The vision of Brazil on other countrys

[DeletedUser]

Nope[2]
It's obvious this research is terribly biased.

For now, I have only my common sense to offer you, I have only some years of observation by only one view point (mine). Still so, i strongly think this research is biased. The numbers just do no sense at all, believe me.

I've read some of the links you provided above and i could POINT the biases there. But I'm too sleepy to do it now and have other more important things to do.
Then sorry about it. I hope you don't wait much for a better answer.

edit:
waaaait... i didn't know the real meaning of the word "prejudice"
That's what you get for being without sleep for a lot of time You read things and think they do sense, even exchanging a thing for other lol

 

[DeletedUser]

The specific research project you are calling terribly biased, “Prejudice and Discrimination in the School Environment,” was requested by the National Institute of Educational Study and Research (INEP) and carried out by the Institute of Economic Research (FIPE). The study’s coordinator was Jose Afonso Mazzon, professor at the Faculty of Economics, Administration and Accounting at the University of Sao Paulo (FEA-USP). This study showed that 99.3% of those involved in the educational environment, in Brazil, exhibit prejudice.

Good luck trying to argue there was "terrible bias."

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't care who they are... Any random university around here could do the same research and get numbers close the reality....

What is biased is what they consider a person exhibiting prejudice ._.

Are they also judging them based on jokes? HAHAHA
That research would me make laugh, if that's it...

Jokes against black, japanese, american, argentinian, portuguese people (as well people from different regions of Brazil) has nothing to do with prejudice O_O

I DOUBT they were considering real prejudice. These are high numbers as percentages... I was once in school and I've never seen anything like that there. Seriously... We aren't that Nazi LOL
Where in the world you would see children with such prejudice against anyone... (or teenagers... whatever they are)
That's ridiculous!

 

[DeletedUser]

"racismo cordial"

Instead of just making unfounded personal opinions, why don't you review the information on this report. It is available online, and you'll see quick enough exactly how they obtained the information (primarily via polls). Your personal opinion is biased, it is uninformed, and it is clouding your judgment. How can I say that? Because your responses are defensive. Without even looking at the available information, you are making sweeping denials.

Oh, and racial jokes are racist. The mere fact you don't think they are demonstrates just how disconnected you are from the problem.

 

[DeletedUser]

...

And you said most Brazilians are racist... The Joke of the day...

I will repeat... Most Brazilians do ABOMINATE racism!
Racism is existent here but not at that scale you said ._.

 

[DeletedUser]

Once again, I didn't say it, I PROVED it.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yes, of course... Because the ones who you took the statistics are absolutely correct. ABSOLUTELY!
C'mon... You don't even know their base to do these statistics and keep saying they are correct! LOL
To me, that research is irrelevant, until you show me what was taken into account.

 

[DeletedUser]

Let me add one more thing. It wasn't "any random university." Why don't you bother to click on those links I provided earlier:

National Institute of Educational Study and Research (INEP)
Institute of Economic Research (FIPE)
Jose Afonso Mazzon
University of Sao Paulo

The basis for your argument, at this point, is to deny the existence of the evidence I provided. You have not provided even one iota of evidence in contra.

On this one report alone, it was requested by the Government of Brazil, performed by a highly regarded research group, the Institute of Economic Research, and was coordinated by Jose Afonzo Mazzon (click on his name above, to review his extensive vitae). Seriously, how far do you want to travel down the rabbit hole of denial?

Provide contra-evidence. That's your challenge. Good night.

 

[DeletedUser]

1-
You got me wrong.........
I never said it was a random university. Read again.

2-
You haven't provided any concrete evidence.

3-
For now, I won't provide contra-evidence. I'm somewhat busy, right now.

But did you really show what was taken into account? These numbers didn't pop from nowhere >_>
Tell me what was their base for this judgement! I'm not accepting "jokes" as answer.

 

[DeletedUser]

Here it is, in Portuguese'

http://www.agenciabrasil.gov.br/noticias/2009/06/17/materia.2009-06-17.8057908621/view

The research consisted of interviews with over 18,500 students, parents, principals, teachers and staff in 501 public schools.

If you're not going to bother to read anything on your own, this conversation is ended. Alright, gnight.

