Zeld2.0

Well it comes to the question of far more needed or far more in demand... it's hard to quantify such things

Look I certainly understand what you're getting at and I am really against those who don't deserve the job... but in many cases, what about those that do?

My stand is pretty simple - I don't think its all that big of a deal especially since whites are still the clear majority in America and in most areas minorities are extremely hard to find

I don't like preferential treatment at all and while I think things shoould be fair, at the same time, I can't buy into either sides arguments..

Too many examples of "oh we were of the same qualification but the minority got the job instead" - and i say, suck it up and do better so you have an advantage

Then there are the "oh he wasn't as good but he got the job because he was a minority" - well, was there something you could have done to make it so you would win the job?

Its true there are cases where they'd hire the minority anyways (and that I'm against) but also take it from a boss perspective..

"These two guys do the same comparable work but one is willing to go on a smaller salary"

On the flipside there could be the "Damn the minorities, I ain't hiring one"

To me, people are going to end up acting in one of those ways I stated anyways...

But here's a view from a non-white perspective:

Even if there are more chances given, it's only a small minority of the minority that is going to get that most of the time. Top jobs for example are going to be handled by a small minority of the minority and even so, there are many more whites meaning there is a higher % chance a white will get hired if all equally skilled.

But the racism/discrimination I'm talking about here is that kind of stare or look or feeling of tension that may occur between the different races.. there is defenitely that feeling there. Ever been asked "what the fuck kind of person are you?"

I remember another time visiting Texas with a lot of friends on a journalism trip and being asked "do you guys speak english?"

What the fuck was my thought.

So yeah I rambled around a bit but here I come to the solution:

Rather than people constantly opposing integration of society as a whole, society as a whole can't fix any form of discrimination (be it at work, physical, etc.) until people are wiling to come in contact with others and see the other side as well as work with them. When all of society decides to move into enclaves (be it black, asian, hispanic, white, etc.) there is going to be a tension between races. And when there is that tension, hard feelings are going to come out whenver one even slightly FEELs cut out in anyway and will say discrimination.

So until people are willing to at the least feel there is no discrimination, people are always going to mutually distrust each other and will feel they are discriminated in one way or another.

And again as stated I've been fortunate that my family is very well off and I have achieved a top notch education and so I've been doing well, but that doesn't mean everyone should get the same results...

Equality of opportunity not equality of results

theusername

I said it before and i'll say it again and again. Affirmative action should be based on a persons financial situation and not their race.

People should not be judged by their race.

brianna

hmm ok so i think i made a pretty damn good point here about creating role models that kids can see themselves in and yet no one responded. so i'm quoting myself and commenting on it, i can do that cause i rock.

wow brianna, that's very inciteful, great point!

Zeld2.0

i agree to an extent on the model thing anyways...

but i also agree with theusername - if you really need it, it should be based on financial status only, and not race - and honestly helping minorities is often because of their financial status (usually) but this way those who need it of any race will get something, not just one race regardless of if they are rich or poor

Shades

See, this is the problem right here:
Who cares if the GROUPS catch up? Was the Klan right, and the blacks really are all in this together? I was under the impression that racist behavior was treating someone as though the color of their skin classified them as part of a group. I mean, news flash- you are not all in this together. No matter what your skin color is, it's you and you alone vs. life. I have never had my white brethren rally at my place to assist in any emergency I've been in. Whoever claims that white people are some kind of unified group are lying, plain and simple.

It's such a hypocritical double-standard- don't give different treatment to someone of a particular skin color. You know, unless that skin color isn't white and that treatment is good. Then you must treat them differently. How does that not promote the idea that these minority groups are very real and very separate from the rest of us?

Here's how pretty much everyone I know in college feels about it. I have never once discriminated against anyone in my life. I have never treated anyone better or poorer than I felt they deserved based solely on the content of the character. And yet, I am constantly told by the media and "community leaders" (whatever the hell that is, never saw that line on a tax form) that I have actually been surrounded and participated in vicious racist behavior all my life, and now that I'm in college, it's time to pay for it. So there's a Women's Engineering Society, a Black Engineer's Society, etc., but no White or Male Engineering Society. If anyone tried to make one, shit would hit the roof. So what's the message I take home? Women and minorities are perfectly happy forming sub-groups to exclude me, but I can't do it to them. How in the hell is that not racist again?

