Affirmative Action vs Reverse Discrimination

Ahnimus

reborncareerist wrote:

I wonder if Denzel Washingston, Morgan Freeman, and Laurence Fishburne get nominated every year?

Anyhow, I don't know ... Black films awards is no real skin off my butt, although I think its become quite clear which minority groups in the U.S. have some political clout and which don't. I imagine the reasons for this are historical. Blacks have been horribly mistreated in the past (and quite frequently in the present as well), and now, people are letting the pendulum swing quite far in the other direction. Other ethnic groups don't have this history in the U.S., although increasingly they do have the numbers.

Just imagine the effects that "white film awards" would have on our society.

jlew24asu

Ahnimus wrote:

Just imagine the effects that "white film awards" would have on our society.

white people were never slaves. there will always be an imbalance between because of that, for a long time really. that and white people greatly outnumber african americans. i think racial equality has come a very long way in the past 10 years. paritally due to, you guessed it, affirmative action.

hippiemom

Ahnimus wrote:

Just imagine the effects that "white film awards" would have on our society.

Yes, I think it's very important that we immediately start having "white film awards" because white people have traditionally had such a hard time having their work recognized. In 78 years of Oscar history, they've given TEN of those statues to black actors! That's ten white folks who went home empty handed and we shouldn't stand for it.

Ahnimus

hippiemom wrote:

Yes, I think it's very important that we immediately start having "white film awards" because white people have traditionally had such a hard time having their work recognized. In 78 years of Oscar history, they've given TEN of those statues to black actors! That's ten white folks who went home empty handed and we shouldn't stand for it.

So what, it's in the past man. You can't have equality by segregating yourself. That's how you create inequality. Look my ancestry is from Switzerland a neutral country that suffered the effects of both World Wars. My ancestors were subjected to not one, but two world wars including Nazi Germany as it's extremely close neighbour. I love Germany and I've yet to meet a German person I don't like. I don't look at German people and think, wow their acenstors may have killed my ancestors in WW1. Or their grandfather of even father may have killed my 45th cousin in WW2. That's bullshit, because they didn't do anything to me directly, especially the people that I'd be talking to today. The same applies to Blacks, that's in the past man. I still here people say they don't trust germans because of WW2, those people are fucking ignorant. But what should we do about it? Make it illegal to criticize germans? Or segregate them from the rest of society? It's just ridiculous. If you want unified people you have to let bygones be bygones. I now we've all been taught from a young age about the oppression of blacks, natives and women, and how white men are the root of all evil. But that's complete horseshit. We can look back on those trajedies and learn from them, and learn that racial exclusion and segregation is bad for society, but we shouldn't dwell on it and allow to affect the way we perceive others or our policies. Tolerance isn't about splitting people into groups.

surferdude

hippiemom wrote:

Yes, I think it's very important that we immediately start having "white film awards" because white people have traditionally had such a hard time having their work recognized. In 78 years of Oscar history, they've given TEN of those statues to black actors! That's ten white folks who went home empty handed and we shouldn't stand for it.

So by the sounds of it you think affirmative action should be taking place in the NBA and NFL for whites and latinos. The whole affirmative action program in the NFL for coaches is a joke. The underlieing thinking that teams will hire the best player based solely on merits on the field but coaches are hired by skin color. That the burning desire to win and hire the best only takes place at the player level but not the coaching level.

hippiemom

surferdude wrote:

So by the sounds of it you think affirmative action should be taking place in the NBA and NFL for whites and latinos. The whole affirmative action program in the NFL for coaches is a joke. The underlieing thinking that teams will hire the best player based solely on merits on the field but coaches are hired by skin color. That the burning desire to win and hire the best only takes place at the player level but not the coaching level.

I don't know a single thing about the NBA or the NFL, and I don't particularly care either. I'll let all the millionaires sort it out for themselves. I don't really have any strong feelings about affirmative action either. I think there are excellent arguments on both sides, but the old "What would happen if we had white film awards, why isn't there a NAAWP?" argument isn't one of them.

surferdude

hippiemom wrote:

I don't know a single thing about the NBA or the NFL, and I don't particularly care either. I'll let all the millionaires sort it out for themselves. I don't really have any strong feelings about affirmative action either. I think there are excellent arguments on both sides, but the old "What would happen if we had white film awards, why isn't there a NAAWP?" argument isn't one of them.

