more she's doing it in that same Chicago twang she can't get rid of. When have you ever heard anyone with a "black accent" say "I've come too FAAAARRR"?

Dumb shit.

Fatter o' mact we debunked this again in the thread I already linked to Rump's "best words", right here, post 70.

In fact if we were to go ahead and y'know, quote that post, that'd be great.

>> That myth comes from a dishonest Fox Noise edit. The part they cut off was the intro to what she was saying at the time:
0:33 here ---

​

----- it's the exact lyric of a gospel song, word for word. Hillary didn't write the lyric; Curtis Burrell did. And James Cleveland made it famous --- at least among those who follow gospel music.

​

Lyric recited verbatim, even down to the redundant "from where I started from". It's exactly how the song is written. I linked the lyrics just above; you can read it along with her. Literally.

Now, Fox Noise cut the intro off and made it look like Hillary was contriving something. Knowing what you see above, here's how Fox Noise set it up:

​

They're playing their audience like a cheap banjo. But there it is, and that's what it always was. After this she quotes a Bible passage --- shall we conclude she's "contriving an Aramaic dialect"?

Anybody who looks at this with the required critical eye can see the bullshit a mile away, or rather hear it. Listen to how she pronounces the word "far". That's a Chicago twang she can't get rid of --- not in any way a "Southern drawl". You would literally have to have no idea what a "Southern drawl" is to hear that and buy the way Fox Noise tried to sell it. By deliberately cutting out the context and dishonestly setting it up as an "accent" --- they create a myth.

In an apparent desperation edit they even spliced in another passage from a completely different part of the speech, apparently trying to sell the glottal stop in "Trenton New Jersey" as if it's a Southern drawl. I grew up in that area and I already know "Trenton" IS pronounced locally with a glottal stop. But again, Fox Noise counts on viewer ignorance. <<
​

So again congratulations on posting sheer stupidity. No wonder you disappeared off the board for years.

 

[Correll]

Interesting study. Not really a surprise to anyone.


White Liberals Present Themselves as Less Competent in Interactions with African-Americans


The team found that Democratic candidates used fewer competence-related words in speeches delivered to mostly minority audiences than they did in speeches delivered to mostly white audiences.The difference wasn’t statistically significant in speeches by Republican candidates, ..."

“It was really surprising to see that for nearly three decades, Democratic presidential candidates have been engaging in this predicted behavior.”

With this preliminary evidence in hand, the researchers set out to further test their ideas..."



On regular individuals.




"The researchers found that liberal individuals were less likely to use words that would make them appear highly competent when the person they were addressing was presumed to be black rather than white. No significant differences were seen in the word selection of conservatives based on the presumed race of their partner. “It was kind of an unpleasant surprise to see this subtle but persistent effect,” Dupree says. “Even if it’s ultimately well-intentioned, it could be seen as patronizing.” "





Excellent finding on soft racism, or "low expectations".

---- so you're saying these "white Liberals" don't have a great relationship with "the blacks"?

I'm posting a link to a scientific study showing that liberals talk to blacks at a lower level than to whites.


I made no comment about how this effects teh relationship the liberals have with blacks.

Good point. I was of course paraphrasing and trying to stay as close to the original as possible.

So what do you think of "talking to blacks at a lower level" such as "look at my African American over here" or "I have a very good relationship with the blacks"?


Meanwhile --- you do know what "mirroring" means, right?

My interest in this study is the difference between liberals who talk down to blacks and conservatives who do NOT.


I think it shows that liberals have a lower opinion of blacks than conservatives do.



And no, I'm not familiar with "mirroring". You are welcome to inform me, if you wish.

See the link to "code switching" above as well as the LBJ quote.

See also this thread, which is why the topic immediately called you-know-who to mind.

>> The Globe reviewed the language used by 19 presidential candidates, Democrats and Republicans, in speeches announcing their campaigns for the 2016 presidential election. The review, using a common algorithm called the Flesch-Kincaid readability test that crunches word choice and sentence structure and spits out grade-level rankings, produced some striking results.

