New Diversity Criteria for Admission...what to make of that?

MyReign1 · Feb 18, 2004

Why oh why has affirmation action become synonymous with black people? Historically the biggest benefactors of AA have been white women. Why is that fact often hidden?

"WHO HAS BENEFITED FROM AFFIRMATIVE ACTION: White men and women have benefited more than racial and ethnic minorities in state hiring and under alternative admissions criteria to the Universities. White women are the largest beneficiaries, while white men have benefited as veterans, the disabled, and people over 40. This benefit is particularly important for women, since many families are now two-paycheck families or are single paycheck families supported by women. Attacking women’s ability to earn a ood paycheck is an attack on families"

Sheri257 · Feb 18, 2004

Why oh why has affirmation action become synonymous with black people? Historically the biggest benefactors of AA have been white women. Why is that fact often hidden?

Well, if it's supposed to help white women, it certainly didn't help me. I lost a job to a black guy, and I was told the company wanted to hire more minorities. Being female wasn't of any concern to them, probably because there are lots of women in the workplace now.

Every affirmative action program I'm seen pretty much focused blacks. Maybe that's why people tend to equate affirmative action with blacks. I dunno.

nekhismom · Feb 18, 2004

I know that AA has it's problems, but I wholeheartedly agree that it is a necessary evil. However, it would be better if there was a system that could evaluate all candidates without regard to race. Unfortunately, this doesn't exist in America today. I mean, really, who wouldn't be ALL FOR hiring the most qualified candidate? BUt wouldn't it suck if you were not able to obtain qualifications because of racial barriers???????????

I stand by my original thought.......if you are not a minority, it is hard for you to understand the depth of descrimination in America today.

Not saying that non-minorities DON'T experience discrimination, because I've seen it happen, but it is worse with minorities in my experience.

MyReign1 · Feb 18, 2004

The way I see it is - if my white child and a minority child are in the same class with the "same teacher" - being taught "the same things" - there is no reason in the world that they can't both make the same grades and do fantastic if they both pay attention and put the same amount of work into it.

Do you honestly believe that all it takes is for two children to be on equal footing is for them to be in the same class? You know better than that. You're a nurse, put on your critical thinking hat. Everything is not that simple. Putting race aside for a minute, two white children in the same class wouldn't be on an equal footing if their home lives aren't equal. Maybe the other child's parents are uneducated. Maybe that child comes from an extremely poor home. Maybe that child is hungry and the last thing on his mind is school. If the child is black, he is two times more likely to come from poverty. And, where there is poverty there is generally a lack of education. If the parents' aren't educated, most likely education is not a priority in that household as it may be in yours. It's a vicious cycle. Look at some of the projects they show on television. If I lived in one of those I would probably be too busy, praying that I make it through the night, to study.

Don't believe that because a child goes to the same school they come from the same background. I come from a poor family and I've gone to the best schools in the state since 1st grade. I was able to make it because education was a priority for my mother. In fact, I think she may have stressed it too much. I'm a career student and proud of it :) .

MyReign1 · Feb 18, 2004

Well, if it's supposed to help white women, it certainly didn't help me. I lost a job to a black guy, and I was told the company wanted to hire more minorities. Being female wasn't of any concern to them, probably because there are lots of women in the workplace now.
Every affirmative action program I'm seen pretty much focused blacks. Maybe that's why people tend to equate affirmative action with blacks. I dunno.

Lizz, I can say the same exact thing. As a Black women, AA has never helped me. So is that supposed to prove a point or something? Don't base everything on your personal experiences. Believe it or not the world is bigger than just you. Just because you haven't seen it, doesn't make it untrue. Besides, people see what they want to see. IF you see a white woman hired you assume she's the best fit for the job. If you see a black person hired, you assume AA. Because God knows there is no way on this earth that a black person could have been the best fit for the job. It cracks me up when all of you say you've been passed over due to race, like you were privy to that black person's resume. Maybe they were looking for a minority and it just so happened that minority was a better fit than you, graduated from a better school than you, had a better GPA than you, had more experience than you, was more charismatic than you. WOW, imagine that. Have you ever considered that the person who gave you that inside info, "Sorry girl, you know that had to pick a black person," didn't want to destroy your ego.

My point still stands, white women have historically been the biggest benefactors of Affirmative action.

RNSuzq1, RN · Feb 18, 2004

Why oh why has affirmation action become synonymous with black people? Historically the biggest benefactors of AA have been white women. Why is that fact often hidden?

