No, I think that disease argument is b.s. too. We have Tay-Sachs, maybe it's more prevalent, but I don't think that your race centers around diseases you are more susceptible to.

I must not be saying this properly because a lot of you aren't seeing this point the way I am. People attach stereotypes to certain races, let's start with that. Jews have big noses, Irish red hair, African-Americans have dark black skin, Asians have small squinty eyes, you see where I'm going with this? Now, those stereotypes are specifically linked to a race for that individual. Now, all I'm trying to say is when someone looks at you, they judge you as a certain race, whether you've checked it off on a box or not. That's the biological basis for race, what you see as the external features of a person.

Does that help at all?


RUgreek

Ok...I am understanding this post better than past ones. I think you are confusing a BIOLOGICAL FACT with someone else's PERCEPTION. Just because you see those physical facets and attribute them to a certain type of person doesn't mean that the trait is BIOLOGICAL. It simply means that you are guilty of generalization. BIOLOGY is specific scientific evidence, not what a laymen may use as classification.

I completely agree with this point - it's fallacious logic to think that one item determines a trend, or that a handful comprise a majority . . . and you can provide the statistics, but causation here is difficult to prove. Do you honestly think that it's the 'little box' culture that causes scholarship amounts to be lower, or is it more likely the long-term effects of repression of access to education for minorities. coupled with current attitudes against them? I'm just trying to think more of the root cause rather than the current symptom.

I don't like the 'little boxes' or what they represent, but there are many underlying causes here, not just the one.

Good point, but should we discern between "black" and other minority status? The reason I ask is that I attend a school where some minorities are over-represented - Asian/Pacific Islander and Indian/Middle Eastern are all represented higher than the national rate of population.

However, "black", or African-American, comprises less than 5% of enrollment, compared to 11% (if I recall correctly, probably a little higher at current census) nationwide. I certainly don't know what to attribute this to, that's really not my area of expertise - any thoughts? It seems to me that institutional racism seems 'different' depending on the particular 'race' (or background) being discriminated against . . .

This is a rational conclusion, and an important one for PM_Mama to understand (in my opinion) - this may make it easier for her to understand your points. Now, what do you think would limit this type of oppression? Would it be enough for 11% of all CEOs to consider themselves black, and for 11% of the TV personalities to be black?

Unfortunately, I don't think that just this would eliminate the problem - actually, I'd imagine this was (one of) the original (ideal) intents of the 'little boxes' . . . I think this thread has shown just how deep-rooted and difficult this sort of problem is, even when discussed by the (relative) intelligencia of our society (by which I merely mean 'college-educated').

Just a question-
would you feel competent if you got a job, and found out that the employer used affirmitve action quotas to hire?
A.A. helps minorities (depending on ethnicity and gender) and if I found out the only reason I got a job was because I had tits and didn't have a little man in between my legs, I would have to wonder about the companies intergrity. Not to mention that everyone there would know why I got it over John Doe White Man. I don't think that almost everyone at an office knows who applies for a job, their qualifications and thus the person hired for a position is always held to the other candidates by coworkers. So I don't thinK I could work some place like that.

Also, if someone that is a minority does not want to go to college, gets poor grades, doesn't try in school at all, and they get a full ride and goes to college for free does that help anyone? I thought scholarships were supposed to help people that wanted to further their education, not someone who is lazy and just wants a few free years of school. I don't think it is fair because there are people out there that work their butts off and they don't get a free ride. They may get a 4.0 but they have to have apart time job all through college to afford books or whatever. How is that fair?

I think PM_Mama00 makes some interesting points. Affirmative Action programs are a way to balance out the exsistence of discrimination towards a class. My professor got her job because of AA, and she's damn proud of it. The only "minority" she fits into is the fact she is a woman, nothing else. I know the process is very slow and it's not producing the african-american CEOs yet, but you can't have equality everywhere, it just doesn't work like that. Give it more time, you'll see better results, they are coming, don't worry.

As for AA being racism against caucasians, I really don't see what that means. Specifically, yes, white males will be at a disadvantage in a fight for a job that invokes AA, but the point of it is to eliminate racial segregation, caucasians will just have to deal with it until that happens.


