PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Civil Rights Debates
     Affirmative Action is wrong!
       From my own life experiences

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
frogggystyle

|      |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
0

Rate this post:

I, being a colored person, don't buy the argument for AA. I never have. I was raised in a multi-race household. I was taught to look beyond color and accept people based on who they are and how they treat you. We, as a nation, don't share that same philosophy and we probably never will. I don't run the country, the businesses, the schools, etc. But, if I did, I would ensure that every person who is qualified for a spot gets weighed by their merit. Gender and ethnic background would be irrelevant. In fact, they wouldn't even be questions on the application.

I'm a multi-race male. My mother is white, my father (deceased) was Mexican, and I was raised by my mother and a black stepfather. You can say affirmative action works in my favor based on my looks and bloodlines. I joined the Navy ten years ago. When I enlisted I checked the Caucasian box even though I look Hispanic and bear a Hispanic last name. The reason I chose that box is that I believe that all people should be judged on their own merit, not on their skin color. I wasn't sure if the military practiced affirmative action, so I claimed to be white because I don't believe in handouts or leg ups based on skin color.

I don't know about anyone else, but I treat everyone with the same amount of respect as the person next to them, until they prove to me that they are not worthy of that respect. I judge people on their merit alone. Skin color has never been a factor in how I treat someone. That is because I was raised by adults that taught me that I should see people for who they are and not for the color of their skin.

I have always worked hard for what I received in life. I don't want a free handout or advantage based on my ethnic background, especially knowing that someone more qualified than I am could be adversely affected if I am less qualified than they are and I get a specific position that they warrant more than I do. I took college classes after hours and earned my BA in Psychology. The college I earned my degree through (University of Maryland) did not care what color their student body was composed of; they just wanted to educate any and all who came to learn. Interesting enough, at least 95% of the students in every class I took were not black. College tuition covered 75% of the college fees. I was only an E4 in the Navy during most of the time that it took for me to get my degree, so it wasn't like I was making a ton more money than everyone else to pay for my college education. Since affirmative action was never a factor, what does that say about blacks having the desire to gain higher education in a non-affirmative action college system?

I applied for a commissioning program and was accepted my first time up, not because of the color of my skin or because of my Hispanic last name, but because I carried a high GPA in college and for being a motivated and hard-charging Sailor who earned the respect of his subordinates, peers, and superiors alike. Today I am a student naval flight officer, something I have always dreamed of becoming. I did not earn my college degree because of my name or skin color. I did not become a Naval officer because of my Hispanic last name. I got to where I am because of personal perseverance, determination, motivation, and commitment. Nobody gave me a handout because of some affirmative action policy or quote system. I worked hard for what I have and where I am today. I can say with pride that I earned what I have, not because of some handout, but because I worked for it. You see, a non-affirmative action system can and does work. If the opportunity is given to you the only thing to stop you from becoming what you want is your own desire.

Regardless of my beliefs, I have received more than my fair share on racial discrimination and taunting from whites, blacks, browns, yellows, and every other color in the spectrum. Some of those instances range from whites calling me a 'foreigner' to blacks hating 'whitey'. Discrimination affects everyone, not just blacks, not just women, not just Jews, etc. White men are now carrying the burden they levied against the blacks when this country was born. That is not fair, that is not equal.

I've seen affirmative action at work and I don't approve of it. The first time I got a good dose of it was when I was applying for a fire fighter job. Prospective fire fighters are required to compete in strength and academic tests. The first test is academic. If you are a minority you get a 10 point bonus. If you are a woman you get a 20 point bonus. White male? No bonus for you. This test was 200 questions and your final score ranged between 0 and 100 points. I scored a 98 and I checked the 'white' box.

If you scored high enough, you were asked to compete in the physical test. Women were required to carry/push/pull a lot less weight than the males. If a woman can do as much as I can, then she warrants the position as much as I do. But as a fire fighter, if you cannot carry the damn hose or a 180 lbs. person out of a burning house by yourself, you aren't going to be very much help to that department. That is why you don't see firemen in wheel chairs. Nothing aginst the handicapped and nothing against women, but you have to be able to do the job. That is why I believe that every person applying for this kind of job should pass the same physical and academic tests as the person next to them. This kind of job requires you can carry a 180lbs dummy 100 yards. Not every person is going to weigh 60 lbs, ladies. In my eyes, ethnic and gender diversity mean nothing compared to being qualified for an arduous job, especially when it comes to saving lives.

I was watching the The Donahue show that covered this topic. It got me thinking about affirmative discrimi...errr action. The show was basically how I thought it would be - A bunch of white people standing up, especially the women, saying that discrimination affects everyone, not just people of color. The common retort from the black guy who was on stage was something to the affect of, "You don't know our pain," and "Blacks have been discriminated against for hundreds of years and we are owed this." He never said that verbatim, but that is basically how he responded.

One of the white women asked if it would be appropriate if acclaimed black colleges instituted AA to get more representation from the white population. The black guy answer firmly, "No! It's not the same thing." So, I guess it is ok to give preference to blacks in predominantly whites schools, but it is not ok to give preference to whites in predominantly black schools. I don't care how you look at it - that is discrimination and it promotes inequality.

The guy also said something to the effect that such programs are not required in black colleges because most white people are not interested in attending them. What difference does that make? If you are going to institute a policy of preferential treatment then it had better cross all lines, not just the ones you choose. Either discriminate equally or don't discriminate at all. It is better to do away with the preference all together.

I think the necessity for AA is tired. We, as a nation, will forever be scarred from misdeeds from generations ago. There is truly nothing we can do to make up for the people we enslaved, killed, displaced, or disenfranchised. However, we can learn from those mistakes and ensure they are not repeated. I will bet my life that we will never again allow slavery in the form it was in during America's early years. Human rights are something we embrace. That will never change unless our government is overthrow by some Jihad mother fucker that demands we all bow down to Muhammad, all women hide their bodies and be subserviant, etc. Like I said, not in my lifetime will this ever happen in the U.S.

Back to the Donahue show though. I was surprised to be cheering for Pat Buchanan when he spoke. I didn't like how he kept saying "White Christian Males" are being treated inequally compared to the colored people in some regards because I feel that religion really has nothing to do with AA. Personally I have never seen an organization that receives government funding demand that 10% of their personnel are Jewish, 10% are Catholic, and so on and so forth.

Pat made some excellent points, even though I don't necessarily agree with a lot of the biggotted things he says. He mentioned several times that two wrongs do not make a right. He was referring to AA trying to make up for previous racial disparities in the work force and school systems. I agree, two wrongs do not make a right. I really don't believe giving preferential treatment to someone based on gender or race is a good way to make up for lost ground.

Let's face it, everybody is different. Everyone has some strength or weakness compared to the person next to them. I may be athletically gifted and the girl next to me may be intellectually gifted. That doesn't make her better than me, it makes her different. Now, depending on what we are competing for, our individual strengths may play a factor in who is picked up for that last spot. People who are missing a leg are not picked up for the Olympic 4x100m relay team for a reason. Idiots do not work as NASA for a reason. Color and gender have nothing to do with requirements of ability. If there is a short pagan Asian woman out there running the 100m in 9.6 seconds, damn it, get her ass on the relay team. Until then, you need to bow out and let those who possess that required ability to take their rightful place on the team.