Kadath

Well, I don't know about your college, but back when I was an engineering student women made up 50% of the school and 10% of the engineers. Similarly, black students were about 20% and there were maybe 4 black engineers. They form those groups not to exclude you, but to encourage more of the members of that group to pursue engineering. Not everything is a plot to fuck with you.

Your other points were good.

__________________
it's quiet in here

Shades

But, there it is again. They want to encourage more of "their kind" to join engineering- a fellowship tacitly based solely on race and gender. Again, how is that not racist? I mean, they came right out and said it in the name- they only are trying to help people of the right race and gender.

Here's the only test you'll ever need to know if something is racist. Take out whatever gender of race identifier they used- "Women," "Hispanic," etc.- and substitute in "White" or "Male" as appropriate. If it then sounds racist, then so was the original form.

Kadath

Look, try to understand this. Pretend that you didn't have a whole fucking world of positive white male role models, positive images of white males on TV, 99% of fortune 500 companies run by white males and all that. Now wonder why you might want an organization that encouraged pride in your group. Your simplistic view of the world is noted and discouraged.

__________________
it's quiet in here

Shades

But I doubt that those "role models" (side note- engineering role models? Are you serious?) identify themselves primarily as male and white. If you want to identify yourself first as a minority and feel bad about the lack of others of your group, go right ahead, but understand that you are now part of the problem. You reinforce the false barrier of race. I'm sorry there's no Empowered Minority Engineer muppet, but I also don't see why anyone would care.

Oh, and the overwhelming majority of graduate students here are non-white, and non-American. So by your logic, where I look around and see few of "my kind," I ought to form the Americans in Graduate Level Engineering group, and everyone should be OK with that. Right?

Since this is an open forum, feel free to tell me straight- why do these groups insist on not being treated differently on the one hand, then insist that they are different on the other. Explain to me how that is EVER going to bring society to a point where there are no such barriers.

NoSoup

Alright, I think I am beginning to understand both sides of the argument a little more now. However, I pose a question.

How would you feel if there were certain governmental programs out there that helped only whites? Similarly, like Shades had said, what if there were white only/male only groups?

I completely understand that certain groups/rewards encourage women/minorities to do a certain something, be it engineering, police work, or whatever. I also am going to assume that the reasoning behind this is because white males dominate the market in these specific industries. However, why don't I see any programs out there for a male to be a hairdresser? Exotic Dancer? Paralegal?

I hope you see what I am trying to get at, and why I am not yet convinced that it is alright to have some programs out there for women/minorities with the argument that in that certain field, there are few of them, as I am sure there are fields where they are many fewer men than women...

gondath

Let me restate that integration happens when people are brought into direct contact with one other on a daily basis. People in close proximity even take on some of the characteristics of the people around them. the bottom line is that these programs biased towards race and gender are never going to go away because some of the people in these groups are looking to tip the scales in their favor, politicians are exploiting the legitimate and not so legitimate concerns of these "groups" for their own gain, and you will always find people who disciminate against other people for what they look like. I don't see how making fun of someone for being fat is any different than making fun of them for being black, asian, white, whatever, and the truth is I do it too.

Zeld2.0

Look Shades, I think you're thinking they're out to get you. Believe me, they are not.

These groups are meant to encourage others to participate because the norm ALREADY is the white male. It's not about race when you consider a group such as the Women's Society of Engineers, it's their attempts to promote engineering among females, a GENDER.

They're not out to screw the white male over. They're out to promote their field to others when they feel they are underrepresented and/or really want to see others participate.

The reason why they don't have a white male society of engineers? Because they're already (or at least WERE) a dominant group in that field and didn't have to promote it.

You see, I sense a lot of paranoia from many male whites who feel that minorities are "out to get them." They're not. In many cases, I sense (and I emphasize sense because that's certainly the feeling I get from many people here and elsewhere) that much of it is competition they don't want. In the history of the U.S., the white male has long dominated the upper echelons of society, business, and politics, and often times they're not facing competition from non-whites.

That's certainly not going to be true for everyone but I see it as an underlying subconscious feeling that many exhibit.

