Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Unitended racism
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 172 (513516)
06-29-2009 12:32 PM


"The Supreme Court ruled Monday that white firefighters in New Haven, Conn., were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision that high court nominee Sonia Sotomayor endorsed as an appeals court judge." Link
The idea behind Affirmative Action is to give a fair advantage to minorities in the workplace, as a way to "even the playing field," so to speak.
I am of the opinion, however, that Affirmative Action only further perpetuates racially charged issues and in no way evens the playing field. For if you promote or hire someone solely on the basis of their race, how is that any better than denying a promotion or employment based on race? Is that not still racism?
The US Supreme Court seems to think so and so do I.
If you were a Justice of the Supreme Court, how would you rule and why?
Edited by Hyroglyphx, : Fixed link

"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by CosmicChimp, posted 06-29-2009 1:19 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 20 by Rrhain, posted 06-30-2009 3:58 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
CosmicChimp
Member
Posts: 311
From: Muenchen Bayern Deutschland
Joined: 06-15-2007


Message 2 of 172 (513519)
06-29-2009 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Hyroglyphx
06-29-2009 12:32 PM


Class struggle. LOL
As a member of the Supreme Court I would vote according to principles of maintaining and furthering separation of social-economic classes. Race, skin color and cultural background are almost irrelevant. It's all about the "haves" and the "have nots" to me.
Just Kidding
Affirmative action is pass, and was from its inception. To me it is a red herring distracting from the true concern which is fair and even treatment of all job-seekers. Hiring selection must be based upon ability, talent and qualification.
Edited by CosmicChimp, : No reason given.
Edited by CosmicChimp, : No reason given.
Edited by CosmicChimp, : fixed the incomplete sentence
Edited by CosmicChimp, : fixed the subtitle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-29-2009 12:32 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-29-2009 1:26 PM CosmicChimp has seen this message but not replied
 Message 4 by Rahvin, posted 06-29-2009 1:38 PM CosmicChimp has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 172 (513520)
06-29-2009 1:26 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by CosmicChimp
06-29-2009 1:19 PM


Re: Some people must be ex
Affirmative action is pass, and was from its inception. To me it is a red herring distracting from the true concern which is fair and even treatment of all job-seekers. Selection based upon ability, talents and qualifications.
Abilities and qualifications should be the only thing relevant to procuring or keeping employment. Is that always the case? Psh, yeah right. Ideally that would be great though.

"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by CosmicChimp, posted 06-29-2009 1:19 PM CosmicChimp has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Taz, posted 06-29-2009 3:54 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 4 of 172 (513523)
06-29-2009 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by CosmicChimp
06-29-2009 1:19 PM


Re: Some people must be ex
Affirmative action is pass, and was from its inception. To me it was always a red herring distracting from the true concern which was fair treatment of all job-seekers.
The problem is that minorities have a continuous statistical disadvantage.
Minorities statistically receive fewer promotions than white males.
Minorities statistically receive lower salaries than white males.
Etc, etc.
Affirmative Action was intended to counteract the underlying bias that results in the racial/gender/ethnic disparities we see in teh workplace that are not consistent with the distribution fo those minorities in the general population.
For example, roughly half of the population is male, and half is female. We should therefore expect to see that roughly half of all employees across all levels of a given company to be male, and roughly half to be female. That's not even close to the distribution we see. The same problem exists for ethnic minorities - the racial distribution of employees at any given level of any given employer is vastly different from the distribution of the population as a whole.
There are many causes for this of course. But they all eventually result in the same thing: a black woman (for example) is less likely to get a given job or receive a promotion than a white male, and she will very likely earn significantly less even if the two have identical qualifications and ability. Affirmative Action is an artificial counter to this effect, basically giving employers additional incentive to hire/promote/etc minorities to balance the inherent bias towards white males.
It's not racism against whites - it's a counter to racism against minorities and sexism. You (or I even) could say that it's not fair that an individual may receive a job over another applicant because of their race...but the statistical fact is that, without Affirmative Action, that happens all the time anyway. When an arbitrary choice between to equally qualified individuals must be made, statistically the white male is chosen over women or people of other races. "Fairness" never comes into it in either case.
Remember also that, despite popular opinion, Affirmative Action does not result in less-qualified individuals attaining a position unfairly solely due to their race. The program has absolutely nothing to do with discarding everyone's resume and instead making a decision based on skin color or gender. If a job requires a bachelor's degree and 5 years' experience, nobody is going to hire a high school dropout who just happens to have the right skin color.
I agree that the ideal is to simply make race and gender completely irrelevant to the hiring process. We even have laws in place that forbid discrimination along those lines. But the fact is, those laws are extremely difficult to enforce, and they aren't working. Discrimination still exists in the workplace as proven by employment and earnings rates of minorities and women compared to white men. If you have a better solution to correct that disparity than Affirmative Action (and more practical than "just stop being racist"), then please suggest it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by CosmicChimp, posted 06-29-2009 1:19 PM CosmicChimp has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by CosmicChimp, posted 06-29-2009 9:05 PM Rahvin has not replied
 Message 27 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-30-2009 10:12 AM Rahvin has replied

