|
|
Post by abbey1227 on May 2, 2022 1:57:31 GMT
Emma Guest-Consales, President of the Guides Association of New York City who leads tours of Gilded Age mansions on Fifth Avenue and other neighborhoods, told Insider the "Gilded Age" is a phrase applied retroactively to describe a period from the late 1870s to the early 1900s. "The name is just what it implies — a thin veneer of gold covering humble or not so nice material, things underneath," she said. "The titans of industry built their fortunes on the backs of the abjectly poor. Workers were treated horribly, immigrants were discriminated against, racism and xenophobia were rampant."Typical Gilded Age mansions were "large, lavish, and luxurious," much like the Lanier house today, Guest-Consales said.
In United States history, the Gilded Age was an era extending roughly from 1870 to 1900. It was a time of rapid economic growth, especially in the Northern and Western United States. As American wages grew much higher than those in Europe, especially for skilled workers, and industrialization demanded an ever-increasing unskilled labor force, the period saw an influx of millions of European immigrants.
The rapid expansion of industrialization led to real wage growth of 60% between 1860 and 1890, and spread across the ever-increasing labor force. The average annual wage per industrial worker (including men, women, and children) rose from $380 in 1880, to $564 in 1890, a gain of 48%.[1] Conversely, the Gilded Age was also an era of abject poverty and inequality, as millions of immigrants—many from impoverished regions—poured into the United States, and the high concentration of wealth became more visible and contentious
Did one of those descriptions come off as much more harsh and possibly biased than the other? ![[wonder]](//storage.proboards.com/7182076/images/j0RhrUuXIPyEojDjrssW.gif) |
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on May 3, 2022 0:04:31 GMT
Both are honest, but don't confuse the difference between colloquial and academic writing with inherent bias.
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on May 3, 2022 3:19:09 GMT
Both are honest, but don't confuse the difference between colloquial and academic writing with inherent bias.
speak English, Doc. We ain't scientists.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on May 3, 2022 23:22:26 GMT
Both are honest, but don't confuse the difference between colloquial and academic writing with inherent bias.
speak English, Doc. We ain't scientists.
Both authors said the same exact thing. There is no bias except in your head, which I am [generously] ascribing to the common stereotype that academic speech/writing is "sterile" and therefore unbiased.
If I were being less generous, I'd say that your complaint has more to do with the first author's name and your racism.
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on May 4, 2022 3:57:31 GMT
speak English, Doc. We ain't scientists.
Both authors said the same exact thing. There is no bias except in your head, which I am [generously] ascribing to the common stereotype that academic speech/writing is "sterile" and therefore unbiased.
If I were being less generous, I'd say that your complaint has more to do with the first author's name and your racism.
Doctor, heal thyself
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on May 4, 2022 11:17:54 GMT
Both authors said the same exact thing. There is no bias except in your head, which I am [generously] ascribing to the common stereotype that academic speech/writing is "sterile" and therefore unbiased.
If I were being less generous, I'd say that your complaint has more to do with the first author's name and your racism.
Doctor, heal thyself
I did |
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on May 4, 2022 11:31:21 GMT
I do not think so.
You seem to jump and cringe and recognize things that aren't there because you've been so groomed to see them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on May 4, 2022 12:04:11 GMT
I do not think so.
You seem to jump and cringe and recognize things that aren't there because you've been so groomed to see them.
The latest alt-right buzzword: "groomed"
Too bad you guys gave up on "cuck" before Wil Smith actually gave you the perfect opportunity to use it.
But I did do my own research and I did do my own thinking to reach my conclusions. When faced with new facts, I re-evaluate. If my internal logic holds then I change nothing. If it doesn't, I spend time working it through to find the fault in my logic and evolving as a person. There are still some issues that I struggle with but those are my struggles.
Through this process, I think I'm quite able to see the difference between real racism and "woke" nonsense. I'm also capable of seeing when people use pointing out "woke" nonsense as a cover for real racism.
|
|
|
|
Post by abbey1227 on May 4, 2022 12:11:56 GMT
The latest alt-right buzzword: "groomed"
Too bad you guys gave up on "cuck" before Wil Smith actually gave you the perfect opportunity to use it.
But I did do my own research and I did do my own thinking to reach my conclusions. When faced with new facts, I re-evaluate. If my internal logic holds then I change nothing. If it doesn't, I spend time working it through to find the fault in my logic and evolving as a person. There are still some issues that I struggle with but those are my struggles.
Through this process, I think I'm quite able to see the difference between real racism and "woke" nonsense. I'm also capable of seeing when people use pointing out "woke" nonsense as a cover for real racism.
That's probably true. Though I do see the humor in it used to always be priests.......but now it's very often teachers. And you've been surrounded by both, IIRC?
You seemed to be filled with logic in a world that has very little.
The definitions have changed and the too oft repeated accusations have had their effect.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prometheus on May 4, 2022 12:33:30 GMT
The latest alt-right buzzword: "groomed"
Too bad you guys gave up on "cuck" before Wil Smith actually gave you the perfect opportunity to use it.
But I did do my own research and I did do my own thinking to reach my conclusions. When faced with new facts, I re-evaluate. If my internal logic holds then I change nothing. If it doesn't, I spend time working it through to find the fault in my logic and evolving as a person. There are still some issues that I struggle with but those are my struggles.
Through this process, I think I'm quite able to see the difference between real racism and "woke" nonsense. I'm also capable of seeing when people use pointing out "woke" nonsense as a cover for real racism.
That's probably true. Though I do see the humor in it used to always be priests.......but now it's very often teachers. And you've been surrounded by both, IIRC?
You seemed to be filled with logic in a world that has very little.
The definitions have changed and the too oft repeated accusations have had their effect.
1. Surrounded? There were a lot of teachers at the schools I attended. Is that what you mean by "surrounded"? There were priests at church every Sunday... and around campus in high school. Is that what you mean by "surrounded"?
2. It's the only way that I know how to cope without diving to the bottom of a vat of whiskey
3. My sentences were quite clear and took into account any changes in definition that I care to acknowledge.
|
|
![[wonder]](http://storage.proboards.com/7182076/images/j0RhrUuXIPyEojDjrssW.gif)
![[giveup]](http://storage.proboards.com/7182076/images/FSYefibmKqtatIXMgHZg.gif)
![[cheers]](http://storage.proboards.com/7182076/images/engyBVslEdpmpmdnBwZQ.gif)
