Affirmative action doesn’t just hurt whites, it backfires on blacks

[AZrailwhale]

Does anyone question how Trump got into Wharton or Bush got into Yale?

Just think of the qualified white men who were denied entry so they could be admitted

Nobody needs to question either case. Both came from rich families.

 

[rightwinger]

Yes, what the hell do you think “affirmative action” means? It means taking action to favor one group over another.

Not necessarily

It means giving opportunities to more than white males

 

[AZrailwhale]

Not necessarily

It means giving opportunities to more than white males

That is so fine a distinction, that you aren't even splitting hairs, you are splitting atoms.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

the more academically superior whites (and lately, Asians), and the less academically accomplished blacks. (

academically "superior" whites versus academically "accomplished" blacks?

Damn Lisa, you can't help it. Even when you're not trying, your white supremacist mindset comes oozing out lol.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I strongly disagree. Replacing favoritism towards one group with favoritism towards another just creates new problems. The best solution would have been to forbid discrimination entirely, which by the way, is exactly what the law did.

I know it probably feels like favoritism, but it's actually not.

White males, followed by white females are at the top of the social-economic hierarchy and were favored for more than 170 years before the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

What you all are experiencing is not favoritism in a different direction, it's just that your particular demographic no longer commands the favoritism it has traditionally held. Things are more balanced and a little bit more equitable now.

White people have had a head start ahead of black people for almost 200 years, not just one provided by others doing one another a favor, but by laws that provided that head start and favoritism. So to hear you all crying about black people and/or other minorities now being shown preference over whites just seems particularly disingenuous, especially since it's not true.

 

[IM2]

Yes, what the hell do you think “affirmative action” means? It means taking action to favor one group over another.

You, like many others with your mindset, ignore the consistent favor whites continue to get.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

As a woman

Do you support Affirmative Action or not?
What do you do for a living?
Housewife?

Lisa doesn't believe that affirmative action applies to women or has actually helped white women. MizMolly flat out denies even the government's own research into the changes the passage of the law brought.

Lisa also appears to be unaware that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects her as a Jewish person under Title VII.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

There has been no favoritism unless you think whites are entitled to all the jobs and admission.

That's exactly what they must think if they're bitching about anyone else getting anything after they were LAWFULLY entitled to EVERYTHING prior to the last 58 years.

 

[IM2]

academically "superior" whites versus academically "accomplished" blacks?

Damn Lisa, you can't help it. Even when you're not trying, your white supremacist mindset comes oozing out lol.

Lisa is what she and whites with her mindset believe AA is. Dumb, less educated and given favoritism based on her race.

 

[IM2]

That's exactly what they must think if they're bitching about anyone else getting anything after they were LAWFULLY entitled to EVERYTHING prior to the last 58 years.

“Racism has distorted reality for many whites. Teachings about history, the world, the pursuits of thought, expressions of culture, and personal relationships have for most whites been both limited and false.” -Horace Seldon

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Yes, what the hell do you think “affirmative action” means? It means taking action to favor one group over another.

The executive order itself explains what is meant by "affirmative action", apparently you're denigrating something you haven't bothered to educate yourself on?

Executive Order 10925​

​

On March 6, 1961 President John F. Kennedy issued Executive Order 10925, which included a provision that government contractors "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin." The intent of this executive order was to affirm the government's commitment to equal opportunity for all qualified persons, and to take positive action to strengthen efforts to realize true equal opportunity for all. This executive order was superseded by Executive Order 11246 in 1965.​

A Brief History of Affirmative Action | OEOD | UCI​

 

[AZrailwhale]

The executive order itself explains what is meant by "affirmative action", apparently you're denigrating something you haven't bothered to educate yourself on?

Executive Order 10925​

​

On March 6, 1961 President John F. Kennedy issued Executive Order 10925, which included a provision that government contractors "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin." The intent of this executive order was to affirm the government's commitment to equal opportunity for all qualified persons, and to take positive action to strengthen efforts to realize true equal opportunity for all. This executive order was superseded by Executive Order 11246 in 1965.​

A Brief History of Affirmative Action | OEOD | UCI​

And that is exactly what I said. No favoritism, equal treatment under the law. You, Paul and IM2 are the ones wanting the Executive Order AND the law perverted to favor one group over others.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

And that is exactly what I said. No favoritism, equal treatment under the law. You, Paul and IM2 are the ones wanting the Executive Order AND the law perverted to favor one group over others.

That is NOT what you said. You said the EO directs employers to take affirmative action in the form of favoritism while the EO specifically states that the affirmative action must be WITHOUT regard to race, color, creed, national origin, etc.