  
Asgara
Member (Idle past 2302 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 5 of 172 (513530)
06-29-2009 3:03 PM


I don't believe we'll ever be able to level the playing field at the end of the game until we concentrate on leveling it at the START of the game.
Level out educational opportunity, access to technology at an early age, pay teachers what they're worth. When every child in America has access to a top notch school system, because they're ALL top notch, then we will see equality in the work force.

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Rahvin, posted 06-29-2009 3:34 PM Asgara has not replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 6 of 172 (513531)
06-29-2009 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Asgara
06-29-2009 3:03 PM


I don't believe we'll ever be able to level the playing field at the end of the game until we concentrate on leveling it at the START of the game.
Level out educational opportunity, access to technology at an early age, pay teachers what they're worth. When every child in America has access to a top notch school system, because they're ALL top notch, then we will see equality in the work force.
That will be a gigantic help, but it still doesn't do a damned thing against racism in general.
The fact is, as of right now in America a black person with exactly the same educational opportunities as his white neighbor will either need to work harder, receive less, or both when it comes to entrance into higher education and employment.
It happens even when education and qualifications are otherwise equivalent.
And it happens because racism, while certainly declined from the monstrous past, is far from gone.
I think the root of the problem is a cultural one, and that we're going to continue to need programs like Affirmative Action until we can finally, as an entire culture, stop classifying people based on color or gender or sexual orientation etc. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening. I think things will continue to get better, but bigotry has been with us for a long time and I don't think it's ever going to completely go away.
Personal anecdote time: my boss at my last job flat-out told us, his other employees, that he doesn't like black people. He acknowledged his bias and actively tried to compensate for it personally (and I suppose that if you're a racist the least you can do is recognize that your bias is bad and try to correct it), but what do you think would happen if a black person and an equivalently qualified white person applied for the same job?
It's not uncommon. And many people even simultaneously hold such views as "black people tend to be lazy" while also believing themselves to not be racist. "I don't hate black people, and I;d never use that N-word, but generally they tend to be less reliable workers than whites and asians. I'm not racist, I'm just recognizing the facts." I've heard that sentiment far too many times.
We've reached the point in our society where racism is treated as the terrible monster it is, and everyone almost universally condemns it...and moved on to denial. Now, we'll still discriminate while we claim to support equality. It's really no different from the whole "I don't have anything against gays, I just don't think they should be able to be married" nonsense. Most bigots don't think they're bigots.
That's why we need Affirmative Action. It's the only way currently available to counteract the bias that collectively we often aren't even aware of until we examine the statistics. When 30% of a company's employees are minorities, but only 5% of management is comprised of those minorities, there's a problem.
Edited by Rahvin, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Asgara, posted 06-29-2009 3:03 PM Asgara has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Perdition, posted 06-29-2009 4:57 PM Rahvin has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 7 of 172 (513532)
06-29-2009 3:54 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Hyroglyphx
06-29-2009 1:26 PM