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't care to read, I've read all you posted here, and will continue doing so. I just don't want search things. It consumes a lot of time.

O estudo indica ainda que 99,9% dos entrevistados desejam manter distância de algum grupo social. Os deficientes mentais são os que sofrem maior preconceito com 98,9% das pessoas com algum nível de distância social, seguido pelos homossexuais com 98,9%, ciganos (97,3%), deficientes físicos (96,2%), índios (95,3%), pobres (94,9%), moradores da periferia ou de favelas (94,6%), moradores da área rural (91,1%) e negros (90,9%).

I still doubt it's true. That doesn't fit with reality.
Seriously, not even children 7 years old would give these kind of answers, with this mentality.

Still... You didn't prove me anything other than I doubt this research shows real values lol
It's not possible I live in a city COMPLETELY outside Brazil reality, about prejudice. It's not possible EVERYONE I KNOW (except 3 people) don't have this kind of mentality, but the rest of Brazilian have...

To me that research was a joke. No matter how serious these institutions use to be, I highly doubt about the results.

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't care to read, I've read all you posted here, and will continue doing so. I just don't want search things. It consumes a lot of time.

Right, so you ask me to provide evidence, to provide proof, to research the material and state my case, and then you don't bother to read it because it hurts your brain?

That's just insulting, don't waste my time.

 

[DeletedUser1105]

I don't care to read, I've read all you posted here, and will continue doing so. I just don't want search things. It consumes a lot of time.

I've been a quiet observer of this debate, as I know nothing about the topic at hand.

Your attitude is not going win you any arguments. One side has provided evidence to back up their opinion, and now it is your turn to provide evidence that backs up your view. Your personal opinion is not good enough. And not reading the evidence provided against your arguments means you should not be posing your opinions on it.

 

[DeletedUser]

The basis for your argument, at this point, is to deny the existence of the evidence I provided. You have not provided even one iota of evidence in contra.

Aww, come on Hell - how many times have you pointed out that it's impossible to prove the absence of something?

Anyhow, if you want to get hung up on evidence then by all means but what you're providing is a second hand report of a study. What you're getting is Flávia Albuquerque's interpretation of the report. She's a journalist, not a social scientist. I don't really trust journalists to interpret scientific research, personally. They're too often tempted towards the sensational and do exhibit a degree of bias as a result. That's my opinion, at least.

I have to treat some of what's in the article with a bit of suspicion. It claims that:

The research reported high levels of prejudice. Of those interviewed, 96.5% have prejudice against persons with disabilities, 94.2% have ethnic/racial prejudice, 93.5% have gender prejudice, 91% age prejudice, 87.5% socioeconomic prejudice, 87.3% sexual orientation prejudice and 75.95% prejudice based on place of origin.

To me, that appears like it might be a bit of a misrepresentation. Rather than reporting high levels of prejudice, that seems to be indicating widespread prejudice - but not necessarily a "high level".

There's a later paragraph which talks about the "intensity" of the prejudice - which I'd interpret to be a discussion of the "level":

In terms of the intensity of prejudice, the study revealed that 38.2% have prejudice by gender, and this is mostly by men against women. As for age, 37.9% have prejudice, mainly against older people. The intensity of prejudicial attitude comes to 32.4% in relation to persons with disability, 26.1% associated to sexual orientation, 25.1% in relation to socioeconomic differences, 22.9% ethnic/racial and 20.65% place of origin.

This seems to contradict what was said earlier ("38.2% have prejudice by gender" as opposed to "93.5% have gender prejudice"). I assume that this is because of problems with the translation and that this 38.2% is some kind of quantative assessment of the level of gender prejudice. That doesn't seem, to me, to be a "high level" of prejudice but, again, I guess the problem could be in the translation.

It's a game of Chinese whispers really, trying to interpret an English translation of a Brazilian journalist's interpretation of a Brazilian professor's interpretation of data.

Of course, it could be that Flávia Albuquerque is perfectly correct in her interpretation (and, for those of us not familiar with Portugeuse, that the translation is perfect), although it's important to acknowledge that that's an assumption.

 

[DeletedUser]

I've been a quiet observer of this debate, as I know nothing about the topic at hand.

