Announcement

Join us on Discord: https://discord.gg/nf43FxS

Poll

Does Affirmative Action Promote Equality or More Discrimination?

It Promotes Equality2%2% - 1
It Doesn't Help to End Discrimination21%21% - 8
It Promotes More Discrimination76%76% - 29
Other0%0% - 0
Total: 38
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|5507|SE London

"Is it fair to give a better job or an opportunity at the University to under-qualified individuals just on the basis of race, ethnicity or gender?"

No.

I would've thought that was quite obvious to anyone. Any recruitment should be done purely on merit.
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,609|5546|London, England
Things like this just stir shit up. It promotes more discrimination, in other words. Equality means everyone is the same. Not "make the minorities have special things, because they're a minority so that makes them automatically discriminated for some reason, so we'll give them special things"
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5336|'Murka

Selection for any position/program should be based solely on merit. Personally, I don't believe race or gender should even be on the application form.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|5370|The Land of Scott Walker
Promotes more discrimination.  The person best qualified should receive the position. Period.
Gawwad
My way or Haddaway!
+212|5610|Espoo, Finland
In an ideal world, emplyers would only pay attention to the qualifications, but this is rarely the case.
AA can help to get rid of race and gender prejudice by giving women, minorities and immigrants a change to show that they are up for the tasks.
On the other hand it can just as easily work against the cause by making the majorities jealoys of the special treatment.

I don't really like the whole idea of looking at people by race or gender* though, so I don't support this.
If the way the world is evolving doesn't change dramatically, discrimination will slowly die out on it's own.

*when talking about work and education

Last edited by Gawwad (2007-11-24 11:04:49)

Smithereener
Member
+138|5241|California
Maybe back when it was first implemented, it was somewhat justified. Racial discrimination was rampant back then and AA may have helped minorities to promote themselves as people who are equally qualified to do the things that others may have believed them to be unfit.

With that said, I don't believe AA has much merit now. Like most of the posts before this, I believe that admissions or any kind of recruitment should be done based on accomplishments or merit. I think that while the intended outcome for AA is noble, the way it tries to achieve that is wrong - seems to me it's a precedent for quotas.
PureFodder
Member
+225|5211
Affirmative action ingrains into every employer that they need to look at the sex and colour of skin of everyone they interview. It encourages everyone to define each other by these things rather than it not be an issue at all.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|5330|North Carolina

Bertster7 wrote:

"Is it fair to give a better job or an opportunity at the University to under-qualified individuals just on the basis of race, ethnicity or gender?"

No.

I would've thought that was quite obvious to anyone. Any recruitment should be done purely on merit.
QFT
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|5632|67.222.138.85
It does nothing to end discrimination, and it keeps people who deserve the jobs from getting them. A really disappointingly piece of legislature.

Though it would have been interesting to make this a multi poll, examining our views on AA and our ethnicity.
Home
Section.80
+447|5773|Seattle, Washington, USA

When it comes to employment, I don't think affirmative action should play a part. The most qualified person should be hired. However, in terms of education, I think affirmative action is good. Because a higher percentage of minorities are impoverished than the percentage of impoverished whites, I think offering an advantage is completely fair, especially considering the role whites played in "cursing" minorities to their position. Giving them an oppurtunity to break the cycle and get into/pay for an education they would not otherwise be able to is completely justified.
TuataraDude
Member
+115|5448|Aotearoa
As mentioned earlier, in an ideal world, it shouldn't be required. However sexism and racism are still around. Things are improving and the idea of giving someone a position because of their race or gender rather than their ability is equally unpallatable. In my business, I hire based on ability and we have a large cross-section of people. Being a business that traditionally has been seen as a male dominated industry though, it is difficult to attract females to the job. We were even accused one time of not hiring females, but in actual fact we had several working for us and less than 10% of applicants are women, making it difficult to have a 50/50 spread. A couple of years ago we made a concerted effort to raise the profile of women in our business to try and attract more women. We still have a very small percentage of women applicants, but we will not hire a woman if there is a better qualified male.

Being a male of European heritage though, it is difficult for me to apprciate just how much racism and sexism is still around in the business world. Another example, the Oscars a couple of years ago. When Denzel and Halle won their Best Actor/ress awards, it was said that the fact they were the first black actors to receive the awards (for male in a long while and for female, ever) was as a result of racism in the past. I find it staggering, and sad, if this is true, but I am also aware that this may be the case and I have just been unaware of it. If this is truly the case, then AA still needs to be in place. It does however stop a business from reaching its' true potential if the best person for the job misses out.
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,907|5557|949

It is an inherently racist program.  Anything that weights race or ethnicity over actual measureable gauges of success is racist.  I do not necessarily agree with the program, but I definitely understand the idea that in certain aspects of society, we have racist systems in place, and the idea of affirmative action is to "level the playing field" so to speak in those systems.
David.P
Banned
+649|5199
No because it's a piece of apologetic legislation which causes the majority of people who are qualified to lose out to a minority who are not.