How would sports be if AA was instituted? Let's say...every men's pro sports team *had* to be 65% white males....because that is a rough representation of the percentage of whites we have in the U.S. Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that 5% of the team had to be Asian, 15% had to be black, and 15% had to be Hispanic. How does a population's ethnic percentage have anything to do with who is best for the job? It doesn't...everything requires a certain skill or ability. If you don't possess it, bow out. Besides, how many blacks do you see screaming about wanting to have a place on the hockey team? People have a choice to play or not to play; nothing should ever be mandated where skill and ability are disregarded and skin color has more weight.

Let's talk a little bit about discrimination. Let's say you own a store and you need to hire a cashier. Only two people give you applications, Halle Barry and Chris Rock. Now, let's say for instance they both have the exact same experience in this kind of job and both had the same GPA in school. Both have equally good references and both seem qualified for the job. You conduct an interview with each of them to get a better feel for who they are. Now who would you pick to be your cashier? Why did you pick that person?

Regardless of who you picked, they are both black but your own personal prejudices lead you to pick one vice the other for a certain reason. Both could turn out to be equally exceptional employees, but you made your choice because of prejudicial preference. Was it Halle's charming appearance that made you pick her? Was it Chris' outgoing and upfront personality that made you pick him? Maybe you think your customers would rather have one vice the other help them check their food out. You use preference in almost every day decision you make, but do you do it for the right reasons?

There are certain places where discrimination will always be required. Working at Hooters...sorry guys, the theme is Hooters, not Dicks. Sure, you can work as a cook in the back, but unless you are a chick running around in skimpy shorts and a revealing t-shirts you don't fit the bill. Again, that comes down to personnel merit. You don't have titties, you are aren't a female, sorry...no waitress job for you. But, when it comes to areas such as education or any federally aided program, a blind eye should be the basis of judging who gets the empty spot.

We cannot expect today's citizens to try and make up for the atrocities blacks endured all those years ago when we (today's citizens) played absolutely no part of those actions during that time period. Keeping those memories alive causes more hatred for each other. The solution is to let it go and move forward. What ever happened to the saying, "If you don't learn from the past you are doomed to repeat it?" We cannot go back and fix the wrongs of our forefathers, who carried out their practices because that was the social norm at that time. Today is a new day and we have learned from those mistakes. Today we have different practices and policies, yet we have programs in place to advocate preferential treatment for those of color. I don't owe the black man next to me anything, nor does he owe me anything. So why do we allow affirmative action to exist generations after the fact knowing that it promotes inequality?

You have blacks ranting about being brought to America and forced into slavery, yet nobody says much about my relatives being killed and kicked out of this country that had been theirs for hundreds of years before the white man came. To me that says that many of these blacks who champion affirmative action are looking for a free hand out or advantage. Many get jobs not based on their own merit and self-worth but because their great great great great grand daddy picked cotton in a field. My bloodline, I am sure, has suffered just as many if not more afflictions of the white man back in the day. Do you hear me complain about it? No, of course not, because I am intelligent enough to understand that what happened in the past happened in a different time period and that those actions are not the norm in today's society.

I say that the slate should be wiped clean, starting today, so that each of us can embrace the equality that our Constitution mandates that we all have. No more affirmative action, no more racial preference. Yes, there will still be individuals that support their own particular prejudices against specific people for the color of their skin, religious practices, gender, etc. You cannot change everyone, but you can change the system. Eventually, most people will buy into that system and the prejudicial practices of today will be significantly lower for generations down the road. You cannot truly have equality if even a fraction of the system favors a specific race. Changing the system to reflect the advocacy of equality for all people can work. I know it can because I am living proof of it.

Diluting the pool with under-qualified, or not as qualified, people does not make this nation or any organization stronger. Granted, not every person has the exact same educational system so that will always be an issue. Regardless, most every student has access to public libraries and various other means of education if they look for it. If you want to learn there are always resources out there to quench one's thirst for education. My perception is that many of today's minority kids do not want to work hard because they have come to expect that handout of affirmative action to work them into the system, or they cry foul when they are not hired by a company that does not support affirmative action. Not only does affirmative action work against non-colored people, but it makes colored people think they don't have to work their butt off as much as the white guy next to them. The minorities cheat themselves by not putting forth all of their effort to meet the minimun standards set for whites and the whites get cheated because they are beat out by some colored person who does not meet the minimum standards. That is a no-win situation. Again, these are only my ideas and perceptions.

I hope the Supreme Court deems affirmative action an unlawful and unconstitutional practice this year. When they do that, if they ever do, we as a people can finally start to embrace the idea of equality. We cannot keep trying to apologize and make up for the mistakes of the past. When will enough be enough? One hundred years from now? Two hundred years from now? A thousand years from now? When there are more blacks in America than whites? When there are no whites in America and only blacks remain? When can we let it (our nation's history with blacks) go? I say the time is now, less we destine ourselves to not live up to our own Constitution's premise of equality and cause better-qualified people (regardless of skin color or gender) to fall to the wayside to the less qualified people who are not hired by merit but because of their pigmentation.

One of the many problems with AA is that it gives advantage where none is needed, in some cases. You could have a black kid who is a friggin' genius and comes from a wealthy background competing for a college slot against a white kid who has average grades and comes from a poor background. Who is more worthy of a leg up? Based on AA, it is the black kid even though he already has every advantage compared to the white kid. That white kid just got slammed, twice. Once because he was white and does not warrant preferrential treatment and the second time because he actually needs more help getting into a college than that other kid.

Every black person is not disenfranchised. Every brown person does not come from a broken home. Every yellow person is not a math genius. Every red person does not live in a friggin' teepee. But, as a nation, we have determined that the past grievances those individuals were afforded is worthy of giving each of them an advantage over any white person who has the same qualifications, regardless of the broken home and lack of opportunity that white person may come from.

Forced diversity is never the right answer. People segregate themselves by choice. People make their own decisions. Nobody should be forced to be around people, even if they want to be around those people. If a school only all-black it is considered OK. Have you ever heard of an all-white school? Shuld whites be forced into a black school system? I say the answer is no, which is why I think people of color should not be giving enrollment advantages to get into various schools.

If everyone would just bust their ass in high school, get good grades, participate in school activities and sports, stay out of trouble, and do some volunteer work for the community then those individuals who have a hard time getting in to college now would not have so much trouble. It is not fair that a guy who busted his ass to get a 4.0 GPA in high school is not accepted into a college in favor of a black woman who got a 3.0 GPA. People are responsibile for their own action and choices. If you choose to get average grades then you should not have an advantage over someone who earned superior grades.

Where is the work ethic? Colored people are relying on affirmative action for that leg up over their white counterparts that often beat them out academically. Whose fault is it for poor grades? Is it the white man's fault a Mexican woman's high school GPA was low? No, the Mexican woman had a choice during those four years to get good grades. She made a choice not to do as well as she could have. Therefore, she should given no enrollment advantage compared to someone who clearly busted their hump to excel.

I am sick of the colored people in America expecting a free hand out. I don't owe you anything. Whites don't owe you anything. My family does not owe you anything. You owe it to yourselves to do well the first time around in high school, stay off the streets, stay out of gangs, join school or community activities, and if need be relocate to an area where you can be accepted into a college that has low admission requirements. The world does not revolve around you, it merely revolves. You are expected to keep up because you are the only one to blame if you fall behind.