RUgreek

Honestly, the only place where I see affirmative action practices (for both women and minorities) is at fast food restaurants and other sucky jobs. :rolleyes:

Someone's biological background or origin creates those physical attributes. If you did not have the dark skinned relative, then you would not have it yourself. Someone's perception is not based wrongly just because it is a generalization. If a person sees a physical characteristic only associated with a certain racial or ethnic group, a characteristic specifically found within that group, yea it's a cheap generalization, but it only exists in that person because it was passed to them biologically. You can't inherit this type of feature through any other means, except for being born with it.

Doesn't that mean that someone born with certain traits that they are part of a certain race as a biological fact? If something is real and exists, doesn't that make it a fact?


RUgreek

Misconception Nbr 1:

Minority based sholarships are not just HANDED OUT or FORCED upon someone or any one minority. Those recipients have either met or exceeded the qualifications just as the other applicants have. Those individuals have probably worked just as hard and long as anyone else. Once again, you are talking about one scholarship out of how many???????? Why is there a belief that those applicants that accept this scholarships are lazy, dumb bums picked up off the streets?? :confused:

Misconception Nbr 2:

So I guess there are no companies that have glass ceilings for minorities :rolleyes: ? Just because someone is a minority in a high position DOES NOT mean that it the only reason why they have that position. Nevermind the fact that this person has EXCELLENT credentials, come with EXCELLENT references or they are usually the one to stay late and arrive early. They obvisouly must be some lazy bum off the streets hired to fill a quota...YEAH RIGHT!

Maybe instead of criticizing the employee, how about asking the company why DID IT TAKE FEDERAL LEGISLATION FOR THEM TO HIRE SOMEONE THAT WAS A MINORITY?

Wow...
 

Can someone please inform ME as to which college actually fills out the form for a person who doesn't want to go to college without their consent and signature, gives them a full scholarship with their 1.93 gpa, escorts the person to the campus while stopping at Walmart for supplies and the bookstore for books and chauffeurs them to class?

For whom are these stereotypes linked to that individual? Just because a lot of people have a perception in their mind of certain people, does NOT mean they are right. The majority of the world has a skewed conception on a lot of things because of their lack of education...not because there is a biological basis for race.

There are black, asian, hispanic Jews. Within whites, or caucasians, there are even more categories that are lumped together...all in a social manner because someone lumped them together.

Even scientifically you make no sense...how can there be a phenotype without a genotype?? Within the category of caucasian, anglo-saxon and middle eastern are included. You claim that there are physical indicators (common traits associated with them) for race which make it biological, but that breaks down here. A person from the middle east will be darker and than someone who is anglo-saxon in many cases...even darker than someone who is latino possibly. Yet middle easterners and anglos are dumped into a broad category called white. Even the government has been having a great deal of trouble using "race" in the census...kinda hard to distinguish blacks who are hispanic for one example.

- Rudey
-- The elevator has gone up

[/B]How many minorities do you know that have a 1.0 GPA, have a household income of $100,000, go to class once a month, and have a FULL SCHOLARSHIP?


Perhaps you would care to do some surfing on the net for links about affirmative action.I think it would benefit greatly.

Negative Action
 

Once again, don't assume everyone thinks that hired minorities are lazy bums to everyone else. But know that they came in the easier way that was not open to someone who was not a minority.

My problem with affirmative action is this. The claim that people who are minorities deal with poverty and it is harder for them to get into college, is wrong to me. Immigrants to this country often have to deal with even poorer conditions but if they don't fit into the minority, well screw them. Also, the concept of using racial categories comes in again. There are groups within whites who are underrepresented, yet because they've been clumped together in the category of "white", they are considered part of the majority.

I would rather have it that a school or job looks at the obstacles that you've overcome. If you're from the boondocks and walked 4 hours to school every day and had no money, then I think you should get a lot more consideration. But what's the point of taking a black person who has a high income all because they are black? Then it becomes an issue of diversity. The school wants to provide the students with some interaction that allows that homogeneity to go away. But even this isn't accomplished. Seriously when you get to a lot of campuses, you see the different crowds because the saying birds of a feather, flock together still holds. Then the reason for affirmative action might be based on the birds of a feather saying. If you are a minority, you feel uncomfortable. There are no if's and but's about that. So perhaps seeing that there are a lot of people like you on a campus will attract you to that campus.