Seriously do i have to start shouting fucken liberals?
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,907|5557|949

David.P wrote:

No because it's a piece of legislation which causes the majority of people who are qualified to lose out to a minority who are not.
The above statement is not necessarily true, just a common retort with no basis in reality.
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|5683|Argentina

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

David.P wrote:

No because it's a piece of legislation which causes the majority of people who are qualified to lose out to a minority who are not.
The above statement is not necessarily true, just a common retort with no basis in reality.
QFT.

I don't agree with AA but that statement is absolutely wrong.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5336|'Murka

Home wrote:

When it comes to employment, I don't think affirmative action should play a part. The most qualified person should be hired. However, in terms of education, I think affirmative action is good. Because a higher percentage of minorities are impoverished than the percentage of impoverished whites, I think offering an advantage is completely fair, especially considering the role whites played in "cursing" minorities to their position. Giving them an oppurtunity to break the cycle and get into/pay for an education they would not otherwise be able to is completely justified.
I disagree, to an extent. The only time minority status should play a role in scholarship determination is if both applicants are equally qualified in all other areas under consideration. If that is truly the case, then give the nod to the minority applicant.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
CommieChipmunk
Member
+488|5495|Portland, OR, USA

FEOS wrote:

Home wrote:

When it comes to employment, I don't think affirmative action should play a part. The most qualified person should be hired. However, in terms of education, I think affirmative action is good. Because a higher percentage of minorities are impoverished than the percentage of impoverished whites, I think offering an advantage is completely fair, especially considering the role whites played in "cursing" minorities to their position. Giving them an oppurtunity to break the cycle and get into/pay for an education they would not otherwise be able to is completely justified.
I disagree, to an extent. The only time minority status should play a role in scholarship determination is if both applicants are equally qualified in all other areas under consideration. If that is truly the case, then give the nod to the minority applicant.
On what basis?  Reverse discrimination is still discrimination.

Race, sex, sexual orientation, political leaning, religion... hair color.. whatever else people decide to discriminate against, should have no effect on whether you get the job, scholarship.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5336|'Murka

Re-read what I wrote.

I personally don't think that is a situation that will ever occur. There will always be some criteria other than race, gender, or ethnicity that will set one applicant over the other one. If (for the interest of debate) the situation occurred where, by every conceivable criteria, both applicants were equally qualified for the scholarship...how do you select the winner?

There is no such thing as reverse discrimination...there is just discrimination, period. Whether it's against black people, women, asian people, hispanic people, or white males...it's all just discrimination. The color of the discriminator and the discriminatee make no difference.

Keep in mind that this is all coming from a white man who lost out on a college scholarship to a female...who scored lower on the test used to determine the scholarship winner (the ACT). Her standard for "success" was lower than mine.

Last edited by FEOS (2007-11-24 18:41:20)

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|5370|The Land of Scott Walker

FEOS wrote:

If (for the interest of debate) the situation occurred where, by every conceivable criteria, both applicants were equally qualified for the scholarship...how do you select the winner?
Experience in the field.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5336|'Murka

Stingray24 wrote:

FEOS wrote:

If (for the interest of debate) the situation occurred where, by every conceivable criteria, both applicants were equally qualified for the scholarship...how do you select the winner?
Experience in the field.
Perhaps I'm not being clear enough. Experience in the field certainly falls in the "conceivable criteria" category.

Basically, the two applicants are exactly equally qualified across any differentiator that applies to their selectability for the scholarship/position. I know it's a remote possibility, if not an impossibility. But for the sake of debating the point...the question still stands.

I realize it's turning the OP a bit on its head...and I am by no means a fan of AA. In fact, I'm vehemently against it, as it is just institutionalized and accepted racism/sexism.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|5370|The Land of Scott Walker
I see where you're coming from FEOS.  When I read your post, I looked at it through how things work in my field.  2 people can have equal qualifications, yet one can have less experience.  I guess if all things were equal including experience, the employer picks who they like the best.
David.P
Banned
+649|5199

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

David.P wrote:

No because it's a piece of legislation which causes the majority of people who are qualified to lose out to a minority who are not.
The above statement is not necessarily true, just a common retort with no basis in reality.
The statement above the above statement is based upon observation of facts.

Case in point. Teachers in special ed schools.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5336|'Murka

David.P wrote:

Case in point. Teachers in special ed schools.
Please expand on this, David. As my son is in a special ed school, I'd like to better understand.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,907|5557|949

David.P wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

David.P wrote:

No because it's a piece of legislation which causes the majority of people who are qualified to lose out to a minority who are not.
The above statement is not necessarily true, just a common retort with no basis in reality.
The statement above the above statement is based upon observation of facts.

Case in point. Teachers in special ed schools.
While I don't doubt your experience in special education schools, I can rebut this from MY own personal observations - my good friend's fiance is a teacher for kids with autism and other developmental disabilities, and she willingly took the job with less pay despite being overqualified for the job.  Why? Because she wants to help people.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2021 Jeff Minard