Do you feel the same negative feelings when you hear the words "abortion math," or "spousal abuse math," or "terrorist math," or "ghetto gang banger welfare math”?

None of those word-combinations make me uncomfortable. I’d love to figure out what they could possibly mean.

For “white supremacy math,” I don’t know what it means because I didn’t read the LAUSD racial equity plan. I’ve never heard anyone actually use it. I don’t think it’s a widely used phrase.

I feel somehow that there's some greater point you are trying to make that has not come through in this thread.

Instead of posing questions for us to ponder on, why not just tell us exactly what you are getting at.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I don’t know the psychology behind it. Someone who has an outsized share of power enjoys that power, and threats to the power are viewed as an encroachment. It’s interesting to see the tactics employed to respond to the encroachment.

Slowguy says, “some percentage of people are willing to be misled, and don't dig much deeper past their initial emotional reaction to hearing something described in that kind of language. Label something as racist, sexist, white supremacist, etc, and that's enough for a lot of people to condemn whatever it is without really looking too hard to see if those charges are actually true.”

Slowguy says people won’t dig deeper to explore something? Do I skim the surface of ideas and exist in an emotional, non-rational state? That sounds more like other people in this thread. If he’s not talking about me (which is impossible to find out because he won’t answer questions), then what is the relevance of that in this discussion? (We can’t find that out either because he won’t answer questions).

Thanks for the non-contributing contributions, Slowguy.

Slowguy loves to push the narrative of the overly emotional liberal. It’s funny because I’m perfectly comfortable talking about racism with mild terms (like “disrespect”) or harsh terms (like “white supremacy”). The different terms don’t evoke any emotional response from me. It’s all fine. My request to people to be loosey goosey with new terms and words is met with, “it’s too extreme!” Okay. I guess we better tone it down for these guys. They really are triggered.

First, will rational explanations ever convince someone whose attachment to his ideas is primarily driven by tribalism and emotion rather than evidentiary rigor? I think not.

Then, when someone loves to push the narrative of the overly emotional liberal or whatever, typically they are projecting something that they see in themselves on to someone else. Its a pretty common defense mechanism.

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

No one is "triggered" by anything you've said. Being confused about something that you still have yet to be able to explain is not the same as being "triggered."


FWIW, I haven't seen this kind of liberal trolling since Yahey was kicked off the forum.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Not that I need to defend Slowguy, but this is not at all what he's doing.


No one has yet to offer a rational explanation for the use of the term "white supremacy math." All I've seen are passive aggressive games to try to support some broader point, which I can't even tell what it is.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

In my OP, I said “white supremacy math” and the phrase “math teaching styles that are disrespectful to human dignity” are the same thing. That’s my definition. I don’t know what the definition of “white supremacy math” is elsewhere. In this conversation, I’d like to use my definition. Is that okay with you?

The point of my post was a question about if white men were a little more loosey-goosey as they interpret and translate messages about this subject, would they be more amenable to the core concepts? Would there be more common ground?

I think the answer is that white men won’t be loosey goosey. They’re not willing to do that.

Do you have a link or source to the term?

---

Advanced Aero TopTube Storage for Road, Gravel, & Tri...ZeroSlip & Direct-mount, made in the USA.
DarkSpeedWorks.com.....Reviews.....Insta.....Facebook
--

Was DarkSpeed referring to me in the above, and in the post about "Trumpists?" If so, then he's embarrassing himself. There's basically no way to read my posting history in this forum and mistake me for a Trump supporter.

And there hasn't been any significant offering of "evidentiary rigor" in this thread, largely because there's no solid premise at play. I haven't seen anyone offer a solid definition of "white supremacist math." I haven't seen anyone offer any evidence that such a thing exists, or that it has to be addressed, or that the current initiatives in place adequately answer the problem. This entire thread has been a general discussion about the application of certain types of language, words, and phrases to perceived problems, and whether the types of language we're discussing is effective or turns people off.

I don't think anyone has talked about emotional liberals or tribalism, so, as usual, it's unclear what DarkSpeed is yammering on about. I assume it's in response to CallMeMaybe's posts, but since I have her posts hidden, I don't see them, and am not particularly interested in them.

As an aside, given the amount of intellectual dishonesty and poorly thought out argument coming from DarkSpeed, if I were he, I'd seriously reconsider using my company's name as my screen name.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Slowguy is an intentionally deaf guy who’s talking in a conversation about the things he can’t hear. FFS

Okay, gramps. 😂

I think he's in his 40's...

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

Apologies for going off on a bit of a thread tangent but this point resonated for different reasons.

I'm pretty sure you've previously inferred that population growth is a major contributor to many of the issues facing us today. Though I recognise the sentiment of compassion in the above I'm not convinced in the capacity of wealthy nations to continuously absorb the less fortunate. There are already significant gaps within our own populations across measures such as wealth, education, health etc. How does importing more less fortunate help reduce these gaps? It does little to address the root of the problem, which IMO stems from a lack of women's rights in third world countries and incompetent/corrupt governance.