And as for your comment on the overwhelming majority of graduate students becoming non-white and non-American... that's because many of the brightest in other countries see the great ability in America and send their best to learn here. Rather than complain about it, it should be an honor when you realize that in a world of 6 billion, the top people everywhere are coming here.

And you know what's ironic? If/when whites are minority in America (be it 20 years or 100, doesn't matter) they might get preferential treatment. But right now, too many are painting all non-whites as a minority, (ironically reminding me of old segregation with whites vs. non-whites) and right now too much is this "us vs. them" policy when much of it is based on smaller gorups within that brush stroke.

Honestly though, I don't know what else to say. This is honestly an emotional subjective and personal thing within everyone and what the media and others feed you and your own perception of events in your life. Living in Los Angeles, the most diverse city, my perceptions are going to be different from someone in living, say, the rural Midwest where its predominately white and protestant.

Zeld2.0

Well to tackle the Exotic Dancer/Paralegal thing... are there many groups out there for them for females? They're a female dominated business (at least Exotic Dancer anyways) and really don't need promoting to get more females... and for males? Well, they're probably not in great demand to begin with and on top of that, be it social pressures or what not, males generally aren't interested in that field or it is shunned upon (such as Exotic Dancer).

As for all white/male groups... sure thing if their motive is benevolent (same goes for every group out there, i can't say the same for violent racial groups though).

But I'll say one thing... one of the things is that these groups aren't there to be a "Blacks ONLY" or "Asians ONLY" or "whatever ONLY" group. Usually these groups are formed with the mind of promoting their race and allowing OTHERS to understand theirs! Usually most groups WANT others to join them to create better understanding.

The falling, however, is that with many what I call "racial tensions" between groups, however, usually what happens is that these groups become increasingly segregated into their own race enclaves. Their purpose isn't to segregate, they want to integrate, the problem is that often times, that's exactly the opposite of what happens for whatever reason.

Put it this way: if they say no to you from an Asian club, then they're discriminating. They aren't a very great group if they claim to be anti-discriminatory and that should be brought up to them. But, the real question is, how many whites or non-Asians in general are wiling to actually join an Asian group?

Probably not very many.

NoSoup

Lol, well, I guess exotic dancer isn't exactly the best example, but it was one of the few female dominated careers that I can think of at this late hour. My point was, I don't really see any scholarships/grants out there to promote a white male to do anything, yet there are scholorships/grants out there for women/minorities to do pretty much anything.

I understand the "social enclaves", and unfortunately it does happen far to often, IMHO.

I started this thread simply to question the politics behind it, I am not trying to blame anyone for being for/against these programs, If I were a minority, I most certainly would take advantage of whatever I could.

I just think that racism & discrimination would be easier to get rid of as a whole if noone, especially the government, allowed biasing anything on race and/or sex.

I think a lot of the problem are people's perceptions on different races.

Gangsta'

When you see that word, what color was the person that you pictured? I would imagine most would picture black, but I am certain that there are quite a number of people out there that are gang members from every race.

Asian

What did you picture there? If I name a race, people will still have preconcieved ideas of what people should be like. If I had to take a gander, I would bet that most non-asians associate the word asian with incredibly good/hardworking students with large families.

Europeans

I am curious as to what this brings to mind to you non-whites out there. It would be difficult for me to come up with a non-biased description, as I am white.

Another misperception is that groups that are usually comprised of a single race, like the group of asian friends that hang out at school or whatever, don't want any non-asians in that group. When I was in highschool, I met a really interesting asian girl and she and her friends welcomed me with open arms. It was kinda funny, though, to play football with them, as I was a tall white dude and I was playin' with a bunch of tiny Asians. Anyway, the point of this excercise was to show how our common perceptions/misperceptions limit our ability to interact with these so called "enclaves". Certainly some do exist, but many are more open than anyone would dare believe.

Grimlok

As a 31 year old black man... I CAN'T WAIT TO START REAPING ALL THE PERCEIVED Benefits we BLACK PEOPLE have in society.

I mean, as a college graduate, I love getting beat out for entry level jobs by young hot white girls with GED's. I also enjoyed not even getting considered for management in a Telecommunication company even though I had trained half the people that were above me.

