• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

POLL: AA and diversity

Why does every single question has some dumb answer for yes that puts the black person in an lower position everytime?
And yes, i will keep bringing this up. Since a white male with a felon has more qualification that a black male with no criminal records does that make the system inherently racist?
I can tell you this, of the black people that do pass the test, none of them will get the job anyway because as studies put it, they are at the bottom of the scale as far as "attractivness" as an applicant - even lower than you average white felon,. There was a long thread where we brough up AA, racism and all that good stuff. NOBODY in this entire forum could even admit it as being a problem. Save you energy.
 
All of the questions are biased, but I answered all except #4 - that one's just absurdly biased, too much so to even vote. And I generally side against AA, welfare and the like, so I'm not just giving you sh!t because I disagree with you or anything. But damn #4 is ridiculous. Public school funding varies greatly, and more & more in today's society jobs require a post-HS education, which isn't free.

PS - when putting other people down for having less access to education, you probably shouldn't confuse "there" with "their".
 
PC'ers don't like being forced to admit that AA (and similar forced diversity programs) are inherently racist because they (these programs) begin with the assumption that minorities are incapable of acheiving on their own merit.
 
couple of points

"The question is where do you make the cutoff for past problems?" Olson said. "If someone engaged in significant criminal activity up until age 17, have they all of the sudden become an angel at age 18? I don't know; we're looking at that."

i have a number of friends who chopped cars and ther "activities" when they're younger but once past 18 they go completely legit (well they joke of getting minors to do crimes for them)

the responses in the poll are horrible

lets go through them

Is lowering testing requirments to promote diversity a good idea?
yes
no
depends on the occupation

fine whatever

is disqualifying felons for civil service positions racist agains blacks?
yes, the blacks have felony convictions because of the white man
no, you shouldn't get second chances based on the color of your skin

this is poorly worded, some people (like me) don't see the problem letting convicts from becoming firefighters, i'm guessing you were referring to the unnaturaly high incarceration rate among black men

are minimum strengh/agility requirments in physical occupations sexist?
yes, things are heavy because men design them that way(thus keeping women from doing the work)
no, "equal pay for equal work" works both ways lady

again i was going to answer yes and then you blather on about keeping women down, a firefighter is a physically demanding job, things are heavy because of gravity

do education requirments discriminate against blacks/women/hispanics
yes, minorities shouldn't have to be able to preform basic algebra because its not part of there culture
no, its not the white mans fault if they refuse to get an education

again, wanted to answer yes but i'm not when you word like that, I think the cultures that value basic algebra the most are asians and arabs (the godfathers of algebra), they're both visible minorities in the states

am i the only one that thinks even debating these issues is stupid?
yes, your a racist big and should be shot!
no, i can't believe people are this stupid, darwin surrenders

is this flame-bait?
 
Originally posted by: Vic
PC'ers don't like being forced to admit that AA (and similar forced diversity programs) are inherently racist because they (these programs) begin with the assumption that minorities are incapable of acheiving on their own merit.
Click to expand...

 
affirmititive action does discriminate against the majority but you could argue that welfare discriminates against the rich with the same argument
 
poor example. do the rich need walfare?

EDIT:
Who's fault is it that welfare exist in the first place? The rich person?
Who's fault is it that AA exist in the first place? The black persons?
 
Is lowering testing requirments to promote diversity a good idea?
yes if the requirements are irrelevant or there to overtly or subtly exclude diversity.


is disqualifying felons for civil service positions racist against blacks?
yes, blacks are disproportionally apprehended and convicted of crimes so the issue is has the applicant reformed.


are minimum strengh/agility requirments in physical occupations sexist?

Yes if minimums are some arbitrary opinion oriented thing designed to exclude. Men vary in strength as do women.

do education requirments discriminate against blacks/women/hispanics
yes, but only against minority women in cases where educational requirements are irrelevant to how well somebody can do a job.

am i the only one that thinks even debating these issues is stupid?
no, because stupid is not to be able to look at a question from many sides and such stupidity abounds.
 
Originally posted by: Vic
PC'ers don't like being forced to admit that AA (and similar forced diversity programs) are inherently racist because they (these programs) begin with the assumption that minorities are incapable of acheiving on their own merit.
Click to expand...