I'm actually all for a time limted, and one time only affirmative action program. Native Americans probably need it more than African Americans though.

Ahnimus

Well first of all, let me tell you what would happen if there was a "white film awards". There would be chaos, rioting in the street, home invasions, anarchy."

However, that will not happen with "black film awards", "asian film awards" or "spanish film awards" or any other variety. The animosity is always directed at the "white" catagory, which is actually a lot of different people. Most of the people in the white catagory have no genetic connection to any of the people that commited those crimes on humanity. Most of the people that commited those crimes were of English decent. I'm personally of Swiss decent, but that still lumps me in the "white" catagory because of my skin colour. My ancestory is actually from one of the most neutral, non-violent, non-oppressive nations in world history. I am not alone and I am lumped in with the "white" group. But even if my grandfather had slaves, that's not my fault. It's not even really his fault when you understand sociology, psychology, neural science and history. Owning slaves was acceptable at that time and Africa's governments were selling the slaves to the English colonies. It's nobodies fault really, it was a bad part of society that thankfully we've moved beyond.

I personally think one of the biggest atrocities of modern society is the oppression of children. Children are human beings, adults boss them around, hit them, yell at them, they have favourites and mistreat the others, they aren't allowed to speak unless spoken to, even though they are really smart. Children are misjudged, overlooked and down right discriminated against in modern society, in the entire history of our planet for that matter. Many times they are held to adult standards and not given the privledges of adult life. Such is the case when a 15 year old is tried for murder in an adult court. At least let him drink a six pack first. Let him get hammered, have sex and experiment. I think if we didn't hinder our children's development, if we let them experience life, they might learn quicker, be more interested and hopefully move out sooner.

Anyway society does have a long way to go. We aren't even aware of some things. Because that's the way sociology works. The first step is identifying a problem. Dr. Spock said we shouldn't hit our kids and that was revolutionary. Before that no one thought it was wrong. It was perfectly acceptable. The same applies to blacks and women. You have to understand this and also recognize that things have changed, are changing and always will change for better or for worse. We decide the right course of action and we must do it in unity. The terms feminisn, masculism and affirmative action are designed to suit a situational purpose. I found this article on wikipedia to try to explain better.

wikipedia wrote:

[size=+1]Equalism[/size]
Equalism is a name often given to forms of egalitarianism (advocacy of equality) concerned with issues of gender or race. Thus, equalism is another name for gender egalitarianism, sexual egalitarianism and/or racial egalitarianism.

The term is used by people of many disjointed political philosophies developed separately by political activists. This includes people who support gender-blind policies in response to the failings they saw in certain branches of Feminism, as well as people who support colour-blind policies in response to what they see as the discriminatory elements of Affirmative Action.

Central to equalism is the belief that society must be colour-blind and sex/gender-blind.

PilatesBetterman

PaperPlates wrote:

Ever hear of someone complaining they got fired because they were white? Me either.

Ever hear of someone complaining they probably didnt get that job because they were white? Me either.


Ever hear of someone saying they probably got pulled over and ticketed because they were white? Me either.

Give it ten years. And a Democrat victory or two. The WMA will soon be the one's being persecuted. :(

It happens in Canada. Our National Police Force gives preference and credit to "Visible" minorities in an effort to "balance" years of discriminatory hiring practices. I am i 28 year old white male who never had the "luxury" of being gifted all the priviliges my fore-fathers did, but i pay the price for it. "reverse" discrimination is a myth. It is discrimination nothing more nothing less. I believe people should be treated for what they've done and who they are as person, those things are within each individuals control. Skin pigmentation, reproductive organs and age aren't.

redrock

I once got a job in the US because I could put down that I was Native American. I always ticked the caucausian box ( but during the interview, my potential employer kept on asking me about my family history (which I thought was a bit uncalled for). He eventually confessed and said if I could put down I was a 'minority' he could hire me (for quota reasons). I laughed it off saying that though I had lots of nationalities in my background, the only non-white blood I had was native american and that I was only 1/32nd native american. Apparently that was all that was needed (quite a while back - don't know how it is now). So basically, me.. as white as can be (only ghosts could be whiter than me and even then, it would be a close call), I was Native American..... Had I not had that tiny drop of 'minority' blood, I wouldn't have had the job.