What your delusions of what Paul, IM2 & I want are irrelevant because the law says what it says. What you all are struggling with is the fact that white males & females are NO LONGER BEING FAVORED "as much as you all have been in the past" which is not the same thing as black people BEING FAVORED which would be a violation of the EO.

It's kind of inevitable really. Eventually people come along who are younger, more knowledgeable than you are on current technology or recently education and they replace you or push you out. That doesn't mean you're being targeted, you all are only pissed off it seems because some of the people who are a part of this process are ALSO black.

 

[AZrailwhale]

That is NOT what you said. You said the EO directs employers to take affirmative action in the form of favoritism while the EO specifically states that the affirmative action must be WITHOUT regard to race, color, creed, national origin, etc.

What your delusions of what Paul, IM2 & I want are irrelevant because the law says what it says. What you all are struggling with is the fact that white males & females are NO LONGER BEING FAVORED "as much as you all have been in the past" which is not the same thing as black people BEING FAVORED which would be a violation of the EO.

It's kind of inevitable really. Eventually people come along who are younger, more knowledgeable than you are on current technology or recently education and they replace you or push you out. That doesn't mean you're being targeted, you all are only pissed off it seems because some of the people who are a part of this process are ALSO black.

That isn't what I said go back and read it. In case you have trouble locating my statement, it is post SIX of this thread. Affirmative action has been implemented in many cases by mandating quotas or other acts favoring one group over others. Paul and IM2 go on and on about how AA has resulted in groups other than Blacks gaining advantages that ONLY BLACKS DESERVE (at least that's my interpretation of their expressed attitudes)

 

[IM2]

And that is exactly what I said. No favoritism, equal treatment under the law. You, Paul and IM2 are the ones wanting the Executive Order AND the law perverted to favor one group over others.

You are incorrect. We want the law to remain as is because the law was made to stop a perverted process that did favor one group. Those who are opposed to it want to return to that perverted process.

 

[IM2]

That isn't what I said go back and read it. In case you have trouble locating my statement, it is post SIX of this thread. Affirmative action has been implemented in many cases by mandating quotas or other acts favoring one group over others. Paul and IM2 go on and on about how AA has resulted in groups other than Blacks gaining advantages that ONLY BLACKS DESERVE (at least that's my interpretation of their expressed attitudes)

Quotas were deemed illegal in the Bakke case nearly 50 years ago. Your interpretation of what I or Paul have been saying is in error and based on the fallacy you believe about the policy.. Affirmative action hasn't mandated anything unless the organization is proven to still be practicing racial discrimination. That part gets left out when you get race pimped by whites who whine about being forced to hire people of color.

 

[IM2]

Yes, what the hell do you think “affirmative action” means? It means taking action to favor one group over another.

 

[AZrailwhale]

That isn't what I said go back and read it. Affirmative action has been implemented in many cases by mandating quotas or other acts favoring one group over others. Paul and IM2 go on and on about how AA has resulted in groups other than Blacks gaining advantages.

You are incorrect. We want the law to remain as is because the law was made to stop a perverted process that did favor one group. Those who are opposed to it want to return to that perverted process.

Nope. I want the law enforced exactly as written. A level playing field. No advantages for anyone. YOU want racial advantages, set asides, even money all because your skin is darker than mine.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Quotas were deemed illegal in the Bakke case nearly 50 years ago. Your interpretation of what I or Paul have been saying is in error and based on the fallacy you believe about the policy.. Affirmative action hasn't mandated anything unless the organization is proven to still be practicing racial discrimination. That part gets left out when you get race pimped by whites who whine about being forced to hire people of color.

Quotas by name, not by action. You even cry about other disadvantaged groups benefitting from AA. Grow up and get over yourself.

 

[Paul Essien]

Did Lisa558 really bring up the Abby Fischer case ?

Abby Fisher, the infamous white girl, who claimed to have been a victim of “reverse discrimination” at the University of Texas.

Really ?

Even though the year she was rejected (supposedly on behalf of us dumb blks), there were 42 whites with LOWER GRADES and scores than her who got in, and only five people of color (3 white latino and 2 blk) with lower grades and scores who did;

And even though there were around 168 black kids (and some Latinos) with grades and scores equal to or better than Fisher who ALSO were rejected but we didn’t decide to sue like whiny-ass entitled brat as a result.

This is why Lisa558, AZrailwhale doesn’t dare try their bullsh*t with me

Lisa558 just needs to stop playing and say “I hate you n*ggers with every fibre of my being”

I’d actually have more respect for her if she brought it like that. Rather than all this pussyfooting around