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.
Maybe it does for you, but have we removed the reason so many people treat anyone who isn't white differently?
As in, without AA, would qualified black and Hispanic candidates get overlooked to hire a white man?
Good to see you racism out in the open. Many whites are racist and that's why they don't hire minoritites. Not just a handful since that would mean it isn't a big problem, but that many whites are racist.
We already know, because of Affirmative Action, whites who are more qualified get over looked in order to give a job to a minority. But that somehow doesn't matter?
Quit forcing your beliefs, no matter how well intended, on others. Respect property rights and dont look to government to cure societal ills. They are the ones who create most of the problems in the first place.
Last edited by Loveshiscountry; 05-09-2018 at 07:16 AM..
I think "advantages" is a better term, but at the end of the day, the whole process is more about acknowledging them and attempting to be fair (if you're not fair already) so that there's a reasonably level playing field as relates to things out of a person's control, such as the color of their skin.
But you don't want a level playing field. You want a level outcome and you want to use force to do it. Bad enough your policy doesn't work and is destructive as is any policy that lowers quality but you'll take my property and my livelyhood even though no ones rights have been violated. How is that better for society?
Took me awhile to type this as it's hard to type when your boot is on my neck. Oh but you mean well so it's all good.
I think "advantages" is a better term, but at the end of the day, the whole process is more about acknowledging them and attempting to be fair (if you're not fair already) so that there's a reasonably level playing field as relates to things out of a person's control, such as the color of their skin.
Please, do tell how this "attempting to be fair" manifests itself in a country that already has hundreds of laws/regs/policies that not only outlaw racism towards non-white/Asian minorities, but institutionally promote racism against the white majority and Asian minority?
U of M law school example - the affirmative action folks won. It is still perfectly legal to outright violate the civil rights act and give preferential (blacks, hispanics) or discriminatory (whites, asians) treatment BASED SOLELY ON RACE. That playing field is not just "fair" to black and hispanic minorities, it is tilted in their favor, by law.
There are countless laws/regs/policies just like that all over America, but apparently all that tilting in the favor of blacks and Hispanics is still not enough. So again, do tell what "attempting to be fair" consists of. Give a detailed accounting of the rent your argument seeks.
I was reading an article for one of my graduate courses and thought some of you might find it interesting. It's brief.
Here's a really concise quote.... based on this quote, how would you answer the poll?
"It’s important to note that privilege does not guarantee good outcomes for the privileged group or bad outcomes for everyone else. A white person, for example, can work hard and have little to show for it, can be mistreated by the police without cause, be denied a job they’re qualified for. What privilege does is load the odds one way or the other so that the chance of bad things happening to white people as a category of people is much lower than for everyone else, and the chance of good things happening is much higher. Privilege is not something a person can have, like a possession, as in “Where’s mine?” Instead, it is a characteristic of the social system—like a rule in a game—in which everyone participates."
So... what's your opinion, based on the definition offered above?
I won't touch this subject with a ten foot pole. I say this because you will never be able to convince people one way or another.
In my experience, the most successful men are value-giving, socially-confident, non-needy, friendly-to-all, leader-of-men archetypes. White or not, it really doesn't matter.
This said, I think being a "minority" is difficult to live in any society. Denying this is intellectual dishonesty. For example, being a white person living in China or Korea or Japan would be difficult. This is nothing more than just minority disadvantage. It has nothing to do with "white" or"yellow" privilege.
This said, I think being a "minority" is difficult to live in any society. Denying this is intellectual dishonesty. For example, being a white person living in China or Korea or Japan would be difficult. This is nothing more than just minority disadvantage. It has nothing to do with "white" or"yellow" privilege.
One must compare people of a similar demographic. As in white women and black women (cisgender, heterosexual) would be compared... not young white men to elderly black women, for example.
If I recall this correctly, you have a mixed daughter, correct?
I can tell you this much according to my own experience. Racists always assume the mixed child like me wants to be white, even though I really don't give a damn about being white or not.
Growing up mixed will teach you one thing very quickly: there is no such a thing as MY people. MY people means people who love me, period. That is why I stay loyal to my family and friends. I think this is a good attitude. The only thing can really protect a minority is a good law. (I will pick free market but we will never have free market, so I have to pick the second best which is the good law.)
One rule for all, or no rule at all. This is how you achieve real equality in real life. To me, AA might help the minorities in certain situation, but it is not a good program. Hate crime laws are not necessary. This is my opinion.
Some people always have this weird belief that majority of the people want to be treated BETTER, no, I think majority of the people just want to be treated equally as everybody else.
Last edited by lilyflower3191981; 05-09-2018 at 08:44 AM..
This said, I think being a "minority" is difficult to live in any society. Denying this is intellectual dishonesty.
You should study more history. There is no shortage of privileged ethnic minorities in a given society, so to give "minority" a universal value (and then claiming anyone that disagrees is wrong) is just false. This is why it's always dangerous to make absolute statements.
I don't know that it didn't help at all... individuals, I mean.
I think the people who put them in place were trying to help people who were constantly denied opportunities by racists and bigots.
Unfortunately, those same racists and bigots never learned anything or we would not need affirmative action anymore.
People like you never bothered for a second to wonder if affirmative action could be bad for the people it alleges to help. You just accepted it without question. That's a problem.
Originally Posted by RedZin I think "advantages" is a better term, but at the end of the day, the whole process is more about acknowledging them and attempting to be fair (if you're not fair already) so that there's a reasonably level playing field as relates to things out of a person's control, such as the color of their skin.
At the end of the day, you don't try and advocate for one group by targeting another group. And that is EXACTLY what you do when you speak of 'white privilege'.
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.