Re: Some people must be ex
Hyroglyphx writes:
Abilities and qualifications should be the only thing relevant to procuring or keeping employment.
I'm sorry for the strong language that I'm about to use.
The you-should-be-hired-and-promoted-based-on-your-qualifications argument is pure bullshit.
First of all, there is no real accurate way to measure a person's qualifications. Each person has his own experiences. There is no such thing as "2 equally qualified people" as bullshitters so often bring up. Is there some kind of magical scale that I'm not aware of?
The fact of the matter is you are a lot less likely to be hired if you have a minority-sounding name. It's sad, but this is why so many people of minority descent change their legal names. The fact of the matter is minorities continue to receive lesser wages doing the exact same stuff as their white counterparts. The fact of the matter is minorities continue to get promoted less than their white counterparts.
Again, unless you have 2 identical resumes, there is simply no way to determine whether the two candidates have the same qualifications or not.
But let us suppose employers actually hire people based on qualifications alone. Why the hell do studies continue to show that identical resumes with different ethnic names always yield the same result, that white sounding names are 50% more likely to get responses from employers even though those resumes were identical to the resumes with black sounding names and Asian names?
Hyroglyphx, sorry for the strong language. The argument you used has been shown to be a bullshit argument for years now, and for some reason people continue to thise this argument against affirmative action.
That said, I am against affirmative action, but for different reasons.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-29-2009 1:26 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by CosmicChimp, posted 06-29-2009 4:43 PM Taz has replied
 Message 21 by Rrhain, posted 06-30-2009 4:20 AM Taz has not replied
 Message 39 by Hyroglyphx, posted 07-01-2009 8:06 AM Taz has replied

  
CosmicChimp
Member
Posts: 311
From: Muenchen Bayern Deutschland
Joined: 06-15-2007


Message 8 of 172 (513537)
06-29-2009 4:43 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Taz
06-29-2009 3:54 PM


Hi, I know that your response is directed to Hyroglyphx, but you have caught my attention in a way that the others who have responded here, with terrific comments as well, have not yet prodded me into similar action.
The you-should-be-hired-and-promoted-based-on-your-qualifications argument is pure bullshit.
People are ideally hired (and promoted) based upon their good and fitting qualifications. Maybe you mean to present the exceptions to the case, in that event I say, fine point taken.
First of all, there is no real accurate way to measure a person's qualifications. Each person has his own experiences. There is no such thing as "2 equally qualified people" as bullshitters so often bring up. Is there some kind of magical scale that I'm not aware of?
You may be right here, but regardless hiring and promoting bosses simply do the best they can based upon the information they have. And it doesn't get any better or more precise than that.
The fact of the matter is you are a lot less likely to be hired if you have a minority-sounding name. It's sad, but this is why so many people of minority descent change their legal names. The fact of the matter is minorities continue to receive lesser wages doing the exact same stuff as their white counterparts. The fact of the matter is minorities continue to get promoted less than their white counterparts.
Are you just dropping the bit about qualifications here? If no, then a hiring or promoting boss would be an idiot not to consider the fact that a "hindered" person has accomplished more to be arriving at the same position as a "non-hindered" person.
If for some reason you have explicitly dropped the implication of using the word qualifications then I would say you have reverted to some kind of job distribution based upon race distribution in society. At that point I would ask for you to explain the reasons behind artificially making job distribution follow race distribution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Taz, posted 06-29-2009 3:54 PM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Taz, posted 06-29-2009 5:45 PM CosmicChimp has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 9 of 172 (513539)
06-29-2009 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Rahvin
06-29-2009 3:34 PM