Myreign1, Not sure where you are getting your information. I'm a white woman and a Veteran. Every advancement test I took in the Navy had 2 passing scores - 1 for minorities and one for the rest of us - white females were NOT considered minorities and I know that for a fact - it was a totally unfair process. My first shot at the E-5 Exam I had to make a 165 - I got a 163 and wasn't advanced. A minority co-worker got a 140 and was advanced in rate - is this fair to you? In the military being advanced in Rate is the same as a "salary promotion" in the civilian world - it's more $$ each month and trust me, we didn't make much so any extra money was a BIG Deal. It's absolutely unfair for someone to get a lesser score on an exam and be advanced into a higher pay rank because they are considered a "minority" than someone who studied more and scored higher than you - that's crazy.

fergus51 · Feb 18, 2004

Aren't women in the military judged by different physical standards than the men?

Marie_LPN, RN, LPN, RN · Feb 18, 2004

Last i heard they were.

RNSuzq1, RN · Feb 18, 2004

Aren't women in the military judged by different physical standards than the men?

Fergus, In Navy boot-camp woman had the option of doing regular push-ups or "girl push-ups" ha, ha. Other than that - we all had to take the exact same PT Test to graduate. This has absolutely nothing to do with taking advancement tests by the way. The Navy is probably the least physically active of all the Services (unless you're in a specialized field -Seals, etc. - that require daily physical work-outs). Most of the Male Chiefs I worked with had desk jobs, rather large beer guts and couldn't run around the block if you paid them - we weren't exactly the most athletic bunch.

As far as women being judged by different physical standards than a man - certainly. A guy could be 200 lbs and get away with it - but a woman that size - never saw one in the 6 years I served. Does that answer your question? SusanNC

manna, BSN, RN · Feb 18, 2004

I'm a little confused, can you explain again exactly how Affirmative Action has benefited white women more so than minorities??

fergus51 · Feb 18, 2004

http://www.listenerforums.net/cgi-bin/people_config.pl?noframes;read=86

This is just one article from years ago, but there are several if you just google "affirmative action" and "white women". White women get more money, more jobs and more contract thanks to affirmative action than minorities. They are considered just as much a "minority" as a black man, so their applications satisfy affirmative action requirements. Haven't you wondered why women are now making up almost half of medical school and law school admissions today when they were almost completely absent a generation ago?

Here's another one, it was apparently studies by the department of labor that found white women were the biggest beneficiaries of AA.

http://www.districtchronicles.com/news/2003/06/26/News/Women.In.The.District.Feel.Unaffected.By.Latest.Supreme.Court.Affirmative.Action-440847.shtml

Women in the District feel unaffected by latest Supreme Court affirmative action ruling

By James Wright

Published: Thursday, June 26, 2003

Few people realize that affirmative action is geared towards women as well as minorities.

Mary Ann Branch is a young professional in Washington, D.C., working as an assistant to a Capitol Hill lobbyist. She knows that in order to achieve her goals, she must work hard, be smart and stay on top of her field.

While Branch is white, she does not see her race and gender as any type of hindrance to achieving her goals. When she heard about the affirmative action decisions regarding the University of Michigan's undergraduate and law school admissions programs, she praised them.

"Good for the Supreme Court," she said. "I think diversity is very important in America today and people of all races should have the chance to meet and work together."

However, when it was pointed out to her that the biggest beneficiaries of affirmative action have been white women, she looked puzzled.

"Really", she said sipping a cup of coffee at Union Station train station. "I don't see myself as a minority because I'm white and a female, which are majorities in this country."

Branch's assessment is quite common among those surveyed regarding the affirmative action decisions.

However, Branch and other women like her may feel the effect of a recent ruling by the Supreme Court that approved the upholding of the University of Michigan's law school affirmative action policy and disapproved of the school's undergraduate affirmative action policy.

While studies conducted by the Labor Departments during the 1960s and into the 90s show that white women benefit the most from programs that give preference to minorities and women in employment and government contracts, many white women, especially young ones are unaware of this fact.

The National Organization for Women praised the affirmative action decision as "another step for equality for women." Even Republican women's groups have praised the decision.

To Joann Moser, who works at the Smithsonian Museum, affirmative action is for people of color.

"I was elated about the decision of the Supreme Court," she said. "This decision will really help my daughter because she goes to a university that does not have the diversity that it should have, but the decision will help."

But point out to Moser that her daughter will probably benefit more from affirmative action's affirmation than any minority male, she seemed confused.

"I know there are laws on the books to help women," she said citing Title IV," but the civil rights laws do not apply to white women."

Wrong, according to Wade Henderson of the Leadership Council on Civil Rights.

"If you look at the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it clearly states that discrimination is outlawed on the basis of race, creed, religion and sex," he said.

"It's funny how white women do not see themselves as part of the civil rights struggle because what has made the Civil Rights Acts so powerful."