Colored people cry for integration, not segregation. If that is really the case, what about your self-imposed social segregation? You act black. You act Latino. You act white. You act a certain way that may or may not adhere to the social standards of your ethnic community. How about acting like an intelligent indvidual that communicates in proper English, lacks "attitude", and doesn't ask for an advantage over the next person, regardless of their color?

You want equality? Act like a person who doesn't feel the world owes you something and dedicate youself to improving your grades and getting involved with the community. Nobody owes you a damn thing. If anything, you owe the country that provides you with all of your rights to complain about not being treated equally. Do your country the favor and denounce the unequal treatment that affirmative action advocates. All men are created equal (not "more equally" because you have more pigment in your skin) - Either live by these words and set the example by denouncing affirmative action or find a new country to live in that gives you the things you think that you have coming to you.

Colored people, regardless of their personal backgrounds will continue to reep this windfall of affirmatve advantage regardless of where they come from or what racial biases they have been subjected to in their life. Every person is discriminated against, yet we have allowed it and deem it OK to discriminate against whites in favor of colored people because of past misdeeds or biases that not every single colored person has had to deal with in their own life experiences.

So I ask you, when will enough be enough? That depends on all of you - especially the people who have children. Racist attitudes are commonly learned from the household that kids live in. Kids are not born with an innate system to hate a person of different color; that is a learned behavior. When parents start teaching their kids that little Johnny, and little Shamika, and little Roule, and little Chuan Li are all worthy of the same respect, then we can move forward and beyond the preferential treatment.

But, like I said, that begins with you all. I already treat every person of any skin color with the same respect as the next person. I do my part. Are you doing yours?


 


Posts: 1 | Posted: 01:48 AM on April 2, 2003 | IP
StormCrow

|       |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Way to go man, it's people like you who give me hope that this country may see equality after all. This is awesome, I love your post. Could you imagine a country based, once again, on hard work, and pride in ones self? No one looking for what is owed to him, because of the mistreatment of relatives four or five generations ago.


-------
"The Way of the Warrior is the two-fold path of pen and sword. Even if a man possess no natural inclination he may be a warrior by sticking assidously to both divisions of the Way."

-Shinmen Musashi
 


Posts: 112 | Posted: 12:15 PM on April 26, 2003 | IP
Manaia

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

First off let me address the fact that I'm a conservative for Affirmative Action. Second that I'm a first generation immigrant and I'm not white.

Now first off they shouldn't call it affirmative action but affirmative consideration. It's in consideration that so many minorities have suffered in the past that they are trying to amend. Words have a strong power on people's emotions and I think that if we would use the right words then it would have a better effect.

Something that people don't know and don't understand is how it feels to be a minority in the US. If you are a minority you are more familiar with the "white culture" then "whites" are of ours. The fact that you think social or economic class is the same for all races shows how much we need to diversify universities. The fact of the matter you will never know how much bias, discrimination, and racism exists in America today. It isn't even close to the levels that it was in the 60's but it still exists. The purpose to diversify is to help counteract some of that. If you don't believe there is any racism, bias, or prejudice in America then you are proof of the need for diversity.

Another reason we need diversity is because the belief is how do we help correct social injustices of the past and not punishing those of the current system. Allowing a few people in because of their race would only eliminate approximately 5% of all applicants. Applicants on the borderline that would have been accepted if not for the diversity policies. The belief is that if the social injustices of the past had not happened that those students would have had better resources and lesser disadvantges and would merit acceptance. That if the past injustices had not happened they would have been that much farther ahead and then have "merited" acceptance and those students eliminated would have been eliminated anyways.

Also standardized tests are racially, culturally, and genderally bias. Until recently most standardized test were made of entirely white males. That is why women in general don't do as well on standardized tests as men overall. If there was a group of people raised, educated, cultured, the same as me and we created a test, who do you think of all the test takers would do the best? Probably those that did have the same background as I did. How do you overcome differences like that?

Why do Professors want participation from everyone in the class? Everyone has different points of view. If you admitted only a few merit based minorities then the campus wouldn't be very diverse. That means that class discussions would mostly be by people that are the same race, culture, color, and probably similar backgrounds. How much perspective would you gain then? When would they ever become educated about "other cultures" or people? Being a minority we bring something with us that whites would bring to a African, Asian, South American, and Pacific Island dominant setting. If you don't understand that, just skip the rest of my post.

Now to address the success rates of minorities in universities. If you accept a more "merit based" pool of applicants into a school compared to a pool of people that were accepted less on the merits of course there is a huge disparity between minorities suceeding (a merit based process). It does not mean all accepted that do not make the "merit" requirements are not qualified. There are some that do get accepted that cannot handle the competitiveness and should not have been accepted. I concede that. The fact is that many that are accepted merit based drop out as well so numbers are not a good indicator. The fact of the matter many are accepted even though there scores didn't merit it. They do suceed and add to the school. Also statistically the pool is much smaller. So every drop out affects the statistics dramatically. It can be very misleading due to the size of the pool compared to the larger pool. Everyone knows the larrger the pool the more accurate the statistic. Also who do you think is more prepared for college the students that are second, third, fourth, fifth generation college student that have a family support group or the ones that come from a first generation college family? How do you think it feels to live away from home in a predominantly white area when you're not white? We have to learn a whole new culture and many times language. We have to learn to adapt to teachers mentality that may not be able to follow our mentatlity because they weren't raised the same as us. Unless you have lived in a different culture that isn't white you wouldn't understand further proving my point for the need of diversity.

I won't go into the economic and disadvantaged backgrounds that many minorities face. I believe that those are pretty evident. There are my views I have many more but I'll give them after because I'm tired of typing. Oh yeah sorry for the typos but I'm not a perfectionist. You know what I mean and that is enough.



-------
Mana'ia

"All I ask is the chance to prove money won't make me happy"
 


Posts: 7 | Posted: 08:20 AM on May 5, 2003 | IP
Manaia

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Oh and another thing the military attracts people that usually don't have what it takes to get into a competitive university anyways. You might feel different if you were applying for University fo Michgan and you got denied because you were white. You act liek the military rejects anyone that passes the physical. Suceeding in the military is totally different then suceeding in college. I don't think you grasped that concept. The military usually recruits people that graduate in the botton 25% of their class. did you know that?


-------
Mana'ia

"All I ask is the chance to prove money won't make me happy"
 


Posts: 7 | Posted: 08:25 AM on May 5, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I am Hispanic and I have brown skin. I have been on the ugly side of racism several times, by both whites and blacks. I have not, however, let those individuals' ignorance deter me from achieving my goals.

I earned my college degree while I was on Active Duty through the University of Maryland. I used to be an EMT and a Radiology Technician for 10 years before I became an Officer. I earned my degree while working anywhere from 220-250 hours a month. I also graduated with honors. I am currently a flight student and a Navy Officer. About the only thing that your last remark contained that had any sense of legitimacy was where you said, "Succeeding in the military is totally different then succeeding in college."

