Claims of white males suffering due to affirmative action "discrimination" refuted

Discussion in 'Race Relations/Racism' started by Bass v 2.0, Jul 19, 2009.

  1. Bass v 2.0
    Offline

    Bass v 2.0 Biblical Warrior For God.

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Messages:
    10,655
    Thanks Received:
    528
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Paris, France
    Ratings:
    +528
    By these two studies which again confirm that white males and whites in general are *NOT* suffering because of discrimination via affirmative action, they simply want to maintain the status quo dominance that has been in place for hundreds of years, those that make such claims are paranoid whiners:

    Managing Privilege: The Stable Advantage of White Males in U.S. Private Sector Employment, 1966-2000


    Abstract:


    We examine race and sex trends in access to managerial positions in large private U.S. workplaces from 1966 to 2000. We take an intersectionality approach by asking, how have the labor market experiences of women and ethno-racial minorities fared in comparison to white men in the post-Civil Rights era? We find no decline in white males advantaged access to managerial jobs since 1966, despite some gains by white women and racialized minorities. Our models suggest that if the economy had not changed during this time that white male managerial representation would have actually increased over time. We find that women and racialized minorities get access to management jobs in the low wage service sector, when they can manage women and racialized minorities, when there are many managerial jobs in the workplace, and in larger workplaces. White women manager other women, but not men. Black men, on the other hand, manage other minorities, but not white women or men. Black women tend to manage only minority women. The temporal stability of white male advantage demonstrates just how durable race and sex inequalities are, even in the face of formidable demographic, economic and political change.




    The Impact of Affirmative Action on the Employment and Earnings of White Males


    Polls show that a substantial portion or Americans, and white men in particular, are opposed to affirmative action in the form of hiring preferences. Survey research has linked this opposition to the belief that such policies disadvantage white men with respect to employment and promotions. In spite of the widespread prevalence of this belief, there has been little research examining its empirical validity. This paper examines the impact of affirmative action policies on the white male employment and earnings before and after 1972, which marked the implementation of "hard" affirmative action measures (goals and timetables). We find that the white male employment rate did indeed decline after 1972 but that this decline was not sustained. We also find that the employment rate for women and minorities declined as well. Earnings for white men increased steadily until mid 1970s and then leveled off. Time series analysis yields two major findings. First, when controlling for relevant labor force variables, there is no difference in the pre and post 1972 white male employment rate and employment population ratio. Second, white male earnings did decline after the implementation of goals and timetables. Black men and women, however, also experienced a similar decline in earnings. The authors conclude that in the aggregate, the evidence does not support claims of white male disadvantage due to affirmative action.



    For all the white male whiners on USMB, SMACK, SMACK!! Take that, SMACK! SMACK! Think about it, SMACK! White males have never been at a disadvantage for jobs and positions of power.
     
  2. Bass v 2.0
    Offline

    Bass v 2.0 Biblical Warrior For God.

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Messages:
    10,655
    Thanks Received:
    528
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Paris, France
    Ratings:
    +528
    This is what's really going on:


    Resisting Threats to Privilege: Various White Men's Movements Resist Confronting Oppression

    This paper examines two contemporary white men's movements:the mythopoetic movement, and the white supremacist movement. While one is violent and extremist, and the other seemingly intellectual and non-threatening, both are part of a broad backlash to critiques of racial and gender oppression. Examining such divergent movements provides a broader picture of this varied backlash defending the institutionalized culture of privilege. Both movements reassert a narrow definition of white masculinity, and defend white male privilege. This paper explores the varied ways in which these two movements address the intersections of race, gender and class in their discourses and respond to widespread critiques of race and gender oppression by reasserting essentialist race and gender hierarchies.
     
  3. Smartt33
    Offline

    Smartt33 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,183
    Thanks Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    USA
    Ratings:
    +147
    The idea of afirmative action is not a bad one. As is true with most programs, abuse is the real issue. The abuse usually takes place when people just don't understand the program, od they have some fear that it must be applied, even when it is not needed. For example, when a person only qualifies for a job, or promorion, because they are a minority, and they get the position even though a non-minority has all of the rest of the qualifications, that is an abuse of the program. If a person does not meet the qualifications, they should not get the job. I have missed out on promotions because of this kind of abuse.
     
  4. Bass v 2.0
    Offline

    Bass v 2.0 Biblical Warrior For God.

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Messages:
    10,655
    Thanks Received:
    528
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Paris, France
    Ratings:
    +528

    Repeat, affirmative action is not for and does not benefit unqualified people, only qualified people.
     
  5. johnrocks
    Offline

    johnrocks Silver Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,919
    Thanks Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    West Monroe, La.
    Ratings:
    +279
    I wonder would Allan Bakke agree? He possibly would never have been able to become a Physician had the Supreme Court ruled differently.
     
  6. William Joyce
    Offline

    William Joyce Chemotherapy for PC

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    9,693
    Thanks Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Caucasiastan
    Ratings:
    +1,349
    I've been told I can't have a job because I'm white.

    Frank Ricci was told he couldn't advance because he was white.

    The media wouldn't let John McCain be president because he's white.

    There are no "white" scholarships.

    There are no consequences for anything stated by a black man, no matter how "racist."

    Blacks can have the National Black Beekeepers Club, whatever they want... NOTHING for whites.

    If a black man can spell his name and show up for work, he's going to be promoted as far as possible. A white man can never do it that way.
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2009
  7. JBeukema
    Offline

    JBeukema BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    25,613
    Thanks Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere and nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,705
    *yawn* does base ever do anything other than cry about being born the wrong color?
     
  8. William Joyce
    Offline

    William Joyce Chemotherapy for PC

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    9,693
    Thanks Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Caucasiastan
    Ratings:
    +1,349
    Problem is, the "qualification" is being non-white.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

are whites really at a disadvantage due to affirmative action

,

economic suffering because of discrimination