That's why we need Affirmative Action. It's the only way currently available to counteract the bias that collectively we often aren't even aware of until we examine the statistics. When 30% of a company's employees are minorities, but only 5% of management is comprised of those minorities, there's a problem.
But there's another aspect here. While it's true that a person with a "white" name may get called back more often, there are other reasons that the percentages don't work out exactly. Minorities are often in under priveledged locations, with little to no good educational aspects, and thus, even if there were the brightest kids in the world, are not going to be able to get the qualifications.
As Asgara said, if we balance the playing field at the level of education, you'd see an uptick in the percentages of minorities in higher paying fields and positions. Racism is still a problem, but Affirmative Action requires race to be a factor.
If we want to level the playing field in a job application, it should be mandatory that names and ethnicity be left off the application, at least at the hiring manager level. If all larger companies went to an electronic application system whereby the name of a person gets replaced with a serial number, we would get a more even distribution of call backs based on applying population without Affirmative Action. From there, racism eneters, but with proper education, racism can be reduced to a great extent.
{ABE} All that being said, I think AA is a useful tool currently, but it should be part of a greater endeavor that would eventually phase it out. Trying to create a "color-blind" society by focusing on color, whether in a good or bad way, undermines the goal.
Edited by Perdition, : Added last bit

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Rahvin, posted 06-29-2009 3:34 PM Rahvin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Rahvin, posted 06-29-2009 5:20 PM Perdition has not replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 10 of 172 (513541)
06-29-2009 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Perdition
06-29-2009 4:57 PM


But there's another aspect here. While it's true that a person with a "white" name may get called back more often, there are other reasons that the percentages don't work out exactly. Minorities are often in under priveledged locations, with little to no good educational aspects, and thus, even if there were the brightest kids in the world, are not going to be able to get the qualifications.
As Asgara said, if we balance the playing field at the level of education, you'd see an uptick in the percentages of minorities in higher paying fields and positions. Racism is still a problem, but Affirmative Action requires race to be a factor.
If we want to level the playing field in a job application, it should be mandatory that names and ethnicity be left off the application, at least at the hiring manager level. If all larger companies went to an electronic application system whereby the name of a person gets replaced with a serial number, we would get a more even distribution of call backs based on applying population without Affirmative Action. From there, racism eneters, but with proper education, racism can be reduced to a great extent.
{ABE} All that being said, I think AA is a useful tool currently, but it should be part of a greater endeavor that would eventually phase it out. Trying to create a "color-blind" society by focusing on color, whether in a good or bad way, undermines the goal.
That would help, but still does nothing when the actual interview comes around.
I would like nothing more than to see Affirmative Action removed. Ideally, a program with any sort of distinction made on the basis of race or gender is abhorrent. Not to mention all of the negatives that come with Affirmative Action - not the least is the perception that minority employees may have gotten their jobs due to race as opposed to qualification, or the perception that minorities are encouraged to be "lazy" because their effort doesn't matter when a quota will get them ahead anyway.
But I currently see no alternative for correcting the disparities in employment and wages. Something needs to be done. What we have right now is an ugly spit-and-chewing-gum solution. It doesn't work well, everybody hates it, and frankly it stinks. It's only marginally better than doing nothing at all. If anyone can suggest a practical solution, my ears are wide open.
Honestly, I think that as things stand we're on the road to eliminating the need for things like Affirmative Action. Culturally we've been shifting to a far more tolerant society...but it's a process that takes decades.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Perdition, posted 06-29-2009 4:57 PM Perdition has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Taz, posted 06-29-2009 5:47 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 11 of 172 (513543)
06-29-2009 5:45 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by CosmicChimp
06-29-2009 4:43 PM