That's right, it is significantly more difficult to succeed in the military than it is to succeed in college. I can confirm this because I have gone through both systems. Anyone can earn a degree in college. Not everyone can succeed in the military. Why? Because each person has to work hard to advance. There are no free hand outs.

*cough*Affirmative Action*cough* *cough*scholarships for being a female or minority*cough*

Even if I did apply to the University of Michigan, and they declined me, you think that should stop me, or anyone for that matter, from pursuing a degree through a different college? Oh, woe is me! Michigan declined me. Well, so much for going and getting a degree since Michigan was the *ONLY* college I wanted to go to. You want to talk about diversity, how about some of these people pick their butts up and go to a different college that will accept them. They can't be turned down by every college. And, if they are, then you know the problem does not lie in the college but that it lies within the individual who is applying for admissions.

What I would love for you to do is to provide me with a link to the source that backups up where you say, "The military usually recruits people that graduate in the botton 25% of their class." You are dead wrong in your presumption. I know you aren't going to find a link, because your "fact" is completely untrue and is made up. Please, allow me to enlighten you.

http://www.defenselink.mil/prhome/poprep2000/html/summary/summary.htm

"Education Level. The Military Services value and support the education of their members. The emphasis on education was evident in the data for FY 2000. Practically all active duty and Selected Reserve enlisted accessions had a high school diploma or equivalent, well above civilian youth proportions (79 percent of 18-24 year-olds). More important, excluding accessions enlisting in the Army or Army Reserve under the GED+ program (an experimental program of individuals with a GED or no credential who have met special screening criteria for enlisting), 93 percent of NPS active duty and 90 percent of NPS Selected Reserve enlisted recruits were high school diploma graduates.

Given that most officers are required to possess at least a baccalaureate college degree upon or soon after commissioning and that colleges and universities are among the Services’ main commissioning sources (i.e., Service academies and ROTC), the academic standing of officers is not surprising. The fact that 96 percent of active duty officer accessions and 97 percent of the officer corps (both excluding those with unknown education credentials) were degree holders (approximately 16 and 44 percent advanced degrees) is in keeping with policy and the professional status and expectations of officers. Likewise, 86 percent of Reserve Component officer accessions and 88 percent of the total Reserve Component officer corps held at least a bachelor’s degree, with 24 and 30 percent possessing advanced degrees, respectively.

Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT) Scores. Enlisted members tend to have higher cognitive aptitude than the civilian youth population, as measured by scores on the military’s enlistment test. Persons who score in Categories I and II (65th to 99th percentiles) tend to be above average in trainability; those in Category III (31st to 64th percentiles), average; those in Category IV (10th to 30th percentiles), below average; and those in Category V (1st to 9th percentiles), markedly below average. The percentage of recruits in Categories I to II (32 percent) was slightly lower than for their civilian counterparts (35 percent). Category III accessions (68 percent) greatly exceeded—in fact, were double the proportion of—the civilian group (34 percent), while the percentage of recruits in Category IV (1 percent) was much lower than in the civilian population (21 percent). No enlistees were in Category V, whereas 10 percent of the civilian population scored in this category."

Odd, isn't it, that the military's Enlisted group has roughly 90% of its members holding a high school diploma while roughly 80% of civilians do? Oh, before I forget, you can learn about that here -

http://www.onbasemarketing.com/demographics.html

You'll find that under the section that states, "In the civilian community, 82.8% (as of 1998) had at least a high school diploma. By contrast, 91.5% (of military Enlisted) (as of 1999) had at least a high school diploma/GED or higher degree."

This statement here that you made, "Also standardized tests are racially, culturally, and generally bias," sounds more like a poor excuse for doing poorly on tests. Let me guess, the questions on all of these standardization tests are written with only John Smith in mind. Is that what you perceive?

I'm sorry, I thought they taught everyone who was willing to read and write how to do so properly. That last I heard, mathematics in school was still about adding 1s and 2s together. The last I heard was that Ebonics, slang, and street language were not included in the curriculum at most schools. Apparently these standardized tests only have questions that address John Smith in proper English, and not Pedro Gonzalez or Latisha Washington in slang where they can more appropriately understand what is being asked of them. Perhaps the tests should be written in Ebonics or slang. Maybe minorities would do better and the standard by which we judge education can be lowered even lower than it is already.

Do you realize who stupid that sounds? If students cannot read or write in proper English, what does that tell us? It tells us one of two things: 1) The school they go to is failing them or 2) they do not have the desire to learn what they are being taught. The test writers are not to blame. The only two people who can be to blame are 1) The test taker or 2) the school that does not properly instruct him or her.

You ask, "How do you think it feels to live away from home in a predominantly white area when you're not white?"

Well, geez, after living 5 years of my life overseas in two different countries where English was not commonly heard, I'd say I know *exactly* how it feels to be a minority, and not just by color. Thanks for asking. By the way, how many foreign countries have you lived in where you could not communicate with anyone in the country unless you learned their language?

You go on to say, "Being a minority we bring something with us that whites would bring to a African, Asian, South American, and Pacific Island dominant setting."

Wow. And all this time, all of those foreign countries that kick our collective American asses in education are doing it wrong.

Where is America in any given subject in academics? Roughly #12? If only we had more ethnic minorities in our educational systems, we could crack the top 10!

You know, those other cultures should really look at implementing more white Americans into their educational system because cultural diversity, according to you, adds so much more to the educational experience for all involved. Those Japanese people have it all wrong, apparently, for only teaching Japanese. Where are all of the white Americans in their system? Surely they should have white Americans in their system in order to make everything better.

Let me tell you something. When I went to college, I was not there to learn how Roger survived on the streets by selling drugs, how Jose knocked up five different girls in the same month and now has five kids on the way, or how Sharlene was raped by her old brothers from age 5 until she left the house at 14. What I did go to college for was to learn the material that the instructors presented to me. If a discussion or debate was brought up then it had to do with the material, not the skin color of the individual sitting next to me.

The one thing that never ceases to amaze me here in America is the overwhelming amount of cried made by those of color that they should be forced into the system via Affirmation Discrimination when people of their own cultural background do just fine back home in their native countries with no white Americans around. Could it be because those other people are not focused on race for their shortcomings and failure to take responsibility for their own actions and study behaviors? I think so.

There are colleges that not everyone can get in to. Forcing those colleges to be more diverse is not good. There are all black schools. Do you think that those blacks that attend all-black schools would want 75% of the student body to be white since that is roughly the percentage that whites make up of the American population? Of course not! Blacks go to all-black school because they want to be around their own kind...around people they are comfortable with. Forcing people of different cultures and ethnic backgrounds upon others can be like throwing a handful of cats in a dog pound. Sure, they all might eventually get along down the road, but neither group wants to be forced into something that they don't want to do by choice.

Forced integration takes away choice in addition to taking away someone's potential admissions to a lesser qualified individual. Is that fair? Would you be willing to suck it up that someone with a full GPA point lower than you and SAT scores 400 points under yours go into the college you applied to? Would you be ok with the fact that someone who got in based on skin color could not even make the minimum scores that you had to make in order to get in to that school?

Congratulations! You just got beat out by a lesser qualifies person, in the name of skin color! You must be very proud. I don't know about you, but that pisses a lot of other people off, especially when they find out that people are being accepted who possess scores and attributes that do not measure up to the minimums that a white male has to measure up to.

