ClumsyMonkey.net

Aerin it is NOT bullshit when a man and a father loses his child to a less-qualified mother based on her gender.

it is NOT bullshit when a qualified white man is not allowed into a university or hired for a job because a less qualified black man is hired or accepted to fill a quota.

creating policies that work against the "WASPs" for the benefit of others is not fair. period.

crystal baller wrote:affirmative action is not an equitable policy.

the solution is to judge applicants on merit and not on race, across the board, period.

it doesn't matter what they're applying for - the most qualified should be selected.

Completely agree! Aerin, I honestly would dig a touch deeper on affirmative action before you suggest that it has helped far more than hurt because I think you'd change your view rather quickly.

crystal baller wrote:Aerin it is NOT bullshit when a man and a father loses his child to a less-qualified mother based on her gender.

it is NOT bullshit when a qualified white man is not allowed into a university or hired for a job because a less qualified black man is hired or accepted to fill a quota.

creating policies that work against the "WASPs" for the benefit of others is not fair. period.

I agree. However, that's a myth. Affirmative Action is all about choosing among EQUALLY qualified individuals. It almost never happens that a less-qualified individual is hired over a more qualified one based on gender, race, or anything else. That myth is propagated by a poor understanding of what Affirmative Action really is.

I used to feel that Affirmative Action was vaguely reverse-racist, until a good friend of mine told me to research it more and to not believe the hype. This I did, and my opinion changed. I urge you to do the same.

As for women getting sole custody over children just for being "the mother", I agree this is something that should be changed; however it has nothing to do with Affirmative Action.

clumsy_congressman wrote:

crystal baller wrote:affirmative action is not an equitable policy.

the solution is to judge applicants on merit and not on race, across the board, period.

it doesn't matter what they're applying for - the most qualified should be selected.

Completely agree! Aerin, I honestly would dig a touch deeper on affirmative action before you suggest that it has helped far more than hurt because I think you'd change your view rather quickly.

Funny, because I'd urge you to do the same. It's kind of pathetic that so many people believe the hype about issues like this. Try being an African American or a woman for a month or two, then come back to me and tell me how unfair Affirmative Action is. It isn't Affirmative Action that's unfair, it's racism and sexism, but we unfortunately can't obliterate those through legislation. Affirmative Action is something like a band-aid, trying to help an incurable wound. It is imperfect, yes, but it is far better than nothing.

But why should the fact that you're a woman or the fact that you're a different race or skin tone, make a decision on how far you can go in life?
Because I have indian in me........should I be allowed to take a job from you??? That you worked soooooooo hard to try and accomplish?

Even though you might have WAY more credentials while I did nothing but live with my parents until I'm 22 and have a 10 hour a week job just to make money for smokes and beer?

Now think about affirmative action....

legislation is a problem. more laws = less liberty.

i'm all for freedom. if i run a business and i want to hire white people, and just white people, no matter whose more qualified, that is up to me. they're my hiring practices. if you don't like them, luckily for you, you don't have to have to work for me or buy stuff from my rascist ass.

just like if you ran a business and you only wanted black women. that'd be up to you.

I'm an upper-middle class heterosexual white male. I'm the most hated kind of person in the world.

I don't even understand discrimination based upon race, gender, etc. It makes no rational sense to me, and I've never seen it in my life, for which I am thankful.

clumsy_congressman wrote:But why should the fact that you're a woman or the fact that you're a different race or skin tone, make a decision on how far you can go in life?
Because I have indian in me........should I be allowed to take a job from you??? That you worked soooooooo hard to try and accomplish?

Even though you might have WAY more credentials while I did nothing but live with my parents until I'm 22 and have a 10 hour a week job just to make money for smokes and beer?

Now think about affirmative action....

I think you are missing my point.

Let me frame it another way before I have to go.

1. Racism exists. Sexism exists. Homophobia exists. You may not be a bigot, and I may not be, no one on this board may be. But they do exist, and they are far more common than we'd all like to think.

2. Racism, sexism, homophobia, and other forms of hatred are NOT FAIR.

3. The government recognizes this. It wants to do something to help people who are fighting for jobs and recognition and being refused because they are dealing with bigoted individuals.

4. The government comes up with Affirmative Action. Is it perfect? No. Is it totally fair in every case? Probably not. Does it help alleviate the complete unfairness of sex- or race-based hatred? Yes. Should it be abolished just for the few times it's abused or imperfect? No. Should it be amended to be the best system possible and give everyone the opportunities they deserve? YES.