I view you last item with a degree of cynicism. Powerful countries (such as the USA, and lately China) have for many years taken advantage of less powerful countries to serve their own needs. Mining, oil etc. This compounds the turmoil in those impoverished nations and promotes the exodus of its citizens. A government with the power to effectuate the strategic needs of its citizens should only implement that power where it is not at the detriment to the citizens of other nations.

Again, apologies for the tangent.

 

Lets try this. What if instead of remedial math, we called it "math for girls?"

When I say "math for girls," I just mean, "math for dumb people."


Would you be loosey goosey with that phrase? Or could you just look past it so that you could look at the core concepts?

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I’m not sure I understand what you mean. You’re saying “girls” is the same as “dumb people”? Does the phrase “girls math” mean you’re addressing biases against girls?

And here we get to the core of the problem, which you should have identified when typing out your OP:
What does 'white supremacy math' mean? It's as pointless a phrase as 'math for girls. With 'white supremacy math' are you saying math is racist against non-white people? That teaching of math is inherently white supremacist?

Words have meaning, if people were honest about their intentions and wanted to seriously improve systems and outcomes they'd use phrases which more accurately reflected the problem they're trying to solve. There is no 'white supremacy' in math. There may be individual teach biases - that's bad. There may be poor teaching methods or ways to engage more students - we should investigate that. There may be better ways to allocate resources, or contribute more resources if deemed appropriate. But there is no 'white supremacy math', just like there is no 'math for girls'. Those phrases don't mean anything.

How can you not understand what I mean? Do you not know what remedial math is? It is the easiest math class you can possibly take. It's the math class that people get put into for people that constantly fail other math classes. It is the math class for people with the lowest IQs. When everyone else is learning trigonometry, this class is still learning basic division.

Would you be okay if we called that class, "Math for Girls?"

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I can see a relationship between calling something “white supremacy math” if the goal is to eradicate racism in math classes. There’s a relationship between the words and the goal.

I don’t yet understand the relationship between the name “girls math” and your goal, whatever it is. I understand that the students are underachievers. You’re quite clear on that.

Do you think they are underachieving because they’re girls? Do you plan to change the teaching style or allocate resources to these girls? Is someone being sexist? Can you elaborate on your goal or idea?

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

You keep arguing that we should "look past the label" and only consider the "core of the argument."


I am asking you if you would have a problem with remedial math classes being called "math for girls."



The answer is "Yes, I would have a problem with calling it this," admitting that misleading labels that are deliberately inflammatory are problematic, regardless of what the core of the argument is.


But if you answer that, then you have to admit that your OP was wrong, which you aren't willing to do............So you stonewall.



I think I'm done with this conversation.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I said being loosey-goosey with words might be helpful. I didn’t say we should abandon logic. I didn’t mean to be evasive, I merely asked if the goal was related to girls. What’s your core argument?

I just googled the definition of “stonewalling,” which is refusing to answer questions or giving evasive replies.

If you can offer anything about what the core of your argument is, I’d like to hear it. So far you have offered absolutely nothing.

You've probably met your match here with Barry in terms of arguing out to the last meaning of the word "is."

As to why some folks here won't engage with you anymore? It's your track record of argumentation. You're all in for the argument--throwing out "fuck you's" "small dicks" "you're a liar" etc etc. Until you decide you don't like it anymore and the next thing you know Dan shows up saying "we need more females around here--don't be so mean to Carly Rae"

---

Steve

BarryP has good endurance and I respect that. He also has good ideas and has admitted he’s been wrong. I find him a worthy and honorable opponent.

As far as me being too mean, I’m sorry. I hope it hasn’t caused undue emotional distress or high blood pressure or other physical manifestations. It’s probably best they don’t engage with me. Self-care! The half-engaging, though, is a little annoying and funny. Mostly funny. 😉

10 pages and all we have is it's "white supremacy math" because whites are better than blacks, Latinos, and native Americans. But Asians are better that whites at white supremacy...

Theses white supremacy math principle are akin to the whiteness rules put out by Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture.

Even the further left leaners are starting to eat each other on this site. Far less informative to read about issues now most conservatives are gone.

oh it's not that you're mean. There are much more mean people here. You're a light weight in that regard. It's that you dish it out--but then can't take it--and retreat back into your protected status (wherein Dan defends you).

Also I'd say the relative lack of thought in your arguments. Mostly based on emotion. Nothing wrong with a argument based on emotion--until you get emotional when someone calls you out on it and then you retreat back into protected person status.

Other than these glaring warning signs for anyone who chooses to engage with you---we're cool. Carry on.

---

Steve

I’m so sorry for being emotional, Steve.

Every day I’m posting about this and that: my feelings, my hurt feelings, my bruised feelings, my sprained feelings, and my broken feelings. These feelings are all tore up.

I don’t have any fun. It’s so miserable having feelings and being emotional. I spend every moment checking my feelings and making sure they’re still hurt by those old insults and arguments. But they are pretty loyal. If I feed these feelings, they keep on keeping on.

So that’s my emotional plan. It’s boring. Every post ends up being the same. No new ideas. It’s just the old emotions and me. It’s hard to be creative when I’m so fixated.

You, on the other hand, are introducing all sorts of new ideas. Bravo!

Curious, what is it you are certain is the one-off?