And people wonder why there is still racism in this country. It is right there in front of your face because it is forced in our faces. Affirmative Action is preferential treatment based on race. What is the definition of racism? That’s right, preferential treatment based on race. Until we do away with such programs, racism will never have a fair shot of being wiped away. It cannot begin unless we legally start removing all race-based programs. A level playing field must be made. Once the field is level, then people can start playing on it in the manner by which they should...where nobody has advantage based on skin color.

 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 09:57 AM on May 5, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Sorry so long in responding but I was finishing finals.
You wanted a list of the military recruits here you go:
http://dod.mil/prhome/poprep2000/assets/pdf/chapters2000.pdf
This is the actual military report for the fiscal year 2000. It is not bias and very objective.  Here is an excerpt that shows you what the military attracts:

A booming economy, with full employment, increasing college enrollment rates, not to mention attitudes on the part of youth that may not be in sync with military enlistment, present challenges to recruiting today’s youth for tomorrow’s military. Recruit marketing, amid the multiple options available to the next generation, must not only reach youth, but inspire the volunteer spirit among them, men and women, majority and minority members alike. Recruiting challenges of recent years have led the Services to consider alternative venues for marketing the military, including, but not limited to the internet, auto racing, as well as other professional sporting events. Current recruiting initiatives aimed at addressing the various choices youth have as they enter the workforce are being devised to target those bound for two- and four-year college programs, college dropouts and stopouts, promising high school dropouts, and Hispanic youth.”

The article goes on to show you how the military doesn’t get the best students. That the military is usually considered by people that have lower college bound propensity. The fact that you’re comparing the military with the total population is really poor logic. The comparison should be made with college bound students who would be suffering from affirmative action. Compared to 18 year old entering college freshmen have 98.8% diploma and GEDs. Almost all the GEDs were from home schooled children. The fact that the military has so many GEDs should tell you what kind of students the military attracts but if you couldn’t figure it that out then go to the link or simply read the excerpt above. Also the military average age of degree holder is 26 years old. That is 3yrs older than the average civilian age of 23. That is besides the fact. The whole fact that you made it doesn’t mean that affirmative action isn’t necessary.  I know anyone can make it. Anyone regardless of the circumstances they find themselves. Everyone here can be anything they want. I know that. The problem is why should we as minorities struggle more on a continued basis to get to where we would have been if we weren’t wronged in the past?
The whole fact is you don’t even know if you made it to where you are without affirmative action. Just because you marked “white/ Caucasian” doesn’t mean that the military didn’t see your Hispanic name and dark skin and promoted you.
Spurred by the lessons of the 1960s and 1970s, the armed forces have been steadily integrating the officer corps since the end of the Vietnam conflict.  Today, minorities make up roughly 19% of all officers including 8.8% African American, 4% Hispanic American, 3.2% Asian American, and 0.6% Native American.  Nevertheless, the gap in representation among enlisted men and women and officers remains a source of concern.  Accordingly, the armed forces expend enormous effort and resources to identify, attract and train the best qualified minority candidates to serve as officers.  These efforts include race-conscious recruiting, preparatory, and admissions policies at the service academies and in ROTC programs.

