On Affirmative Action

Kurokiku · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Kurokiku** on Fri Jul 01, 2011 7:55 pm

Dictionary.com defines affirmative action as the following:

affirmative action
–noun
The encouragement of increased representation of women and minority-group members, especially in employment.

In practice, this is often enacted through legislative measures that in some cases are controversial enough to spawn lawsuits. Affirmative action policies in university admissions and hiring practices have caused some to term the practice "reverse discrimination," believing that it creates situations where candidates who are not women or minorities are passed over in place of lesser-qualified candidates who are.

A case regarding affirmative action in admissions at the University of Michigan went to the Supreme Court in 2003, and though the affirmative action was found constitutional within certain bounds, the fight over it has continued.

Recently, the state of Michigan's legislature passed a ban on the use of affirmative action. The new law was brought before a federal appeals court, who struck it down. It is speculated, though, that the appeal process will continue, possibly reaching the Supreme Court once again.

So the question for discussion is this: does affirmative action indeed cause "reverse discrimination"? If so, is this phenomenon simply something we must accept for the good that affirmative action does minorities and women? Does it even effectively do what it was meant to, or end up creating more issues?

As this is an issue of gender, race, and a fair dose of politics, I'd like to remind everyone to please keep your discussions civil and debates courteous. Informed opinions and arguments would be appreciated, and I think this is a discussion worth having, as long as we can keep it within the bounds of reason. I'm interested to hear your thoughts.

Leli · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Leli** on Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:21 pm

It absolutely does. I've friends who're attempting to get into the RCMP, but they're very unlikely to without signing a 4 year contract as military police first because they're white men. Were they white females there would be no problem, nor would there had they been of another ethnic decent. I've seen people unfit to serve as a police officer given a badge only because they uncommonly hired ethnicity and in the face of sanity and good reason they were hired so that the RCMP doesn't appear racist. I agree with affirmative action, but the mandate imposed on services by this action results in a detrimental situation wherein three hundred pounds men are hired instead of young fit men eager to serve because the institution isn't allowed to have all white men as workers or they're racist.

If you want equal pay and equal rights I don't blame you, but don't sue a company because you didn't get the job. Chances are whoever got the job was more qualified or had the company forced to hire them.

Smokescreen · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Smokescreen** on Wed Jul 06, 2011 11:44 am

Affirmative Action was a good idea on paper. Much like Communism was a good idea on paper. Thousands of pages of litigation have turned it into the most racially biased and offensive document since Mein Kampf. It is an out-dated relic from an era of Rob Roys, The Beatles and unsanctioned south-east Asian conflicts. It needs to go away.

Sciamancer · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Sciamancer** on Thu Jul 07, 2011 7:39 pm

The solution to the problem of discrimination is not more discrimination, simply put. I find its very basis to be bad. If two people are equally qualified, but one is a racial minority and/or a woman, why should s/he get the position over a white man? For artificial diversity?

I encourage the idea of blind-hiring. That is, companies don't get to see their prospective employees until they're hired. They send in an application. The employer doesn't see what the color of a person's skin is until they've already been hired. Bam. Racist/sexism impossible, assuming it isn't mentioned on the application. Now, obviously, this practice wouldn't work for some businesses. Acting, modeling. Those are some of the more obvious ones.

An even better solution, social engineering. If you teach kids not to be racist or sexist, the ones that grow up to own businesses won't hire based on race or sex.

Jag · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Jag** on Sun Jul 10, 2011 5:25 pm

Blind hiring is just something that doesn't work for a lot of people. I know that I don't have a clue whether I trust someone or feel that they would be an effective employee without an in-person interview and conversation. Effective communication ability, for example, doesn't translate through an application. I need to look someone in the eye.

Queen of Ice · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Queen of Ice** on Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:19 pm

Now, I'm no expert here keep that in mind, this is just how I see it based on the little bit I know.

I think people have a poor understanding of Affirmative Action. It's not so much there because we feel we need diversity. We don't; we need quality workers. However, the point of Affirmative Action is to give people who are centuries behind white males the opportunity to catch up. I mean, look at what groups are the poorest, make the least amount of money, get stuck in the (excuse me if this is an offensive way of saying it) "lower class" jobs, end up with the least education.

While we've opened the opportunity to people to advance on paper and in our laws, they are still trapped by poverty and poor education. Affirmative Action gives people who might never get the chance to get a quality education or a good job that opportunity. While it seems unfair or like reverse discrimination, it is the only way that I can think of to break the vicious circle that is poverty and poor education (for now). If we force these people who statistically get inferior educations to compete based solely on merit, they have a very slim chance of getting the education they need to get the job they need to get out of poverty.

Of course, the real solution is to better our education so that everyone gets to start on equal ground. But until we can make sure that all minorities and women are on equal footing as white men, I think Affirmative Action is the best policy we can muster up. I believe that was the thought process behind Affirmative Action, that it would be temporary until everyone truly has equal opportunity. Until then, I think people will have to just live with some of the negative aspects of the program.

Sciamancer · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Sciamancer** on Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:39 pm

Some jobs are definitely alright for blind hiring, though, are they not? A face-to-face interview is completely unnecessary for at least a few professions, such as, say, a computer programmer. They don't need effective face-to-face communication ability so much. Not to mention I can't think of a reason why colleges would need a face-to-face interview, but then again, I may be overlooking something.

Queen of Ice, you do realize that black people and women aren't the only poor people? According to affirmative action, an upper-class black woman who can already support herself should always be picked over a white man struggling to support his starving family. If you want to get everyone on the same footing, then it would be better to always hire the one who needs the job more. Background checks for everyone!

Queen of Ice · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Queen of Ice** on Tue Jul 12, 2011 7:43 pm

Sciamancer wrote:Queen of Ice, you do realize that black people and women aren't the only poor people? According to affirmative action, an upper-class black woman who can already support herself should always be picked over a white man struggling to support his starving family. If you want to get everyone on the same footing, then it would be better to always hire the one who needs the job more. Background checks for everyone!

Of course. I addressed affirmative action's shortcomings.

And you don't get equal footing by handing out jobs like charity. You get equal footing from equal education like I said; this applies to all peoples, be they black, white, male, female, hispanic, rich, poor, etc.

Sciamancer · **Tips:** 0.00 INK by **Sciamancer** on Tue Jul 12, 2011 8:20 pm

Better education is an excellent idea. Really, the whole issue could be solved by not funding schools based on property taxes. Bam, schools no longer get funding based on how expensive the houses are nearby. Of course, the public school system overall needs to be improved a lot, too.

On Affirmative Action

a topic in Discussion & Debate, a part of the RPG forum.

On Affirmative Action

Re: On Affirmative Action

Re: On Affirmative Action

Re: On Affirmative Action

Re: On Affirmative Action

Re: On Affirmative Action

Re: On Affirmative Action

Re: On Affirmative Action

Re: On Affirmative Action

Post a reply

Make a Donation

Who is online