Active Users:1237 Time:23/11/2024 02:42:49 AM
Sure; insert your demographic here. Joel Send a noteboard - 26/08/2011 12:51:48 AM
It used to piss me off that my office had take your daughter to work day and everyone go to bring their daughters and the company would bring in speakers and buy lunch for them but my sons were not welcome. It wasn't that they wanted to help kids it was a misguided thought process where instead of helping all the kids they felt they could level the playing field by helping one group of kids only. None of that rising tides lifts all ship BS for them. When I complained my to female boss who had no qualifications for her job and who didn't even really understand what we did explained to me that is was because females were so disadvantaged they needed extra help. I guess that is true since she was chosen over two qualified men for the job because none of labs had female managers and HR said we had to hire a female. And no I am not just being bitter we were told that they wanted a female and when they couldn't find a qualified female with the proper technical background they hired one without it.

One of the guys I work with now was talking about how wonderful it was that Notre Dame was giving his a son scholarship because they wanted to increase their diversity on campus, he his son is black. Now this guy is an engineering manager who brings in six figures and his wife is a RN but giving him finical aid that wouldn't be offered to a poor white kids is seen as social justice. I had to bite my tongue and walk away. I wish I could afford to send my son to Notre Dame but he had to join the marines and man a machine gun mounted on a fuel truck in Iraq to afford his education. I guess that is simply what he gets for be one of the hated straight white males and not being as rich as white people are supposed to be.

That's the kind of mindset I'm talking about, but you're obviously quite familiar with it. People tend to forget (the ones who ever knew, that is) affirmative action was designed as a temporary remedial program. Biases were so institutionalized that women and racial minorities were widely considered to be inherently less capable than white males, and affirmative action was employed as a means to force hiring that otherwise wouldn't occur due to that bias until it was overcome, a process that would be aided by the success of the first generation of minorities HIRED by affirmative action but SUCCESSFUL on merit.

That was fifty years ago, TWO generations; it's hard to argue whatever benefits there may or may not be to affirmative action have already been realized. It's increasingly argued, with no little merit and by people from every demographic, that affirmative action has become counterproductive because successful minority members are routinely dismissed as simply the product of quotas. Take away those quotas and you take away that argument, but the fact is I simply don't think the institutionalized attitudes about inherent minority incapability exist much anymore. There are definitely cultural issues, but a lot of those may be valid; a white man from a rural slum is no more equipped to succeed than a black man from an urban one, and each is as common as the other. That's not a problem to be solved by giving either of them jobs for which their background and rearing make them completely unsuited.

The best way to solve those problems is to do something about the institutionalized cultural hobbles to success and throw away the quota crutch that's ceased to aid progress and become a hobble of its own. The best MODEL is probably professional sports, ironically already the area where integration is most often highlighted despite having occurred BEFORE (and thus without) the quota systems of the 1960s. Baseball, football and basketball all integrated just fine and minority players thrived, not because anyone put a legal gun to anyones head, but because once a few teams crossed the color line and signed non-white athletes who changed the game, other teams began a mad scramble to find more Hall of Fame players who'd previously been ignored because of their race.

That's one of the biggest modern signs that things have changed since 1960: No successful Western company will pass over an incredibly well qualified applicant simply because they're black, or female, or gay, or [whatever]. They can't afford to do that, because they know their competitors will snatch up someone like that and beat their economic brains out with them. Meanwhile, preserving quotas that were intended to end a generation ago only fosters the very ill will it was designed to eliminate; instead of white men hating non-whites and/or women because of their color or gender, they just hate them for taking away a job for which they were undeniably less qualified.
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Reply to message
A fine example of the fuzzy logic of the left - 25/08/2011 06:30:36 PM 1013 Views
Personally I still favor demographic blind subsidies as the best route to meritocracy. - 25/08/2011 08:18:20 PM 598 Views
it works for gender as well - 25/08/2011 09:02:58 PM 610 Views
Sure; insert your demographic here. - 26/08/2011 12:51:48 AM 654 Views
Preferential in possible scholarships but not admissions process according to the article - 25/08/2011 10:26:25 PM 510 Views
What's your point? - 26/08/2011 12:54:41 AM 490 Views
There are colleges that don't allow homosexuals - or men, or women for that matter. - 25/08/2011 10:35:05 PM 595 Views
Alright then, socially unacceptable. - 26/08/2011 01:00:16 AM 626 Views
Ummm, did you read the article? - 25/08/2011 08:40:46 PM 659 Views
Ah, but you are not reading it either - 25/08/2011 08:53:39 PM 675 Views
But that's just a scholarship. - 25/08/2011 09:34:23 PM 635 Views
it is a scholarship program not a admissions program - 25/08/2011 09:12:47 PM 622 Views
I don't really have a problem with this - 25/08/2011 09:03:55 PM 699 Views
I am not arguing that they shouldn't be allowed to do it - 25/08/2011 09:29:54 PM 522 Views
Fair Enough - 25/08/2011 09:41:25 PM 566 Views
their stated motive was to increase diversity - 25/08/2011 10:09:17 PM 689 Views
One of your lines struck me. - 25/08/2011 10:12:32 PM 665 Views
that happened in the US, we elected Bush as a result - 25/08/2011 10:35:05 PM 507 Views
That's an interesting point... - 25/08/2011 10:37:37 PM 594 Views
Re: that happened in the US, we elected Bush as a result - 25/08/2011 10:55:29 PM 615 Views
It's also worth noting ... - 25/08/2011 11:00:35 PM 492 Views
Wow what a strawman - 25/08/2011 10:23:45 PM 683 Views
yes to bad none of that address the point I was making which would make your argument a strawman - 25/08/2011 10:40:01 PM 470 Views
No I do not believe they are needed, nor do I believe they should be desired - 25/08/2011 10:47:51 PM 662 Views
so you don't disagree with me or you do? - 25/08/2011 11:47:05 PM 614 Views
Ridiculous. Everyone knows conservatives are incapable of creativity. - 25/08/2011 11:12:10 PM 486 Views
are they going to make students prove they are GLBT? - 25/08/2011 11:36:58 PM 552 Views
I think it's less a failing of the "left"... - 26/08/2011 03:25:42 AM 614 Views
I agree there is a lot of fuzzy logic on the right as well - 26/08/2011 02:41:03 PM 550 Views
*nod* I don't deny that it's a problem - 26/08/2011 04:26:56 PM 662 Views
a question for you... - 26/08/2011 08:08:10 PM 723 Views

Reply to Message