Why YSK: because what seems like equal situation from surface isn’t always equal opportunity for all. And even when equal measure of help is provided, it might not be equally useful.

  • @duffman
    -9•1 year ago

    Equality people: “Let’s fund these people who are objectively poor, they are disadvantaged and need it.”.

    Equity people: “let’s fund people part of this group I can clearly identify by looking at them. They are likely to be disadvantaged.”

    • @[email protected]
      1•1 year ago

      “let’s fund people part of this group I can clearly identify by looking at them. They are likely to be disadvantaged.”

      Uh… they don’t identify by looking at them you braindead fool. They do means testing. As in - actually seeing if they need it.

      • @duffman
        3•1 year ago

        Firstly, be respectful.

        There is a huge range of equity implementations in the US. My company, for example, has not done any “means testing” when recruiting for racial equity. Nor when it donates to blanket racial programs. There was no means testing when internships were offered to high school students of particular demographics.

    • @Kage520
      0•1 year ago

      Not sure why everyone is downvoting any opinion that isn’t “give minorities all the available resources!”.

      It should not be: you need x% of your classroom seats to go to minorities. That’s silly because talented and driven people will be sent away to make space. It should be more like: “you must provide an avenue to help those who can prove disadvantaged status to take extra classes and then reapply to your program.” These classes could be online or whatever to make it as easy as possible for someone with less means but still driven to succeed have a way to better themselves.