5. Look at our history and our treatment of blacks and other minorities in the past. It is <i>sickening</i>. Is it fair to one white man to give an EQUALLY qualified black man the job to fill a "quota"? That's debatable. But does that white man, in the face of slavery, lynchings, white supremacism, segregation, and all other forms of horrible things we've done against blacks in the past, have any room for argument? In other words, only one person can have the job, and because both are equally qualified, one person isn't going to get it "unfairly". If the boss, who may or may not have to decided to hire a black person on his own, has to choose the black man, what's the difference than if he had chosen this on his own? It may not be perfectly fair, but it's pretty sickening that in the face of the horrors of what we've done in the past against blacks that a white man can whine about "unfairness."

Sure, he may be right that in this one, particular case it might be constrewed as "unfair". But one would hope that he'd recognize what society is doing and go on and apply for another job without whining about the unfairness of Affirmative Action and society. We're doing what we can to alleviate the very real existence of things that should not exist: arbitrary hatred.

i'm totally with you on the disgustingness of that journal Aerin, but i also have read alot on how White Males are actually beginning to become a discriminated group, because we're trying NOT to discriminate, i'm all for equality, (just look back over almost all my posts in these forums) but in my city with a large Native population (for you americans that's our version of black discrimination in canada) theres actually a problem with white people being turned down jobs, because the company wants to have a large native staff, i think we just need som true equality in our society, no discrimination whatsoever of anyone, and when it comes to jobs, the interview should be by phone and sex, age and race should not be on the form, to allow for REAL equality.

Aerin wrote:Funny, because I'd urge you to do the same. It's kind of pathetic that so many people believe the hype about issues like this. Try being an African American or a woman for a month or two, then come back to me and tell me how unfair Affirmative Action is. It isn't Affirmative Action that's unfair, it's racism and sexism, but we unfortunately can't obliterate those through legislation. Affirmative Action is something like a band-aid, trying to help an incurable wound. It is imperfect, yes, but it is far better than nothing.

First off, AA is racism. Calling AA a "band-aid" is probably the most racist thing said in this topic yet. So being black is like an injury? Being black means you need someone to hold your hand and get your foot in the door for you? Being black means nevermind a person's achievements, lets judge them based on color. Do we really want phone interviews to start with the question "What color are you?" and proceed to "Black? Great! I have a position for an African American I need filled".

Maybe I'll take your suggestion. I will ask an African American what it's like knowing that he/she got the job just because he/she is black. I'm sure that would be appreciated.

I have all the confidence in the world that African Americans can achieve great things without the governent's "help". That one day, they will prove to be better at tasks than whites. That whites will someday have to fight harder for positions that mostly blacks hold.

That is what MLJ fought for: equality. Not a "band-aid".

I didn't say it was a band-aid for being black.

It is a band-aid for the wound of racism. Read what I said.

It's nice that I'm surrounded by idealists who throw around ideas about what should be rather than what is. It'd be nice if racism didn't exist, wouldn't it? Then we wouldn't need Affirmative Action to try and "fix" it.

the point we're making is AA doesn't fix racism. it is racism.

EDIT: to fix many stupid ass errors.

did you ever stop and think that maybe affirmative action breeds racism?

Yes, I've thought about it a lot. Truth is, racism exists with or without it. AA is just another excuse for it. I'm not arguing that it's perfect, merely that it shouldn't be abolished. It is a necessary evil, if you will.

so. Aerin. you still think AA is a good idea?

why? because it's a neccessary evil? no evil is neccessary.

disagree?

why?

It is a necessary evil to combat evil (racism) that neither you nor I nor anyone else can make go away with the addition or subtraction of laws. Only education can do that. I am for this education, but I recognize that I cannot change the opinions of racists.

No, no evil is necessary, but one already exists, and we must do what we can in our limited way to combat it. This is a case where two wrongs don't make a right, but they do make a lesser wrong.

I won't try to force you to agree with me, and I think this argument's gone on long enough. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree; I do see your point, but you and I (and the others who have participated in this discussion) have different values that won't coalesce no matter how much time we spend arguing.

Anyway, feel free to have the last word, as I've said all I'm going to about AA.