http://www.umich.edu/~urel/admissions/statements/amici/Military-summary.doc

That is a brief filed by the military in support of the University of Michigan’s Affirmatives Action race based policies. I know that is a negative against affirmative action. That minorities will never know if they got where they are because they earned it or because they were given it based on race. That is understandable and unfortunately that is a problem with this type of program. The bottom line is this program is not perfect but it is better than no system at all. There are more benefits than harm. How can you expect a perfect program in an imperfect world?
Now you’re facts are so misconstrued that I don’t even know how you even are posting up this information. The civilian population is not the issue because the people that go to these first tier Universities is what we’re comparing not dropouts and everyone else that in the world. The military you can see by the facts has a hard time recruiting the top students that are college bound. I’m not against the military. I’m actually in negotiations to join the ROTC so that in 2 years when I finish law school I will join the JAG.
Standardized testing is so bias and you’re reasoning is so off. I don’t know how you thought that it was even close to being an argument. The fact is there are millions of studies proving testing biases of standardized tests.  Just look it up in google or proquest or whatever. There are thousands of studies explaining the biases. For example in 1976, Educational Testing Service (ETS) Researcher Carol Dwyer gave evidence for the fact that a test's content can be gender-biased. Questions pertaining to subjects to which males are socialized to pay attention (politics, business, and sports) is prominently appear in standardized tests.
Furthermore, many psychologists and other researchers have determined that the format of the test (multiple-choice, speed-based, encouraging of risk-taking) is also biased against females, who are socialized to solve problems differently than males. Also many times questions deal with cultural based material such as investing. Investing is most often encouraged by European American culture. Other cultures are more apt at distributing wealth among families and ideas of the perplexities of investing are not contemplated as often. Students also do better with questions in which they relate to, or can visualize. If you use questions in which the student has not experienced or contemplated often you get worse scores such as : baseball (avg fan 35yr white male), investing analysis ( 73% of investors are white), or traditional family ( most minorities live in an extended family). All these together are factors in why white males do better overall than any other group, females and minorities. The only group that consistently compares and even surpasses are Asians. It is the belief of the studies that Asians do so well because they’re math and science scores are superior. Also researchers know that when you learn English as a second language then you are better grammatically than native speakers. You’d know that if you spoke more than one language. I speak four and I speak better grammatically than most native speakers of those languages.
The reasons for the test-score gap are numerous and interconnected, including different levels among white and black students of parental education level, quality of school systems, treatment and expectation levels from society and the educational system, and socioeconomic status.
Your remarks about this issue of standardized testing show your level of exposure. Obviously you do not investigate before speaking. Your post is proof of your ignorance. Next time I suggest researching about a topic so that I don’t have to waste time debating about a subject that is not the issue of this forum. Sites to help you about standardized testing:
http://www.fairtest.org/arn/caseagainst.html
http://www.pathsoflearning.net/library/testing2000.cfm
usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/crights/links.htm
Your quote: “Even if I did apply to the University of Michigan, and they declined me, you think that should stop me, or anyone for that matter, from pursuing a degree through a different college?”  is exactly on point. Allan Bakke v California School system is exactly my point. Allan Bakke if you didn’t know is the person who basically ended quotas for minorities. This case is on point because Allan Bakke was never accepted into any medical for two years. He sued claiming that he didn’t get in only because he was “white”. The reality is most people that sue weren’t the next ones in line for the spot the minority took. So if you believe in your quote then why all the controversy of affirmative action? If the student was really a good student even if he was rejected because of affirmative action he would still get into another school. Michigan estimates that only 30% of minority applicants benefit enough from the current system to be admitted in which their point total would have fallen below acceptance. This is in contrast to 1.2% of all applicants are affected by Michigan’s policy. All 12,000 applicants believe that they were rejected because they were white when Michigan only accepted less than 300 minorities under their policy.  If those 300 were good enough to get into Michigan then they would be good enough to get into another school right? So why complain about the current policy? You said, “how about some of these people pick their butts up and go to a different college that will accept them. They can't be turned down by every college. And, if they are, then you know the problem does not lie in the college but that it lies within the individual who is applying for admissions.” So why don’t those 300 non-minority applicants that were rejected go find another school? You said it yourself. They can’t be rejected by every school? They will find that if they are borderline Michigan then they will be in the 75% percentile at Michigan State.
I guess though I’m asking this because I’ve been living in other countries for part of my life. I need to be enlightened because I don’t always speak English because I’ve learned four languages from living abroad. Yeah I don’t really know how it feels to live in a country that people speak a language that I don’t understand because I usually did or at last learned real quick. Once you learn a second language it’s much easier to continue to learn others. Wherever you it’s always an adjustment especially when you live in an area dominated by one race into another that isn’t the same racial make-up; sorry I forgot your Hispanic so you know that already.  Just so you know, you might be Hispanic but all my boys here say you’re not. I’m not Hispanic but did live in Mexico for a few years and learned Spanish. It was a real adjustment and even harder at school because it took me time to adjust to life in a foreign country.
Comparing us to foreign schools is even stupider. Our new governmental philosophy is “no child left behind”. How many other countries practice that? How many countries require that every child be educated until 18? Not too many. Also other schools focus more on the fact that they begin specialized studies around 14-16 yrs old with little opportunity to change. Your comparison is flawed because it compares two non-similar educational systems.
Also your comment, “When I went to college, I was not there to learn how Roger survived on the streets by selling drugs, how Jose knocked up five different girls in the same month and now has five kids on the way, or how Sharlene was raped by her old brothers from age 5 until she left the house at 14. What I did go to college for was to learn the material that the instructors presented to me. If a discussion or debate was brought up then it had to do with the material, not the skin color of the individual sitting next to me”.
What college did you go to? Professors always try to bring up debates from different view points. Different experiences bring different perspective. If everyone was raised the same, had the same opportunities, and had the same race how much diversity in thought is there? Like the letter filed from the Association of University Presidents said in support of affirmative action “We go to college to see differences not similarities”. Sorry I forgot that your school wasn’t the same because when you went to school where your university president had a minority opinion thinking  all of you should see the same on the subject and therefore you don’t understand that point.
This post is so long because I really have to explain every little thing about your logic. Please go to these website: http://www.umich.edu/~urel/admissions/statements/liu.html
http://www.godofthemachine.com/archives/000301.html
and read a little before we go on debating this topic. First off saying “when people of their own cultural background do just fine back home in their native countries with no white Americans around. Could it be because those other people are not focused on race for their shortcomings and failure to take responsibility for their own actions and study behaviors?” is in support of affirmative action because countries that have multicultural society the natives usually don’t do as well. Look at South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand. Who does better? There it’s certainly not the native people that were displaced by European rule. Of course countries that are having little diversity would not encounter problems of past discrimination, bias standardized testing, and current discrimination. The problems affirmative action addresses are problems facing multicultural societies.  
The comment you made, “Forced integration takes away choice in addition to taking away someone's potential admissions to a lesser qualified individual. Is that fair? Would you be willing to suck it up that someone with a full GPA point lower than you and SAT scores 400 points under yours go into the college you applied to? Would you be ok with the fact that someone who got in based on skin color could not even make the minimum scores that you had to make in order to get in to that school” is totally racist. If you knew anything you’d know that affirmative action only affects borderline scores. You will be admitted regardless of race if you are a good student and will be rejected regardless of race if you are a bad student. If someone that is benefiting from the injustices of the past can’t make the grades to receive automatic acceptance compared to someone that is making the most of his poor inadequate circumstances and falling a little short can almost do as well… who do you think deserves acceptance?
The fact is there is not a level playing field for minorities. We’re expected to compete at a same level when we have so much more adversity to overcome. The field is tilted towards Americans that have do not suffer from discrimination past or present. It favors people that have parents that are second, third, or fourth generation college students. No one ever complained about the system that allowed Alumni children to be admitted over better qualified minority applicants. Now the system is reversed and everyone wants that to stop. Why? Because when it hurts you, you care and when it helps you, you don’t. Affirmative action is about rectifying inequality. No one can reasonably say that the playing field is equal for everyone. Everyone can make it in this country but why should some have to continue to work harder for the same benefit? That is what affirmative action is all about.

Note: The way you talk in your post and refer to white males and minorities is very convincing that you aren’t Hispanic or a minority. Todos modos no necesitamos hablar de eso. Estamos hablando sobre accion affirmado.




 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 3:25 PM on May 20, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Even though AA is clearly unfair, I probably would support it more if it actually worked.  But as it is now, I have yet to experience or see living proof of a situation where someone actually benefitted from AA.

The primary excuse for AA today is slavery and segragation.  There is not a single person alive in the US today that lived during the age when slavery was legal.  No black person out there who is alive today ever had to live as a slave in the United States, and if there is, they're probably too old to benefit from affirmative action anyways.  Their ancestors 140 years ago may have suffered from slavery but is there anyone today who can say they were enslaved in a system that allowed it?  Even Irish immigrant ancestors suffered from discrimination in the 19th century, should they qualify for AA too?  Even if this excuse was valid, how does AA make up for years of crimes to humanity?  How does reparations?  To those that are dead, it won't.  

The fact of the matter is AA is just an excuse for people to get a free hand-out.  What is it that convinces minorities that they're not good enough to compete with non-minorities in a fair-game setting?

And what's with this bs about not having access to a better educational system?  I agree that some live in a better school zone than others, but hasn't anyone ever heard of a library?  Or a community college?  I thought this was the United States, a country that has knowledge and plenty of resources everywhere you look.  Knowledge is earned, not given.  If you seek knowledge and education, are willing to learn, then the colour of your skin will not obstruct your ability to get a good one.

I might support affirmative action if it could be proven that it works.  But I have seen time and time again both in college and on the job that it clearly doesn't.  If you're motivated and you are capable of doing the job, it doesn't matter what color your skin is.  I've done plenty of interviews as part of my job, and so far I have interviewed very few minority candidates.  Those few that I have almost always get the job whether they are qualified or not.  During interviews I am asked to give bonus points to "those of different ethnicities as a promotional factor for diversity in the workplace".  I have interviewed both qualified and unqualified minority candidates, and 98% the time they get the job no matter what because AA is part of our policty.  Those that are qualified would have in my professional opinion gotten the job anyway, and did not need AA to work for them.  And those that didn't, well, I could clearly see that they would have been just as unmotivated and unproductive with or without AA.  Its sad because I know that I have also interviewed qualified non-minorities whom I have had to turn down simply because their skills or experience were not up to par with other non-minorities, and have instead been forced to stick a less-qualified minority in their place.  I smile when I hire a motivated personality minor, but I can also see that their motivation and attitude have gotten them to where they are, not AA.    

I hired one black woman who was so incredibly brilliant and motivated, put herself through school, and she ended up becoming one of my bosses (partly becuase of AA though I thought she truly deserved the promotion anyway).  I hired a young hispanic man who never showed up to work, and if he did it was never on time, and all in all was never reliable to do anything, and wasn't even the more qualified candidate for the position in the first place (two other white candidates I interviewed had a masters degree, this guy didn't).  

Even if affirmative action actually worked, why can't it encompass disadvantaged white people as well as minorities?  Are we just assuming that they don't exist?  That they're aren't white people out there who have lived a life of poverty, and live in a poor educational zone?  Also, are all minorities living in a disadvantaged situation?  Are there not wealthy black people out there too?