Your attitude is not going win you any arguments. One side has provided evidence to back up their opinion, and now it is your turn to provide evidence that backs up your view. Your personal opinion is not good enough. And not reading the evidence provided against your arguments means you should not be posing your opinions on it.

There's way too much concern around here already about winning arguments.

Isn't it acceptable, just occasionally, to discuss opinions? Hell says racism is rife and that the government do nothing about it, the Brazilians disagree...

Nobody's going to "win".

This section is "Debate and discussion" right? If we bring everything to the level of mind-numbingly tedious debate where not one sentence can stand without 20 references from reputable sources then we're going to kill all discussion and just get left with some very, very dry debate.

 

[DeletedUser]

Some of the wording is rather misleading too. To say that 90% of the people interviewed believe there is prejudice is not the same as saying that the people interviewed believe that 90% are prejudiced. My guess is that the numbers would probably be similar if that "study" was done in the US.

 

[DeletedUser]

EBC is the national broadcasting, the public agency, for the government of Brazil. Basically, they're the information single-source for the Brazilian government. Also, Flávia Albuquerque is not a journalist, she is a clinical psychologist with a minor in communications (English/Portuguese) who worked on the research project discussed. She is not an outsider and she was not posing her opinions on the report, she was providing a lay summary of the results.

Also, the reports are being misinterpreted here. The information was polls of those stating how many indicated there was prejudice, indicating which prejudices they participated in, and other similar directions. But I want to state one thing here, before people have so much fun running on a tangent. This is but "ONE" report I provided. I linked at least 8 reports, and also provided links to sites that provide plenty more reports. This report, in and of itself, provides ample evidence of prejudice within the school systems, but it is not, by any measure, the totality of my arguments and it is opportunistic redress to present it otherwise.

And yes, some of the translations are a little confusing. I can provide clarity on some parts, if you like.

 

[DeletedUser]

Right, so you ask me to provide evidence, to provide proof, to research the material and state my case, and then you don't bother to read it because it hurts your brain?

That's just insulting, don't waste my time.

I wasn't clear. SORRY ABOUT IT. I meant "reading was not an annoyance to me" and I said, AS EVERYONE COULD READ AND UNDERSTAND, "I've read all you posted here, and will continue doing so"

You could say I contradicted myself. But not say I didn't bother to read...
The fault was of my fail at communication, not in my behavior. But you also failed at reading the rest of the phrase.

And not reading the evidence provided against your arguments means you should not be posing your opinions on it.

I've read everything. Ok? :laugh:

Your personal opinion is not good enough.

Hint: I never said it was good enough.

edit:
That's insulting to me, getting accused for something I haven't done, for complete reading laziness of the accusers...

 

[DeletedUser]

And yes, some of the translations are a little confusing. I can provide clarity on some parts, if you like.

Ok, can you clarify this one for me?

--- The research indicates that virtually everyone interviewed (99.9%) wants to keep a distance from some social group. Persons with intellectual disabilities suffer the most, with 98.9% of respondents wanting to maintain some level of social distance. This is followed by homosexuals (98.9%), gypsies (97.3%), persons with physical disabilities (96.2%), indigenous people (95.5%), poor people (94.9%), persons living in the outskirts or slums (94.6%), persons living in rural areas (91.1%) and black persons (90.9%). ~ http://www.patriciaebauer.com/study-...il-translation

What constitutes wanting to maintain some social distance? It almost sounds like they're saying that you're prejudiced if you don't want to visit slums, don't have friends with physical or mental disabilities or are members of other races, etc. Again, I see similar attitudes in the US and other countries. In fact, many players of the West (including you) have shown a lot of prejudice against people with intellectual disabilities.

 

[DeletedUser]

That's insulting to me, getting accused for something I haven't done, for complete reading laziness of the accusers...

You're kidding me right? You're going to act all hurt because you indicate that you read what I posted, but you aren't going to bother reading the information provided in the links I gave you, and aren't going to bother researching the issue itself despite the fact you insist on my providing supporting evidence? Go away... you're not debating, you're making a debacle of debate. Indeed, your very behavior falls inline with some of the "prejudismo cordial" I was reading about and have been witness to.