That's incorrect -- you really don't know the true definition of AA. You are more describing quotas. Yes, there is a difference.

DanceMan

 
Originally posted by: DanceMan
Originally posted by: Vic
PC'ers don't like being forced to admit that AA (and similar forced diversity programs) are inherently racist because they (these programs) begin with the assumption that minorities are incapable of acheiving on their own merit.
Click to expand...

That's incorrect -- you really don't know the true definition of AA. You are more describing quotas. Yes, there is a difference.

DanceMan
Click to expand...

Well I am no more informed by incorrect than I was by the bald assertion of what the assumption behind AA was. I disagree with Vic too in this way. I believe that the assumption I would call a fact behind AA is that many minorities, far from not being able to achieve on their own merits, have actually suffered massively more damage to their belief in their merit than most other people. This is because minorities and especially blacks have been subjected to intense bigoted hate for centuries and have had their families and cultural values ripped apart, on average. AA is an attempt to redress the destruction that was done. The problem, of course, is that self esteem problems are hard to fix because nobody will admit to having them. And nothing pisses off those who feel worthless more than the thought that some other worthless-feeling person is getting help. "I feel worthless, God Damn it, I will never admit to myself, and I made it all on my own; why can't that other worthless son of a bitch do the same."

We all feel absolutely worthless deeply hidden within, but the absolute magnitude of the damage we suffered runs up and down a scale.
 
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: DanceMan
Originally posted by: Vic
PC'ers don't like being forced to admit that AA (and similar forced diversity programs) are inherently racist because they (these programs) begin with the assumption that minorities are incapable of acheiving on their own merit.
Click to expand...

That's incorrect -- you really don't know the true definition of AA. You are more describing quotas. Yes, there is a difference.

DanceMan
Click to expand...

Well I am no more informed by incorrect than I was by the bald assertion of what the assumption behind AA was. I disagree with Vic too in this way. I believe that the assumption I would call a fact behind AA is that many minorities, far from not being able to achieve on their own merits, have actually suffered massively more damage to their belief in their merit than most other people. This is because minorities and especially blacks have been subjected to intense bigoted hate for centuries and have had their families and cultural values ripped apart, on average. AA is an attempt to redress the destruction that was done. The problem, of course, is that self esteem problems are hard to fix because nobody will admit to having them. And nothing pisses off those who feel worthless more than the thought that some other worthless-feeling person is getting help. "I feel worthless, God Damn it, I will never admit to myself, and I made it all on my own; why can't that other worthless son of a bitch do the same."

We all feel absolutely worthless deeply hidden within, but the absolute magnitude of the damage we suffered runs up and down a scale.
Click to expand...

Oh BS. There are more poor "white trash" (most of whom have been that way for generations) in the US than there are black people. When do they get their redress?

Point being, you can't fix a person's self-esteem problem by giving them a free ride. "Here, we all know you don't deserve it *wink*wink*" Yeah, that works...
 
While racism and feelings of exclusion do exist all over the world and in many different professions, I vastly prefer sticking to the merit-only rating system, thanks very much.

It's incredibly insulting to have exceptions made for me based on skin colour. Nor would I expect other people to ignore the fact that I may have had the requirements eased for me for no reason but my physical appearance and that I might not simply be the best man for the job.
 
Since firefighters were mentioned as an example:

Would you want to be rescued by someone who is actually a very poor firefighter and only got their job because of their skin color?
 
Managed to answer the first two, though I wasn't entirely happy with the second one (no on both).

The next two are to complicated for yes no answers, with strength requirements have a definite answer of 'sometimes', and education being too complicated to untangle; however, at the 'job requirement' level, as long as the chosen requirements are really necessary to perform a job, you can't consider them racist, sexist, or anything else except 'requirements'.
 
Originally posted by: Vic

Oh BS. There are more poor "white trash" (most of whom have been that way for generations) in the US than there are black people. When do they get their redress?
Click to expand...

The point is the ratios:

2003 Census Poverty
White (not Hispanic): 8.2%
Black: 24.3%
Asian: 11.8%
Hispanic: 22.5%

Clearly there is something wrong in America where minorities have a higher ratio of poverty. Unless of course, people truely believe that all it takes in America is hard work, irregardless of his/her environmental situation.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top