As I was reading over the Wikipedia article I posted in the thread about school busing, it made mention of the "separate but equal" policy that used to be in place before desegregation took affect. Just about everyone agrees that separate but equal" is never actually equal, but I'm curious to know what your own interpretation of this is, and do you think it ever may have had any advantages?

Seperate but equal, to me always goes back to when integration was still a new term, and some blacks didn't want to be in the same places as whites, they just wanted the same jobs, homes, opportunities, businesses, etc., as white people did but in a different area. And you know, to have that here or there, in a few neighborhoods, I guess that would be alright but to have it all over it would make you wonder, you're on this side, they're on that side, WHAT happens if somebody goes over to the other side?

It means: "you're not go enough to mix it up with the status quo and have access to the better things in life that they're afforded, but since we have to tolerate your kind because you won't go away. . .here ya go, take this off name brand cereal that we made just for your kind. Doesn't have quite the same rich flavor but it tastes almost as good. Be sure you don't eat it where the majority will be burdened by your presence."

Quote :

do you think it ever may have had any advantages?

Only for bigots.

It means that when it comes to types of people, certain types aren't considered good enough to have what others do....so they come up with something of lesser value and try to pass it off as being just as good.