CosmicChimp writes:
People are ideally hired (and promoted) based upon their good and fitting qualifications. Maybe you mean to present the exceptions to the case, in that event I say, fine point taken.
You've missunderstood my point. I was talking about the argument that candidates with similar backgrounds and almost equal qualifications should be hired based on their qualifications. This is a bullshit argument because (1) there is no real objective way to measure qualifications and (2) two bosses may have two different opinions on qualifications.
You may be right here, but regardless hiring and promoting bosses simply do the best they can based upon the information they have. And it doesn't get any better or more precise than that.
And I haven't suggested that they aren't doing the best they can.
The days of jim crow may be over, but racism hasn't gone away. I'm not talking about the in-your-face, hang-them-on-a-tree-and-light-them-on-fire obvious form of racism. I'm talking about the the more subtle form of racism where bosses subconsciously overlook a candidate's qualifications because the candidate has a foreign sounding name.
Are you just dropping the bit about qualifications here? If no, then a hiring or promoting boss would be an idiot not to consider the fact that a "hindered" person has accomplished more to be arriving at the same position as a "non-hindered" person.
If for some reason you have explicitly dropped the implication of using the word qualifications then I would say you have reverted to some kind of job distribution based upon race distribution in society. At that point I would ask for you to explain the reasons behind artificially making job distribution follow race distribution.
And it may be the case that minorities are somehow less qualified than white men. Then of course the same argument was also used (in much less subtle ways) back in the 50's.
The problem with today's form of racism is trying to pin it down is like trying to pin jello onto a wall.
I was talking to my asian friends and they all told me the same thing about the subtle form of racism they encounter on a daily basis but they can't really say anything about it. For example, it is a stereotype that asian men are sexually incompetent. Hollywood does a wonderful job at reinforcing this stereotype by almost completely excluding asian male actors out of the sex symbol parts. They asked me if I could think of any movie made in the states with an asian hero who gets the girl at the end. I thought about it for days and I still couldn't come up with a movie where the asian hero actually gets the girl at the end. Sure, we have plenty of kungfu jackie chan type movies. But circus-like movies featuring asian male actors are about the best thing hollywood could come up with for asian men.
Is that racism our society has toward asian men? Most definitely! Can we nail it in court? Absolutely not! It's too damn subtle to be nailed down.
It goes much deeper than that, but I'll leave it for another post.
Racism isn't always easy to pin down. We as a society has associated racism with evil enough that nobody wants to be branded a racist. Even KKK members don't want to admit they are racists. And if you ask employers and bosses if they are racists, you will most definitely get a big NO. And yet statistics and studies continue to show that people with white-male sounding names are more likely to get responses than everyone else even though the same resumes were sent to those employers but with other ethnic sounding names.
I am not advocating for artificially making job distributions based solely on race... or even 1% based on race. You implicate that I advocate we hire a high school drop-out black person rather than hire a college graduate white person simply because we needed to meet the quota. Sure, you could say that you never said such a thing, and indeed you didn't. But the way you said it makes one wonder if that's what I was advocating.
Then of course it also is a habit of politicians to cariaturizing their opponents. John Kerry got the worst of it, I think.
What I am advocating for is we deal with the issue of subtle racism rather than deny that it exists at all.

People
Eating
Tasty
Animals

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by CosmicChimp, posted 06-29-2009 4:43 PM CosmicChimp has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by CosmicChimp, posted 06-29-2009 8:07 PM Taz has replied
 Message 22 by Rrhain, posted 06-30-2009 4:36 AM Taz has replied
 Message 37 by Phat, posted 07-01-2009 1:15 AM Taz has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 12 of 172 (513545)
06-29-2009 5:47 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Rahvin
06-29-2009 5:20 PM


Rahvin writes:
Culturally we've been shifting to a far more tolerant society...
Sometimes, I have to wonder if this is true or not. I've been looking into more subtle forms of racism. It's not a pretty story!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Rahvin, posted 06-29-2009 5:20 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 13 of 172 (513549)
06-29-2009 7:10 PM


It would also help to remove racism at the political level.
The racism at that level, the deciding level that can make changes to even the playing fields for minorities, is masked into many factors.
I don't know if this is a direct racism based on color or ethnicity, or if this is simply the upper class shiting on the lower class, and as such it gives the illusion of racism?
Inner city schools are under funded, crime is at it's highest in these areas and the police force is also under funded. Poverty is the norm, drugs are the norm, gangs are the norm...in conditions like these it's no wonder minorities stay oppressed.
However, the government doesn't care and little is don't to actually correct this problem. Oh they make a big deal about it; talk about how it's a priority, a cause for concern, much investing will be made, yada yada yada. Nothing ever gets done.
Lets also not look past the constant push for minorities, especially black males/females, to join sports. Yet there is little push for an academic education.
So of all the youth in the inner city, maybe 10% makes it to college - most for sports? Of that a percentage graduate? They then hit a job market with predominantly white, middle class to upper class people.
I'll have to agree with Rahvin and Taz, at this point, if both candidates for the job are equally qualified, a judgement call by the employer is made. Not in all case, but in many. Especially when the jobs are for an executive level.
With the chips stacked up against minorities from the moment they leave the womb, as opposed to their white counter parts, does a little bias in a positive way, based on their color, for once, make that big a deal?
- Oni

Petition to Bailout Comedy The Laugh Factory is imploring Congress to immediately fund what owner Jamie Masada calls an "Economic Cheer-Up." If Congress fails to act quickly, the Laugh Factory comedians are planning to march to Washington and plea to President Obama.

