Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thank you. What a lot of people don't realize is that white males have had their own Affirmative Action. Hundreds of years of legal discrimination and blatant racism/sexism (let's include homophobia in there as well) that extend even before the founding of this country have given white, straight men a head start that they still hold onto today—whether they want that advantage or not. Racial minorities and women have made some strides to level the playing field, and what the majority is feeling today is a shrinking inability to receive favor simply for being white and male.
I don't blame anyone living today for what happened in the past. (I'm usually the only black person around saying, "hey, slavery is over.") But to pretend that women and racial minorities have somehow gained the power to oppress a group that has been in control for eons is laughable, at best.
Two things on this one.
Results don't indicate causation.
That blacks experience a higher rate of unemployment may be due to white discrimination, but that is just one of many possibilities which may apply.
Other than this justifying black discrimination against whites, why did you immediately rule out all other possible causes?
In the previous post, the issue of legacy placement at public and private universities came up. This is a legitimate issue, but not one which should be solely about race and gender. Yes, legacy admissions tend to make student bodies white and male, but this is rich, white and male. Poor white males don't graduate from prestigious universities and they don't send their kids there. To make being born poor, white and male a mortal sin as we do just means blacks and women of any economic and social standing will have opportunities along with white males from wealthy families but not poor white males. In other words, poor white males get a double dose of class exclusion and state sanctioned discrimination while better off white males are untouched by both.
My problem isn't being white and male. That would be fine if I were also wealthy, but I'm not. And while I have no children of my own, I do have nephews who are also white and face the same double dose of class exclusion and state sanctioned discrimination because, while being white and male, they are not wealthy either. You see, the race and gender issue is incidental to the class issue, and that's the real issue.
It serves the interests of racist blacks and sexist females to keep the current system which excludes only poor and working class white males. A poor white male will never provide a business opportunity to a black person or female, but they will compete for the same job. I think if we got honest answers from those blacks and females admitted to once closed universities about who they would prefer to have as class mates, they would select wealthy white males over poor. I'm sure you'll disagree.
And these people he's speaking about are underrepresented in their government, and with regard to education, employment, wealth, and the ability to be seen as the default in mainstream culture?
And how are white males represented in Congress?
Because law makers are white and male they favor me because I'm white and male?
Which laws have they enacted which favor white males?
Can you show me some highly qualified black candidates who have run in white majority districts only to lose due to racist white males opposing them?
I can show you a highly unqualified (first term Senator) who was put in office by white males (44%, highest for a Democrat since Carter).
If you look at the "racist" Tea Party movement you'll see loads of females, blacks and Latinos who have enjoyed enthusiastic support from whites.
A
Can you show me some highly qualified black candidates who have run in white majority districts only to lose due to racist white males opposing them?
I give you the 1990 North Senatorial Race of Senator Jesse Helms. A Conservative and long time segregationisth and Harvey Gantt an prominent Black American North Carolina architect one time mayor of Charlotte North Carolina.
Here is a little historical background about Jesse Helms
An unreconstructed Southern conservative, he began his political career in the Democratic Party in the days when white Southern politicians championed racial segregation. He moved to the Republican party in the 1970s. Helms was the most stridently conservative politician of the post 1960 era.,[4] especially in opposition to federal intervention into what he considered state affairs (integration, the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act). Helms tried, with a 16-day filibuster, to stop the Senate from approving a federal holiday to honor Martin Luther King, Jr.
