General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums#RaceTogether and the Harm of Racial Ignorance
When asked on Twitter whether Starbucks employees received diversity training before being asked to start conversations about race with customers, the company replied: "We don't presume to educate communities on race, only to encourage an open dialogue." The trouble with this, however, is that it is socially irresponsible for a company to subject employees and customers to no-holds barred discussions of race. While Starbucks suggests that "talking about race" is "worth a little discomfort", the company has a responsibility to consider what it can and should do to take into account the perspectives of people who actually have to deal with racism and don't have the option of treating it as an optional topic of discourse in the coffee line.
One of the reasons why it is so difficult to have public conversations about race is the fact that very few people have actually studied race seriously, either on their own or within an educational setting. Starbucks is actually contributing to the misconception that "race" is something that doesn't require education to discuss. The truth is that many people have never taken a class on the subject, attended an anti-racist workshop or even read a book about the history of racism. Conversations based on racial ignorance are actually quite harmful and have the potential to alienate people who have experienced racism or lost loved ones to racial violence. As an anti-racist educator, occasional coffee drinker and woman of color, I do not want to hear random members of the public who have not studied race share their uninformed opinions with or around me in the early morning hours.
Research on racial attitudes has demonstrated that there are wide swaths of the majority population who believe that talking about race at all is racist, that critiquing white people individually or collectively is inherently hateful and that racism is over (if it ever existed in the first place). Such ideas minimize or outright deny the existence of racial inequality and white supremacy in our society today. As philosopher Charles Mills explains, these forms of denial produce an "epistemology of ignorance"--a way of knowing and constructing the world built on a lack of knowledge about the social and political realities of race.
Read More http://www.huffingtonpost.com/crystal-fleming/racetogether-and-the-harm-of-racial-ignorance_b_6895070.html?utm_hp_ref=black-voices
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Then, Crystal might wish to avoid DU.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)It can be stressful.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Nailed the voice of too many DUers that MUST be heard in EVERY thread discussing race.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)I think they still think the one who smelt it dealt it.
I wonder how they know a thread has been posted? A signal flare? Secret fight club?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)the Commissioner picks up the Blackphone.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)sheshe2
(83,833 posts)Here ya go, bravenak.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)There's no way I could have worked at Starbucks that week. No. Not me.
sheshe2
(83,833 posts)Ha! I don't even like Starbucks Coffee. It tastes burnt to me.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)I like those, they seem perfect to me. And I might be cheap.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Starbucks must have consulted these "housewives" in coming up with their blend!!
I would have told them to make their own dayum coffee.
Burned Beans The Shame of Starbucks
http://worldofcaffeine.com/2011/03/09/burned-beans-the-shame-of-starbucks/
Most fine coffee beans should be medium roasted. Junk beans are often burned, because, once you burn the beans, you can no longer tell what sort of quality they might have had if they had been properly roasted. The fact is, all burned beans taste the same: burned and bitter. Starbucks coffee is burned and bitter. You can tell when beans are burned because they take on a black color. We can only assume that Starbucks starts with the worst possible beans. After all, burning better beans is just a waste of money. Unfortunately, through the vagaries of marketing, not only has Starbucks become virtually omnipresent, but nearly every other coffee roaster has jumped on the burned bean band wagon. That is why, when you visit a shop selling a variety of whole coffee beans, most, if not all, of the beans have been burned black as hell.
In the ultimate coffee smackdown, it was yuppie Starbucks vs. Ronald McDonald and the Dunkin Kid. And the clown and the kid won!
Consumer Reports magazine said that in a test conducted at two locations of each emporium, its tasters found McDonalds coffee to be decent and moderately strong with no flaws. On the other hand, the Starbucks brew was strong, but burnt and bitter enough to make your eyes water instead of open. The March, 2007 issue of the magazine, advises, Try McDonalds, which was cheapest and best. Several other more recent blind taste tests have consistently rated Dunkin Donuts and MacDonalds as the best tasting and Starbucks as the worst tasting coffee sampled.
Thanks for the vid, MADem~
MADem
(135,425 posts)Last time I was there, they sold me some Paul Newman coffee and it was really, really good!
sheshe2
(83,833 posts)We have a demo Nespresso machine at work and all the free coffee pods we want. It's a "perk" so to speak.
MADem
(135,425 posts)One of my nephews did an internship for university at a bigshot company--they paid him slightly better than minimum wage, but he got all all the "snacks" and "beverages" he could stuff in his pie hole--and they had lots of good stuff. And he was eating it, too! If he hadn't been hoofing it to/from work, he would have put on a ton of weight!
sheshe2
(83,833 posts)Thanks for the laugh, 1SBM.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)gollygee
(22,336 posts)why they didn't hire someone to help them work on it internally. Oh wait, yeah I do know. It was just a PR stunt.
XemaSab
(60,212 posts)that was far more likely to backfire than to produce positive PR for Starbucks, much less meaningful dialogue.
A genuine effort would maybe involve providing employment opportunities in underserved communities, working with underperforming schools, diversifying the board of directors and senior management, putting thoughtful quotes on the cups from variety of perspectives, and so forth...
...but this was clearly not a genuine effort.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)And isn't it a potential problem that making these employees focus part of their attention on discussing white privilege and so forth with their customers reduces their ability to focus on making the perfect grande skinny mochaccino?
I'm glad that Starbucks has dropped this idea.