Women are the majority of the population and white women are about 75 percent of the women in the United States. They are also the largest group in the workforce, at 45 percent. White men make up 40 percent.

But according to the Small Business Administration, women own 12 percent of businesses. There are only a handful of women who run Fortune 500 companies.

In politics, women are not represented well according to their numbers. There are 12 women U.S. senators and 51 congresswomen.

While state legislatures are better, with 15 percent being women, a woman governor is still a novelty.

When given these statistics, Branch said the numbers were low, but blamed lack of initiative, not lack of opportunity.

Branch said she categorized discrimination against women as sexism and therefore not covered by the civil rights acts. But she was relieved to hear that the affirmative action laws do apply to her.

Both Branch and Moser hope there comes a day when affirmative action is no longer needed, and that everyone will be judged by their work, and not by their race, creed, color, or sex.

Contact James Wright at [email protected].

fergus51 · Feb 18, 2004

Blacks Just Need to Learn to Play Golf

By Robert Scheer

Published March 19, 1995 in the Los Angeles Times

Forget affirmative action. Maybe it once was a necessary tactic but its time is clearly gone. True, there used to be slavery and segregation and women didn't have the vote but that's all ancient history. C'mon, blacks and women have all the power now. Just look at the O.J. trial.

Try getting a decent job if you're a white man. You don't see my name on the masthead of this paper. What kind of meritocracy is this if my merit isn't rewarded the way I think it ought to be?

I'm not making this up, folks. The census stats back me up. Minorities and women now hold 5% of senior management positions, and those used to be white-guy jobs. Even among Fortune-1,000 companies, women now have 3% of the top slots, according to last week's report by the bipartisan federal Glass Ceiling Commission. So far, black men don't have any of the top jobs, but if affirmative action isn't stopped, who knows what could happen?

Don't try to paint me like some kind of racist for saying this, like I've got something against black men. Our beef is more with women than with black men, who are going nowhere fast. Even though almost 800,000 black students a year graduate from college, many of them business majors, they don't have what it takes to get to the top. Most of them still don't play golf. That's what a lot of white executives told the federal commission, which, incidentally, was created by the Bush Administration, so its results are reliable. One white manager told the truth: that, in hiring, "What's important is comfort, chemistry, relationships and collaborations." That's why black, college-educated professional men earn only 71% of their white counterparts on the bell curve: The comfort level is too low.

The real threat is from women, with whom white men have a longer history of relationships. I hesitate to bring it up because they vote and it's better to have white women believe that affirmative action is a black thing. But take what's called "middle management." Black men account for only 4% of those positions, but almost 40% of middle managers are women. Unless you marry one of them, you're out of luck, and what does that tell you about who wears the pants?

The big problem up the road is that you'll have to get along with those women, what they call networking, just to get a job. What does that say about traditional values when a man has to worry about what a woman thinks of his performance? Meritocracy, in the wrong hands, can be a killer. No wonder the federal commission concluded that "Many middle- and upper-level managers view the inclusion of minorities and women in management as a direct threat to their own chances for advancement." They'd be stupid not to.

But we don't have a chance at turning back the tide unless we eliminate the discrimination against white males in the universities. On the nine campuses of the University of California, white men were 40% of the student body in 1980, and now they're a miserable 24%, less than half the number of women. Girls were always better at the school stuff but you could count on them to drop out along the way. Another threat is the 12% who are Latino, but Proposition 187 should scare them off. Same for the Asians, who outnumber white males at UC. I know that Asians are not covered by affirmative action, but even with round-the-clock tutoring, we can't keep up with them. And none of this would have happened if the blacks hadn't started all this. You don't see blacks endangered at UC -- they went up a full two-tenths of a percent in the past 15 years, from 3.8% to 4%. They're taking over.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against a level playing field, and I know that a lot of blacks come from disadvantaged backgrounds due to poverty. After all, census data show that almost half of black children live in poverty, which shows that they have lost the spirit of individual responsibility. We have got to stop coddling them. The answer is to end poverty by eliminating food stamps, school lunches and infant nutrition programs that provide such an irresistible incentive for people to raise their kids in lousy neighborhoods. If poor people want a good job, they should get it the way the rest of us do. Call an uncle or a business associate of your father. Invest your inheritance wisely. Get active in a prestigious church or a good golf club. Blacks are going to make it when they learn to act and look like everyone else.

I am for social policies that are colorblind, just as the founders of our nation were.

For me, all I want is my country back. You know what I mean: a return to traditional values where the white man is king, even if his woman has to work.

http://www.robertscheer.com/1_natcolumn/95_columns/031995.htm

I know this is a little old, but I thought it was funny