Affirmative action didn't, doesn't, and will never work.  Nobody benefits from it, not even those who are supposed to in the first place.  Nothing is free or handed out.  Everything has to be earned, regardless of what your economic or racial situation is.  There will always be discrimination on every spectra, and it's not based on race alone.  Theres prejudice on religions, overweight issues, personal beliefs, too.  No more excuses, you only deserve what you earn.

 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 8:28 PM on June 23, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Re:  Manaia

Excuses, excuses.

Although I can definately see your point.  Nobody is arguing that racism and prejudice still exists.  Nobody is denying the value of diversity.  It probably is difficult for someone of a different ethnicity to attend a predominently white school.  

But I ask you is AA the only feasible way to achieve diversity?  And I would also like to ask personally if you think that prejudice only exists on a racial plane?  If so, then you need to be aware that there are all kinds of prejudices out there, and that it is not simply based on your race.  I am blonde, and often people assume that I don't have any brains becuase that's a stereotype for blonde women.  My mother is overweight and is often discriminated for being overweight, though she is on a diet and exercise program to manage it.  She has been turned down for jobs because people are afraid she will intimidate others.  Silly, right?  But wrong too.

I can agree with you in that I think that standardized tests, at least the verbal part, are culturally biased.  But there are plenty of resources out there for all of us to research and prepare for these tests.  The fact that they may be bias is no excuse for not doing well on them with all the information that is out there for everyone to prepare for them.

There are statistically more minorities who live in a lower economic situation than non-minorities.  But since when is it ok to assume that this applies to everyone?  Are you trying to tell me that all minorities qualify for AA becuase all minorities come from a less priveledged backround?  Or that there are no non-minorities that have a comparable economic situation?

We all have barriers and obstacles to overcome, regardless of our race or economic situation.  Life isn't fair, but AA won't make it any fairer.  Its our own responsibility and decision to overcome them.  Please, stop using ethinicity as an excuse.

By the way, recent Guest, there is nothing that indicates to me that you know for a fact whether that guy was a hispanic or not.  The fact that he doesn't concur with your views on AA doesn't determine his ethnicity, nor does it hold any bearing to just "how white" he is.

So will both of you please read what you have just said, repeat it, and see if it actually makes sense?  
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 9:02 PM on June 23, 2003 | IP
jared00004

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

This is the biggest copy of my room i've seen yet.


-------
Jared
 


Posts: 31 | Posted: 9:13 PM on June 23, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

AA doesn't even promote diversity in colleges at all.  I go to a college that is extremely diverse as far as racial and ethnic backrounds.  I have three asian friends, two black friends, and four hispanic friends.  These girls and I have looked beyond each others race and ethnic backround.  Yet these nine girls have been constantly harassed and ridiculed by the ethnic student associations for socializing and associating themselves with those of other ethnicities.  

It is my belief that these girls could have gotten into college regardless of the color of their skin.  They had good grades, three of them were valedictorians of their high school class, excellent SAT scores and were highly involved in their communities.  They are trying to promote diversity by blending in with a melting pot culture, taking risks and socializing with those of other ethnic groups, just to expand their horizons a little and look beyond color to see the real people inside.  They don't use AA to do that for them, they just have to be themselves and have a positive, outgoing, and openminded attitude.

They've been sent threatening notes because of the fact that they associate with those of different races.  They've been called everything from "whitey-lover", to "n*** lover", "traitor", "chunky chink" and the like by the local ethnic student association members.  I will not say which ones because I don't want to offend anyone, I personally believe its not so much the associations and what they represent but the individuals who are involved in them.  I also believe that every college campus chapter is different.  If AA was not just based on race alone, there wouldn't be a need for ethnic student associations in the first place because people would have to just learn to get along without it and form a community of a blend of different ethnicities.  

AA doesn't even promote diversity, if anything, it just creates more separation between ethnicities with the formation of student racial associations.  I always thought that was the goal of AA, to prevent that from happening, so until now I was a big believer in it.  Now I see that not only is it unfair, unbeneficial to anyone, but it doesn't even accomplish what it was set out to do in the first place.

It is probably difficult for people to learn to assimilate with those of different ethnicities when they first go to college.  But college wouldn't be a learning experience if nobody had to adjust.  Non-minorities have to learn to make adjustments too.  Everyone does, you have to learn to be more responsible, live with a roommate, be considerate of each other, learn to live on your own, and take care of yourself.  You have to learn these skills in order to prepare for the real world, and if you can't learn to assimilate and work with people of different cultures and backrounds, then when is the time to learn?  In the workplace, you'll have to work with all kinds of people, and since you're being paid you also have to learn to get along.  College is the time to learn that.  Teamwork the most important skill to learn before entering the real-world, and it applies to everyone of all races.

In the real world, black people don't just work with black people, hispanic people don't just work with hispanic people, and white people don't just work with white people.  Until people learn to suck it up and get along we will never move forward and make any progress.  Companies don't care what color your skin is, they care about what you are going to deliver and contribute as part of your job, they care about whether they think you will be able to get along with people in the work place.  If you stick to this narrow-minded view of well none of these people are like me or I'm the only black person here or whatever, then that should indicate to you that you're not prepared for the real world.  

Those of you support AA and are minorities have been saying that non-minorities don't know what its like to be discriminated against for the color of their skin.  I don't think you understand what its like to be turned down for a job or for college because you couldn't compete with the other white people, only to find that someone else got it regardless of their qualifications based only on their ethnicity.  There are discrimination, prejudice, and stereotypes that exist and are not racial.  There are also people out there who will look beyond your race and see you for who you really are.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 6:49 PM on June 24, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

“AA doesn't even promote diversity in colleges at all.  I go to a college that is extremely diverse as far as racial and ethnic backrounds.  I have three asian friends, two black friends, and four hispanic friends.  These girls and I have looked beyond each others race and ethnic backround.  Yet these nine girls have been constantly harassed and ridiculed by the ethnic student associations for socializing and associating themselves with those of other ethnicities.”  


Wow, there you go how little you are exposed. I’m a minority (not black or Hispanic) and my parents lived part of my life in white neighborhoods and currently do. I go back there every summer. My sisters and cousins live in white neighbor hoods. I attended four different colleges and never has that behavior ever been seen. If it has then it’s definitely the exception not the norm. Proof that you know nothing about diversity and it’s success. The fact that you go to school with them is proof that affirmative consideration works.

It is my belief that these girls could have gotten into college regardless of the color of their skin.  They had good grades, three of them were valedictorians of their high school class, excellent SAT scores and were highly involved in their communities.  They are trying to promote diversity by blending in with a melting pot culture, taking risks and socializing with those of other ethnic groups, just to expand their horizons a little and look beyond color to see the real people inside.  They don't use AA to do that for them, they just have to be themselves and have a positive, outgoing, and openminded attitude.“


Obviously you don’t anything about affirmative consideration because these girls got in without affirmative consideration. You’re analysis proves it. I don’t know why you talk when you have no clue how it works,”

They've been sent threatening notes because of the fact that they associate with those of different races.  They've been called everything from "whitey-lover", to "n*** lover", "traitor", "chunky chink" and the like by the local ethnic student association members.  I will not say which ones because I don't want to offend anyone, I personally believe its not so much the associations and what they represent but the individuals who are involved in them.  I also believe that every college campus chapter is different.  If AA was not just based on race alone, there wouldn't be a need for ethnic student associations in the first place because people would have to just learn to get along without it and form a community of a blend of different ethnicities.