*stephanie's 2 cents*

although i do share the belief that affirmative action is reverse racism in a candy-coated way, in pragmatic terms, economic affirmative action would probably be closer to reaching a goal of equality. this is due to extremely low mobility among the poor and less opportunity in terms of schooling etc. a friend of mine (who just happens to be black) was recently accepted into harvard. i know for a fact that this decision was not based on her race. she is the hardest working person i have ever come in contact with. im pretty sure that due to annual summer school since 6th grade, she was in calc bc as a sophomore, ap english as a junior, and god knows what else. i go to school in a very upper class area and no matter what school you go to, whether its ivy league or community college, you will probably reach some degree of success. however, in poorer areas, regardless of race, there is less of a chance for the same success. giving that person a leg up would hardly be an obstacle for the richer person's chances of world domination. at the high school level, i was probably awarded somewhere around 15 to 20 points for going to a top notch school which is wierd because i did jack shit the whole time. this 20 points just cancelled out the 20 points awarded to the person coming from a poor background who didnt have time to do the extra curricular stuff that i did (which i got points for) because they needed to work in order to supplement their parents income, pay for school stuff, etc. their school is probably looked down upon and seen as "easier" than my school even though the person being considered for UofM worked hard enough to get high test scores, if not to get a decent GPA. one might say that its infinetly easier in a poorer school to get good grades...do you know how many of my fellow students do jack shit and get above a 3.5? most of the school. i also think that AA should be individually based and not mandated federally or by the state. that way, every college would decide policies on an individualist basis and the person trying to apply would really have no grounds to bitch. its their school, they can do what they want. you are the one who is APPLYING.

im really not sure that made any sense...im not gonna go back and read it. it was pretty much stream of consciousness without talking about noodles and basketball.

Affirmative Action does breed racism. I am not a racist person in the least bit, but because of it, I found myself speaking out against people of different races when I got rejected to U of M when I applied there last year. I watched people who were on lower intelligence levels get into the school I wanted to go to merely for the fact that they had a different colored skin, and I hated it. It proved that a "discriminated race" with half a point lower in their GPA and no extracurricular activities are far more qualified to get into this school because they're supposedly discriminated against. What bothers me more is that we went to the same high school and took all the same classes, and in some cases, I took tougher classes. Now please tell me how that is fair to me, a pale-skinned lower-middle class white male that has to pay for his own college?

Here's another fun example for ya'll to ponder. My friend Andy went to high school with me and took all the same classes and he got a 3.7 (I had a 3.45) and now goes to Dartmouth with a 3/4 ride scholarship. The only difference between him and I is a little bit of a change in the GPA (he took AP Bio and AB Calc, classes that I didn't bother with) and the fact that he is Mexican. He also received a full-ride scholarship to U of M, which is cool, because he really is smarter than I am and worked his ass off to deserve it. I just wonder how .25 in one's GPA justifies one person getting a full ride to that college, and another not getting accepted at all.

But how would one feel to know that they got into a top-notch college on a technicallity, just to fill a quota? I figure I should get into somewhere like UCLA now because they don't have enough lower-middle class white males there, right? Where's my organization of overbearing lawyers saying the world is racist, sexist, and whatever -ist you can think of that can insult a common person? Why shouldn't I get the same opportunities as these minorities?

By the way, one cannot combat racism with racism. People should get jobs due to qualifications. People should get accepted to colleges on intellectual merit. There's no need for organizations to make those that are less qualified seem more qualified because at some point their ancestors may have been slaves, and were treated wrongly.

Okay, all you anti-AAers, I may just have changed my opinion on the issue. Take a lesson from this argument, because it might help you improve yours in the future. I was just talking to my buddy on AIM about this, and here's what she had to say:

"See I agree that [racism] still exists quite a bit but I dont feel that aa is at all the right way to get it dealt with. It just creates more anger and doesn't really get much done. You need laws that allow for suits to be brought against people for discrimination easily...but aa doesnt do the job well for any parties involved."

Why is this a sound, good, and convincing argument?

1. It doesn't attack anyone personally.
2. It doesn't blindly assume that racism and other hatreds don't exist, just because they shouldn't.
3. It offers an alternative to AA that is viable and not some utopian fantasy
4. It's short, sweet, and to the point.

That, my friends, is a good argument. Take heed.

maybe you just bought what she had to say because it came from somebody you respected.