I know this affirmative action (positive discrimation as it was also called), has good intentions as it does try to combat racism in employment (and it is abundant), redress the situation, etc. But I believe it may have been taken too far. The best man/woman for the job... that's what I say!

rebornFixer

I don't think affirmative action has to be racist, and I do think the approach has its up side ... However, society cannot seem to implement such policies without letting things go too far. And yes, it can go to far. The RCMP example that someone else brought up here in Canada is a prime example. I also remember one of the recent police brutality cases in the U.S. I forget which city, but someone actually made the argument that white males should not be hired as police officers because they have a propensity for violence. This remark got media exposure and everything. Holy shit ... People can say that, but as soon as someone says that Carribean baseball players are "slow", they lose their job. Could you imagine someone saying that black men shouldn't be hired as police officers because they are more likely to become involved in organized crime activities on the job? What, its statistically true! ... Many instances of police brutality are perpetuated by white officers, and the cops who become crooked and join gangs are often black. Why can we say one but not the other?
Its almost like affirmative action has set the stage, making it OK to make generalizations about the majority group but not anyone else. Maybe there's no real link here at all, but its a question worth asking. Society oftens takes good ideas a bit too far.

Jackhammer

Yeah, like often, something works just fine, an idiot makes rules, and then it goes ashtray.

Rules are made to be broken, it seems

Ahnimus

I don't think this was a clear case of discrimination. I think Chris Rock's mom was quick to jump to that conclusion.

I've sat in a restaurant for over 30 mins without being served. It happened just last week. She took my order and after 10 mins I could see my order, but by the time I got it, it was cold.

Then she was offered a free meal, but she didn't take it. She wondered why the manager didn't call the waitress over to interogate her. Well, I've never seen that. Manager don't usually interogate their employees infront of customers.

I don't know, it may have been discrimination, but I think she just jumped to conclusions. Cracker Barrel is going to have to make sure Black people get served first to avoid this kind of thing in the future.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Movies/10/18/chrisrockmom.discrimin.ap/index.html

PJPOWER

Ahnimus wrote:

I don't think this was a clear case of discrimination. I think Chris Rock's mom was quick to jump to that conclusion.

I've sat in a restaurant for over 30 mins without being served. It happened just last week. She took my order and after 10 mins I could see my order, but by the time I got it, it was cold.

Then she was offered a free meal, but she didn't take it. She wondered why the manager didn't call the waitress over to interogate her. Well, I've never seen that. Manager don't usually interogate their employees infront of customers.

I don't know, it may have been discrimination, but I think she just jumped to conclusions. Cracker Barrel is going to have to make sure Black people get served first to avoid this kind of thing in the future.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Movies/10/18/chrisrockmom.discrimin.ap/index.html

I think she pulled the racist card instead of admitting that she didn't get served because she's a complaining, loud mouth, rich bitch!............That's just my opinion...........i could be wrong.........

Ahnimus

PJPOWER wrote:

I think she pulled the racist card instead of admitting that she didn't get served because she's a complaining, loud mouth, rich bitch!............That's just my opinion...........i could be wrong.........

Man, I don't take kindly to people that think they are more important because they have more money.

When I had my business I turned down many customers because I didn't give in to their pocket book. They wanted me to basically kick my other customers out, so they could rent my computer in peace. I said no way, not even if you pay me 50 times the regular price, because those other customers are regulars and come in all the time. I wasn't about to ignore them to serve this prick.

So if that was the case, I can see why she didn't get served right away. I used to work for a call centre and the worst is when some rich dude starts whining about how long the call takes. Saying things like "come on time is money" as if I make peanuts by comparison or his time is so important. Makes me sick.

PJPOWER

Ahnimus wrote:

Man, I don't take kindly to people that think they are more important because they have more money.

When I had my business I turned down many customers because I didn't give in to their pocket book. They wanted me to basically kick my other customers out, so they could rent my computer in peace. I said no way, not even if you pay me 50 times the regular price, because those other customers are regulars and come in all the time. I wasn't about to ignore them to serve this prick.

So if that was the case, I can see why she didn't get served right away. I used to work for a call centre and the worst is when some rich dude starts whining about how long the call takes. Saying things like "come on time is money" as if I make peanuts by comparison or his time is so important. Makes me sick.

I agree, I've had to work for the general public enough to know that a lot of times people with a heavy bank account pretty much think they own you........I know that everyone doesn't fit into that category, but the ones that do are truly pathetic.