I go to the University of Hawai’I and it’s the most diverse school in the country ( referring in terms of the amount and races represented). The school has about a 25% enrollment of non-minorities and that never happens. Also when minorities insult other minorities for being “too white” we use different terminology. WE never insult them for their association, we simply feel they betray their culture. So the fact that you used those terminologies I know for a fact that you are LYING. Good try though and don’t say that you’re not because you and I and every minority knows that you are. It’s obvious that YOU made up those names. Those terms are terms that someone tries to create to foster that illusion but no where near real names. The fact that we are minorities and dominated by white culture we organize these clubs to help preserve our culture and interests. Something that our government and most schools can’t do.

AA doesn't even promote diversity, if anything, it just creates more separation between ethnicities with the formation of student racial associations.  I always thought that was the goal of AA, to prevent that from happening, so until now I was a big believer in it.  Now I see that not only is it unfair, unbeneficial to anyone, but it doesn't even accomplish what it was set out to do in the first place.

You have no facts to support that. First off affirmative consideration is meant to diversify and balance the playing field. It has done that evidenced by the rise of minorities in higher education and profession. IT has increased enrollment in many schools because it was meant to help diversify, accelerate minority opportunity, and balance the playing field. Since there are up to 15% more applicants getting accepted because of affirmative consideration and undoubtedly more diversity and minorities in higher education because of it then it has already accomplished its goal.

“It is probably difficult for people to learn to assimilate with those of different ethnicities when they first go to college.  But college wouldn't be a learning experience if nobody had to adjust.  Non-minorities have to learn to make adjustments too.  Everyone does,… You have to learn these skills in order to prepare for the real world, and if you can't learn to assimilate and work with people of different cultures and backrounds, then when is the time to learn?  In the workplace, you'll have to work with all kinds of people, … College is the time to learn that.”

In the real world, black people don't just work with black people, hispanic people don't just work with hispanic people, and white people don't just work with white people.  Until people learn to suck it up and get along we will never move forward and make any progress.  Companies don't care what color your skin is, they care about what you are going to deliver and contribute as part of your job, … If you stick to this narrow-minded view of well none of these people are like me or I'm the only black person here or whatever, then that should indicate to you that you're not prepared for the real world.  

You’re quote I agree with completely. President Bollinger and the Association of University Presidents stated, “You go to college to see differences not similarities.”  How do you see differences if everyone is the same? Seeing that there are test biases, cultural indifferences, and inequities in higher education then that prevents diversity in admission on a standardized admission process. So to accomplish the goal of people working with other races there is a need for affirmative consideration. If you don’t allow for the “critical mass” in the school then how do you expect to see and learn to live with other people?

Those of you support AA and are minorities have been saying that non-minorities don't know what its like to be discriminated against for the color of their skin.  I don't think you understand what its like to be turned down for a job or for college because you couldn't compete with the other white people, only to find that someone else got it regardless of their qualifications based only on their ethnicity.  There are discrimination, prejudice, and stereotypes that exist and are not racial.  There are also people out there who will look beyond your race and see you for who you really are.

That’s the biggest myth about affirmative consideration. That minorities gain it ONLY because of their race. That is just not true. Race in affirmative consideration is ONLY a FACTOR. It isn’t anything more than that. If you’re a minority and you have poor test scores and a low GPA, affirmative consideration doesn’t help. If you score really well and have a good GPA then affirmative consideration doesn’t help you either. It ONLY helps if you’re borderline student. They factor it in like other factors such as alumni parents, community service, and extracurricular activities. So many people that get rejected from schools think that they ONLY got rejected because they weren’t a minority. That simply isn’t true. That fact is illustrated best by the recent University of Michigan law school case. Grutter believed that she was next in line for a spot in the upcoming law class. She was not. It was revealed during trial that she was far from next in line. There were more than 100 people that were indexed ahead of her. The school had admitted 75 students under their admission policy that had lesser indexes than her and only 35 were minorities. So even if those minorities were not accepted and those other 40 people had not been admitted she still would not have been accepted. Unfortunately everyone believes that they’re being denied because they’re not a minority when that is simply not true.

Mana'ia


 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 1:08 PM on August 29, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Manaia-
Its only a "factor" is it? Tell that to the people who have had a 3.8 GPA and got beat out by a student with a 3.5 GPA because of skin color. Thats a pretty big factor. And about the whole "none of you understand what it's like, so you can't talk" thing- I went to high school in Modesto, California and it was mostly hispanic. Whites were definitely minorities but did not receive any type of affirmative hand-out. And yes...much to the disbelief of many non-whites...there is a HUGE boat load of racism that gets thrown at whites everyday! Racism is dished out to all races. And also, can you answer me something? Why is it okay for non-whites to be pround of who they are and express that in public schools...but its considered horrific for whites to do the same??? Can you honestly tell me that there is no "racism" or "discrimination" in that???
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 3:46 PM on October 14, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I'd just like to give my two cents on the issue.  The fact of the matter is that Affirmative Action unfairly promotes minorities.

People say it's ok because it encourages "diversity".  And to them, that is a good thing to do.

Now, back in the day, people unfairly promoted white people.  Their justification was that white people are better than black people.  As stupid as it sounds, they truely believed it.

The problem here is morality.  People have different moral standards.  Just because you think something is in people's best interest doesnt mean you should make it law.  Like I said people back in the 60's truely thought that discriminatory practices were the right thing to do.

If minorities are ever to be looked at on an equal playing field, we must end discrimination of all kinds, "good" or "bad".
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 3:27 PM on October 17, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The plain and simple fact is, Affirmative Action is racist.  It, in action, consists of giving special treatment to people because of their skin color.  It doesn't matter what their ancestors might or might not have gone through.

I'll tell you what.  I will gladly give any job I have ever had, and any job I will ever get, to whatever slaves I have owned.  Or whatever people of any different color that I have brutalized, assaulted, or imprisoned based solely on the color of their skin.  But oh wait, I haven't done that.  So why should I lose my job so that a less-qualified person of color can get it?

I don't know where people get off thinking that diversity is a virtue.  I have no problem with diversity, I just won't unfairly deprive people in its aquisition.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 7:34 PM on November 16, 2003 | IP
Sol

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Guest at 7:34 PM on November 16, 2003 :
I don't know where people get off thinking that diversity is a virtue.  I have no problem with diversity, I just won't unfairly deprive people in its aquisition.


I agree.  Diversity isn't really good or bad.
 


Posts: 60 | Posted: 12:54 AM on March 8, 2005 | IP
Peter87

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Sol for future referance can you check the dates of posts ;) the last post before you on here was october 2003.


-------
Why should we bow to the will of anyone? Especialy a man who our country but another voted for?
 


Posts: 301 | Posted: 4:16 PM on March 8, 2005 | IP
Sol

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Right... sometimes I don't pay attention
 


Posts: 60 | Posted: 9:03 PM on March 9, 2005 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.