The Republican candidates — like Trump — who are speaking at a level easily understood by people at the lower end of the education spectrum are outperforming their highfalutin opponents in the polls. Simpler language resonates with a broader swath of voters in an era of 140-character Twitter tweets and 10-second television sound bites, say specialists on political speech.

.... His vocabulary is filled with words like “huge,” “terrible,” “beautiful.” He speaks in punchy bursts that lack nuance. It’s all easily grasped, whether it’s his campaign theme (“Make America Great Again”), words about his wealth (“I’m really rich”), or his disparagement of the Washington culture (“Politicians are all talk, no action”).

“Trump is talking about things that are emotional, simple, and angry,” said Rick Wilson, a Florida-based Republican consultant. <<​

Interesting information worthy of discussion. And I have done so in the past, and will do so in the future.


But this thread is about the difference specifically when liberals and conservatives talk to blacks.


Are you claiming that liberals are attempting to manipulate blacks when they do that?

 

[Pogo]

---- so you're saying these "white Liberals" don't have a great relationship with "the blacks"?

I'm posting a link to a scientific study showing that liberals talk to blacks at a lower level than to whites.


I made no comment about how this effects teh relationship the liberals have with blacks.

Good point. I was of course paraphrasing and trying to stay as close to the original as possible.

So what do you think of "talking to blacks at a lower level" such as "look at my African American over here" or "I have a very good relationship with the blacks"?


Meanwhile --- you do know what "mirroring" means, right?

My interest in this study is the difference between liberals who talk down to blacks and conservatives who do NOT.


I think it shows that liberals have a lower opinion of blacks than conservatives do.



And no, I'm not familiar with "mirroring". You are welcome to inform me, if you wish.

See the link to "code switching" above as well as the LBJ quote.

See also this thread, which is why the topic immediately called you-know-who to mind.

>> The Globe reviewed the language used by 19 presidential candidates, Democrats and Republicans, in speeches announcing their campaigns for the 2016 presidential election. The review, using a common algorithm called the Flesch-Kincaid readability test that crunches word choice and sentence structure and spits out grade-level rankings, produced some striking results.

The Republican candidates — like Trump — who are speaking at a level easily understood by people at the lower end of the education spectrum are outperforming their highfalutin opponents in the polls. Simpler language resonates with a broader swath of voters in an era of 140-character Twitter tweets and 10-second television sound bites, say specialists on political speech.

.... His vocabulary is filled with words like “huge,” “terrible,” “beautiful.” He speaks in punchy bursts that lack nuance. It’s all easily grasped, whether it’s his campaign theme (“Make America Great Again”), words about his wealth (“I’m really rich”), or his disparagement of the Washington culture (“Politicians are all talk, no action”).

“Trump is talking about things that are emotional, simple, and angry,” said Rick Wilson, a Florida-based Republican consultant. <<​

Interesting information worthy of discussion. And I have done so in the past, and will do so in the future.


But this thread is about the difference specifically when liberals and conservatives talk to blacks.


Are you claiming that liberals are attempting to manipulate blacks when they do that?

No I'm not "claiming" anything. And your link is about when self-described "liberals and conservatives" WRITE to WHAT THEY PERCEIVE AS blacks, not 'when they talk to blacks'. Read your own link.

 

[Correll]

I'm posting a link to a scientific study showing that liberals talk to blacks at a lower level than to whites.


I made no comment about how this effects teh relationship the liberals have with blacks.

Good point. I was of course paraphrasing and trying to stay as close to the original as possible.

So what do you think of "talking to blacks at a lower level" such as "look at my African American over here" or "I have a very good relationship with the blacks"?


Meanwhile --- you do know what "mirroring" means, right?

My interest in this study is the difference between liberals who talk down to blacks and conservatives who do NOT.


I think it shows that liberals have a lower opinion of blacks than conservatives do.



And no, I'm not familiar with "mirroring". You are welcome to inform me, if you wish.

See the link to "code switching" above as well as the LBJ quote.