Quote:
Helms opposed many progressive policies regarding race, such as busing, the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act.[252][253][254] Helms called the Civil Rights Act of 1964 'the single most dangerous piece of legislation ever introduced in the Congress', and sponsored legislation to either extend it to the entire country or scrap it altogether.[160] Helms reminded voters that he tried, with a 16-day filibuster, to stop the Senate from approving a federal holiday to honor Dr. Martin Luther King Jr,[255] although he had fewer reservations about establishing a North Carolina state holiday for King.[256] He has been accused of being a segregationist by some political observers and scholars, such as USA Today's DeWayne Wickham who wrote that Helms 'subtly carried the torch of white supremacy' from Ben Tillman.[257][258][259][260]
In 1996 the Department of Justice admonished Helms's 1990 campaign for mailing 125,000 postcards to households in predominantly African-American precincts warning them (incorrectly) that they could go to jail if they had not updated their addresses on the electoral register since moving.[261] Helms opposed 'every piece of civil rights and affirmative action legislation' and blocked 'black judges from being considered for the federal bench'.[256] In 1982, he voted against the extension of the Voting Rights Act.[256][256] Helms opposed busing, supported the 'racist apartheid regime of South Africa', and 'for years blocked attempts by President Bill Clinton to appoint a Black judge on the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals'.[256] Only when Helms's own judicial choices were threatened with blocking did attorney Roger Gregory of Richmond, Virginia get confirmed. Helms also tried to block the nomination of Carol Moseley Braun, the first African-American female senator, as ambassador to New Zealand[256]
This is one of the campagn tactics used against Harvey Gantt during the 1990 Senatorial campaingn.
Quote:
Helms aired a late-running television commercial[217] that showed a white man's hands ripping up a rejection notice from a company that gave the job to a 'less qualified minority'; some critics claimed the ad utilized subliminal racist themes.[216][218][219][220][221] The advert was produced by Alex Castellanos, whom Helms would employ until his company was dropped in April 1996 after running an unusually hard-hitting ad.[222]
What does this have to do with black people? This is about whether or not white males face discrimination. I don't know many Hispanics, Asians, or any other minority group who buys it either. What this black man DOES know is that you can't prove institutional racism against white males.
And blacks have been using this crutch for a couple hundred years? Well, let's go back a "couple hundred years" then. In 1811, black folks weren't racially oppressed?
I gotta hear this one.
Thankfully for you they were. You are now reaping the benefits of that.
Like Chris Rock said, there isn't a poor white in America who would trade places with a wealthy black man. And i'm totally inclined to agree with that statement.
White males aren't taking any hits that anyone else isn't taking....all poor people are under the gun these days.
If Chris Rock were barred from making racist or derogatory comments about whites he would have absolutely noithing to say when he takes the stage. I wonder what would happen if a white comic ever decided to take that approach with regard to comments about blacks.
i think the reasoning behind all white clubs not being ok is because whites are the majority and represent the majority of the public. it would be silly having an all white club when the majority are white.
to me its the equivalent of having an islam only club in a country thats 90 percent islam. its foolish, its not needed, since islam is the majority there.
at the same time, i would have no problems with a white tennis club or whatever in a majority non white city such as detroit or wherever, since whites are a minority there.
you also have the negative connotations with white exclusivity throughout history which makes the idea automatically negative in most peoples heads.
So then why is an all black club needed just because blacks are a minority? Why is an all black club needed in a city like Detroit where whites are a minority?
Please. Are you kidding me? There are plenty of all white private institutions still left over in this country. If you can't afford entry into those establishments, that's your problem. But they surely exist, and will always exists.
Please provide specific examples and cite evidence that blacks are not allowed in these institutions.
Ok...give me a case of discrimination against you because of your race. Where you were denied an opportunity because you were white, and had no recourse.
I worked waiting tables for a number of years and have been told to my face, "we don't hire males to wait tables". I have also been steered to the back of the house for the same reason. Were I black, I would have a case on both counts. Were I female, I would have a case on both counts. Because I'm a white male I cannot file a complaint with EEOC. They'll mail out a form, but I don't belong to a protected group, so a complaint will go nowhere.
This is an example of the most obvious employment discrimination, but what is even more insidious are the opportunities which never come to light because they are wrapped in the cloak of an Affirmative Action program. In these cases, the jobs are simply filled by non-white males behind the scenes. They aren't turning white males away. They simply aren't hiring.
Added to this is defensive disproportional hiring of blacks and females to avoid lawsuits. A business may be stacked with non-white males without running into legal problems, but a business that has too many white males is a legal sitting duck.
Of course, if you're a racist black or sexist female, all is as it should be. Just keep harping about past alleged racism and sexism so as to justify continuing to exclude today's white males who had nothing to do with any of it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