  
CosmicChimp
Member
Posts: 311
From: Muenchen Bayern Deutschland
Joined: 06-15-2007


Message 14 of 172 (513551)
06-29-2009 8:07 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Taz
06-29-2009 5:45 PM


Racism is an extended selfishness
Your posts show many good points that don't go unnoticed so thanks for those. Allow me to at least point out the minor items I do see that I don't think you realize you are not addressing.
... This is a bullshit argument because (1) there is no real objective way to measure qualifications and (2) two bosses may have two different opinions on qualifications.
Regardless of the actual validity of your statement and two points above, qualifications are earned in schools/universities and on the job experience; listed in CVs, resumes and Lebenslafe; and evaluated and reviewed by prospective employers. And certain individuals responsible for hiring will be making decisions about applicants, irrespective of what another hiring agent may have done given the same data. In theory your points may have some use but in practical terms there is nothing useful yet there.
And I haven't suggested that they aren't doing the best they can.
...
Previously I was trying to say that the current system in place is the "best" we have to offer. As in, bosses hiring workers as it has been for ages is the best way we have been able to come up with a solution to the issue. I ask somewhat sarcastically, do you have something else in mind, something that could better replace the existing way of giving/getting jobs?
Your comments of hidden racism are no doubt true, even as I can see it in my own experiences.
Your further comments regarding other forms of subtle racism I can also accept as valid. Your position on affirmative action is not clear to me; but I still feel that it is a misdirected effort that could be more effectively spent directed more precisely at the problem of racism (or sexism as someone pointed out) in hiring/promotion. Affirmative action as a solution has a place under certain dire circumstances most definitely, but in the current climate as I see it in the USA, I hold that it has outlived it's usefulness, to the society as a whole.
Edited by CosmicChimp, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Taz, posted 06-29-2009 5:45 PM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Taz, posted 06-29-2009 10:54 PM CosmicChimp has replied

  
CosmicChimp
Member
Posts: 311
From: Muenchen Bayern Deutschland
Joined: 06-15-2007


Message 15 of 172 (513552)
06-29-2009 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Rahvin
06-29-2009 1:38 PM


More AA
Ah Rahvin, I see now you too have responded, thanks.
Affirmative Action was intended to counteract the underlying bias that results in the racial/gender/ethnic disparities we see in the workplace that are not consistent with the distribution of those minorities in the general population.
What is the worthy purpose in making company staffing reflect the racial distribution in society at large? According to affirmative action (AA) laws the company is legally bound to tote the burden of maintaining a certain staff profile even to the detriment of the share-holder dividends and overall efficiency of the profitability of the firm.
There's no telling what sort of red-tape nightmare this must be to the company and then the government oversight of the system. What a horrible solution affirmative action surely is when properly viewed from a higher level.
What could be so worth all of that?
It's not racism against whites - it's a counter to racism against minorities and sexism....
You're dead wrong here. It is racism in the exact style that it seeks to rectify. It is racism against a previously existing situation of racism, counter- racism. No, it is even worse, it is institutionalized racism. What a pity. It's wrong! In the aforementioned case it is even what the Supreme Court says.
The damage caused to cultures and segments of society that has at its core hatred, racism and sexism, has absolutely no place in society, must be rooted out stomped and banished forever. Acceptance and tolerance must pervade all the corners of our lives. You still see AA as a viable solution I say it must be replaced with another more direct approach.
Edited by CosmicChimp, : Subtitles are driving me crazy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Rahvin, posted 06-29-2009 1:38 PM Rahvin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Rrhain, posted 06-30-2009 4:42 AM CosmicChimp has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024