- Rudey
-- I have a craving for cotton candy, not grits

Okay, if you had read my entire post and not taken what I said out of context you would understand that what I was saying was
#1 would you want to be hired because you were a minority and for not other reason?
and #2- yes there are scholarships available to people that are minorities for no reason other than that. At WKU there is an application for minority students only (not females, ethnicity only) and the minimum gpa required is a 2.0 or a 20 on an ACT to get a scholarship, where as the application for anyone caucasian requires a 3.0 or above and minimum ACT of 28. My roommate working in the admissions office and told me almost on a daily basis that there were people with full ride scholarships that had 1.9 GPAs or whatever and had a 20 on the ACT and got full rides because they were a minority. Now.. this is ONE university, a whole university, btw.

As for the glass ceiling I never said anything about that. There is a glass ceiling in almost every company where women and minorities are stuck at.

AND I do believe that I said someone that wanted to take a few free years in school that was lazy- not just everyone. I know of minorities that have received scholarships because they were outstanding students, and no other reason. I think I would be much more proud of myself if I was held to the standards (SEE ABOVE IF YU DONT UNDERSTAND) than if I got a scholarship because I was a minority. But maybe I just hold myself to that standard.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I totally disagree with this. The fact that you used "probably" in your sentence indicates you don't fully believe it either.

Rudey, do not put words into my mouth. My sentence of "Those individuals PROBABLY worked just as hards and as long as anyone else" was in regards to work ethic. Some people have to struglle for good grades, some don't


Does the number one change the meaning somehow? Does one person who was killed for a stupid cause make them nothing to look at? And the fact is that it's not just one. I don't make a claim that you can be an idiot and get into Harvard if you're simply black, but I can easily say that if you're black it will help you get in...meaning that if your stats are less than others who are not in the minority, you can still get in.

Again Rudey, as Librasoul22 has stated and which was the intent of my statement, please look at things GLOBABLY and not just one incident (in regards to PM Mama's post)



Nobody claims they are lazy or dumb, but everyone knows that the standards are lower if you're not in the "majority". I remember reading somewhere that there are whites who can get into black colleges easier lately. They may not be worth any less than the blacks, but certainly their stats can be lower and the school's adcomm will look the other way when they wouldn't for someone in the majority.

Did she or did she not just the word LAZY (Ilovemyglo) in her post?? I was addressing it to her statement. Additionally please provide me with some info in regards to HBCU's LOWERING their standards to admit white students. i attended an HBCU (with about 40% of non-african americans) and I really don't believe your statement has much basis to it.


Once again, don't assume everyone thinks that hired minorities are lazy bums to everyone else. But know that they came in the easier way that was not open to someone who was not a minority.

Rudey, why are you telling people (and I quote ) " don't assume everyone thinks that hired minorities are lazy bums to everyone else. But know that they came in the easier way that was not open to someone who was not a minority. " HUH??? Aren't you doing the same thing within one statement? You just told me to not assume that minorities that are not lazy, but its ok to ASSume that they came into the easier way???

How does anyone know HOW they came in? Just because they are a minority?

AA (in academia) was not created because some colleges were harder to get into. It was created because they are institutions of higher learning that would not admit a minority in REGARDLESS!!!!!! (of GPA, community service, academic achievements). It was not based on FINANCIAL NEED,


And Ilovemyglo, your post was read loud and clear and understood what you said. i can't apologize if my response wasn't what you were looking for.

On a personal note
 

I wanted to personally respond (but seperately) to ilovemyglo in reagards to how would I feel ......

I really wouldn't care, especially in regards to what other people thought. Why? Because regardless as to HOW I received a job, there would always be ignorant people that would think that the only reason why I got it was because I am black! PERIOD.

Nevermind the BA or working on the MBA.

Nevermind the fact that one of my work AND personal references is Paul Patton (who you should know is the gov of your lovely state) and his wife.

Regardless of my personal and public achievements, to some folks that is not good enough. It is because of this folks that AA exist.

**** AGAIN THIS IS MY PERSONAL OPINION AND NOT THAT OF THE GENERAL AFRICAN AMERICAN POPULATION*********
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO PM ME IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS!!