Statement of discrimination

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by MrFun


As long as affirmative action is meant to create equality and undo past discrimination, I will believe that affirmative action is justified.

So as long as the intentions are good then its ok to continue? If this is the attitude then AA will never end.

Unless you can find a way to convince all whites not to discriminate based on race and gender??

Whites arent the only ones who discriminate, but they are the only ones who are legally discriminated against.

I will toss out that flawed logic that you pointed out.

What flawed logic is that exactly?

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Caligastia

What flawed logic is that exactly?

The one that I used -- my mistake as you pointed out.


Read my latest post too.

[SpencerH]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Sorry MF, but I must disagree...

Originally posted by MrFun
Secondly, affirmative action may be a form of discrimination, but in this case, this type of discrimination is justified.

Actively searching out and recruiting qualified minorities is one thing, supporting less qualified minority candidates over whites will only perpetuate the seperation.

But then, you will counter with "two wrongs do not make a right."

In that case, we should never have attacked the Al-Queda in Afghanistan. Violence is a terrible thing -- so two wrongs do not make a right.
If two wrongs do not make a right, we should just let terrorists walk all over us -- but we are not doing that, thank God.

Attacking Al-Queda isnt about rights and wrongs. Its simply that after they're all dead, they wont be a direct threat to us anymore.

[Guynemer]

Well, the "New Caligastia" didn't last too long, did he?

About as long as New Coke...

[Caligastia]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Sorry MF, but I must disagree...

Originally posted by MrFun


First off, using a strawman argument is not always deliberate -- it can result from a mistake rather than deliberate distortion.
I never really said that you're lying -- but distorting the purpose of affirmative action.

Im not distorting anything, just quoting a "statement of nondiscrimination" from a university booklet. I havent even commented on the purpose of AA. All I said was that if they were honest in this booklet, the correct title would be "statement of discrimination" because they discriminate against white men.

Secondly, affirmative action may be a form of discrimination, but in this case, this type of discrimination is justified.

So you admit that you think racial discrimination is ok, as long as its against whites.

But then, you will counter with "two wrongs do not make a right."

In that case, we should never have attacked the Al-Queda in Afghanistan. Violence is a terrible thing -- so two wrongs do not make a right.
If two wrongs do not make a right, we should just let terrorists walk all over us -- but we are not doing that, thank God.

Getting slightly off the topic here dont you think?

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Guynemer
Well, the "New Caligastia" didn't last too long, did he?

What is your concept of the "New Caligastia"? A Caligastia that never wants to discuss controversial issues? Forget it. I never said I wouldnt discuss what I want. All I promised was to show more respect for others by not intentionally angering. My intention here is not to anger others, but to discuss. If what I want to discuss makes you angry, too bad. It wasnt my intention.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

I've always had a problem with the whole concept of "positive discrimination". While I don't doubt it's good intentions, I think it's short-sighted. It's like trying to put out a fire by dousing it in petrol.

[chequita guevara]

AA is not about reddressing past mistakes. It is about redressing current discrimination.

White males are not less likely to get into school as before. It is just that schools are making it easier for those who are targetted by instituional racism and gender bias to overcome those hurdles.

Numerous studies have shown that discrimination has a profound effect on testing abilities, with temproarily "discriminated" groups testing lower than normal and temporarily "in-power" groups testing higher than normal. If admissions standards are lowered for those who are discriminated against, it isn't making it any harder for those in the in-power group to get in.

I can understand there are those who think that government should be color blind. Maybe that's so, but at the same time, we should give up all the advantages we have for being straight white men.

[Caligastia]

Chegitz-
Why dont they just call it what it is? Discrimination against White Males. The part I quoted you should be titled "Statement of Discrimination".

I think the advantages for being straight white men are exaggerated. Just as the disadvantages of being black are exaggerated.

[chequita guevara]

Because it's not discrimination against white males. No obstacles are being placed in white males' pathes. White males are not being prevented from entering school or getting scholarships due to their race or gender.

I think the advantages for being straight white men are exaggerated. Just as the disadvantages of being black are exaggerated.

Yes, but you're also a clueless racist. Thinking otherwise would contradict your belief in the inherent superiority of whites.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Because it's not discrimination against white males. No obstacles are being placed in white males' pathes. White males are not being prevented from entering school or getting scholarships due to their race or gender.

So to include everyone but white males in the "protected class" does not discriminate against white males? What you are saying is that its ok to discriminate, as long as its against white males because it cant be discrimination if its against white males. And you call me racist.

Yes, but you're also a clueless racist. Thinking otherwise would contradict your belief in the inherent superiority of whites.

Give it a rest Che, you really have no clue about me. Accusations of racism get boring pretty fast...

[Arrian]

Che,

I see your point about the reasons behind AA (disadvantages for various minority groups), but like I said, I wish there was a better way to go about it. Further, just to nit-pick, if you have an institution such as a college which can accept 1000 students, and you deliberately boost the chances of certain applicants due to their race/religion/etc., you are discriminating against those that do not fall into such groups, as less of them will get in. In this case, white males.

-Arrian

[Dis]

It simply amuses me how Mr. Fun defends the most outrageous of actions.

Aren't these colleges supposed to prepare these kids for the real world? And in the real world employer's do not higher people based on race (well except maybe in Hollywood- it would be silly to hire a white actor to play a black role ). The real world does not have affirmative action neither should college.

And don't say this is some strawman argument Mr. Fun. I'm not some paranoid white man. I can take any discimination against my race. It doesn't bother me in the least bit. I know we have it good, and it doesn't bother me the least bit to help the other races out a bit.

But we should be preparing these kids for the real world. That is my argument against AA.

[chequita guevara]

So because the real world is racist, our colleges should be racist also?

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
So because the real world is racist, our colleges should be racist also?

Thats what you seem to be saying.