See also this thread, which is why the topic immediately called you-know-who to mind.

>> The Globe reviewed the language used by 19 presidential candidates, Democrats and Republicans, in speeches announcing their campaigns for the 2016 presidential election. The review, using a common algorithm called the Flesch-Kincaid readability test that crunches word choice and sentence structure and spits out grade-level rankings, produced some striking results.

The Republican candidates — like Trump — who are speaking at a level easily understood by people at the lower end of the education spectrum are outperforming their highfalutin opponents in the polls. Simpler language resonates with a broader swath of voters in an era of 140-character Twitter tweets and 10-second television sound bites, say specialists on political speech.

.... His vocabulary is filled with words like “huge,” “terrible,” “beautiful.” He speaks in punchy bursts that lack nuance. It’s all easily grasped, whether it’s his campaign theme (“Make America Great Again”), words about his wealth (“I’m really rich”), or his disparagement of the Washington culture (“Politicians are all talk, no action”).

“Trump is talking about things that are emotional, simple, and angry,” said Rick Wilson, a Florida-based Republican consultant. <<​

Interesting information worthy of discussion. And I have done so in the past, and will do so in the future.


But this thread is about the difference specifically when liberals and conservatives talk to blacks.


Are you claiming that liberals are attempting to manipulate blacks when they do that?

No I'm not "claiming" anything. And your link is about when self-described "liberals and conservatives" WRITE to WHAT THEY PERCEIVE AS blacks, not 'when they talk to blacks'. Read your own link.

I was of course paraphrasing.



So, what do you think this data reveals?

 

[Pogo]

Good point. I was of course paraphrasing and trying to stay as close to the original as possible.

So what do you think of "talking to blacks at a lower level" such as "look at my African American over here" or "I have a very good relationship with the blacks"?


Meanwhile --- you do know what "mirroring" means, right?

My interest in this study is the difference between liberals who talk down to blacks and conservatives who do NOT.


I think it shows that liberals have a lower opinion of blacks than conservatives do.



And no, I'm not familiar with "mirroring". You are welcome to inform me, if you wish.

See the link to "code switching" above as well as the LBJ quote.

See also this thread, which is why the topic immediately called you-know-who to mind.

>> The Globe reviewed the language used by 19 presidential candidates, Democrats and Republicans, in speeches announcing their campaigns for the 2016 presidential election. The review, using a common algorithm called the Flesch-Kincaid readability test that crunches word choice and sentence structure and spits out grade-level rankings, produced some striking results.

The Republican candidates — like Trump — who are speaking at a level easily understood by people at the lower end of the education spectrum are outperforming their highfalutin opponents in the polls. Simpler language resonates with a broader swath of voters in an era of 140-character Twitter tweets and 10-second television sound bites, say specialists on political speech.

.... His vocabulary is filled with words like “huge,” “terrible,” “beautiful.” He speaks in punchy bursts that lack nuance. It’s all easily grasped, whether it’s his campaign theme (“Make America Great Again”), words about his wealth (“I’m really rich”), or his disparagement of the Washington culture (“Politicians are all talk, no action”).

“Trump is talking about things that are emotional, simple, and angry,” said Rick Wilson, a Florida-based Republican consultant. <<​

Interesting information worthy of discussion. And I have done so in the past, and will do so in the future.


But this thread is about the difference specifically when liberals and conservatives talk to blacks.


Are you claiming that liberals are attempting to manipulate blacks when they do that?

No I'm not "claiming" anything. And your link is about when self-described "liberals and conservatives" WRITE to WHAT THEY PERCEIVE AS blacks, not 'when they talk to blacks'. Read your own link.

I was of course paraphrasing.



So, what do you think this data reveals?

If anything it reveals that these self-described "Liberals" are more sensitive, toning down the "grade-level" (as in my example above) of their language so as not to appear aloof to the other party, than are the self-described "conservatives". That's what it seems to conclude. I agree with the analysis in post 35 above.

Not that that would be news, but it was an interesting experiment.