The best is when I went to get a loan to consolidate my debt and they told me I needed to pay my debts before they could give me a loan... but my white roommate walked out of the same bank with over $1k more than he asked for even though he was 8 times more in debt then me.

and I really enjoyed that 21% Car loan I was given when the average rate was like 2%.

Those were the days.

I will say this... This post was started with a story about blacks receiving loans and whites being denied... and it wasn't too long ago that a large Chrysler lender in the MidWest was popped because he denied all blacks loans stating that "n*ggers don't pay their bills." I could have easily started a post speaking about the racism against blacks but I didn't because I realize that there are some decision makers who have their heads up their asses when it comes to race.

Growing up in a neighborhood that quickly went to shit in the late 80's I can honestly say that the programs in place are needed because there are some GOOD people who are victims of circumstance and need a little help to get going which is what the programs are intended to do. When people blatently abuse these programs it places a stigma on the ptrogram on a whole and causes people to stand up and say they are unfair.

I"m pretty tired right now so please excuse me if my arguments are not as eloquent as I would like them to be... No Soup raises some interesting points though... some that will be addressed as soon..

as I get...

some...

sleem.

zzzzzzzzzzz

__________________
Your future looks very very grim!

Shades

I find it more than a little condescending that you've chosen to cast me as paranoid. I suppose it allows you to not answer any questions I've raised (how the clubs will erase racial/gender barriers rather than apparently heightening them and wether or not it's inherently racist to form exclusive groups based on any such conceit, not just based on whiteness), but it's still crass. I'm not the slightest bit threatened by minority clubs, nor am I concerned that the assorted other races are "out to get me." Before they could be out to get me, I'd have to first believe that every other white person and I share some kind of bond by virtue of our skin color, and I don't. Hell, I can't stand members of my own family.

Additionally, the last 7 years have taught me a valuable lesson at college- no matter what, as long as you work hard and do well, nothing can hold you back. A while ago, the student government wanted to require that everyone take a diversity class, so I wrote to the paper. It is all true:

I can honestly say that in my circle of friends, the school I'm in, and the general scene I hang out at, white people are almost always the minority present. Does that make me feel self conscious? If it does, does that mean I can only really be comfortable when surrounded by white people? Should I want there to be more white people around me so I can feel comfortable? Do you realize how stupid that sounds? Do you hear how it is exactly as stupid to say I want more women in engineering because I'm a woman and I want there to be more of my kind around? How did the idea arise that there needed to be some percentage of women in engineering to begin with? Shouldn't women just do what they want to? I have a hard time believing that, especially now when women out number men in college, there are women who REALLY want to be in Engineering, but are taking philosophy instead because of that damed patriarchy.

As to just having a group to "promote your culture": again, how is that not raising a barrier? For the anthropologically minded out there, we call these "boundary defining mechanisms." And if you raise those barriers based on your skin color or plumbing, congratulations. You've just boldly declared that, yes, you consider your race to a group that you belong to, meaning that you do not belong to the other races. As a logical extension, it means that, for you, there exists an "us" defined by a common skin tone, and a "them", defined by a different skin tone. Is that not the very definition of racist? I think you would answer yes without thinking if someone defined "us" as white and "them" as not, so how not when any other color/gender is used in place of "white"?

Kadath

Jesus, Shades.
Do you honestly not understand that "wanting more whites around so you can feel comfortable" sounds stupid because whites are the MAJORITY? Maybe not in your social circle, maybe even not at your school(though I find that highly unlikely) but in the country, in the media. Women/minorities don't want more of their kind around, they want a support group. A white male can swing a cat in an engineering classroom and hit 10 of his group.
Your article is amusing in that it provides, once again, anecdotal evidence of three (3) professors that are NOT white males in your department. Whether they are the best professors is not the point; what percentage of the total do they make up? Now, to be fair, I don't expect it to be much. Engineering has been white male dominated for such a long time that there just aren't that many others to go around.
I understand that you have a hard time believing women don't go into engineering because of the patriarchy. Get some numbers on the percentage of women in the engineering programs. Come back to me.

__________________
it's quiet in here

NoSoup

Although I cannot say for certain, the fact that you obtained a higher than market rate loan and denied a consolidation loan to what appears to be your Debt-to-Income Ratio - I would imagine that poor credit has more to do with you being denied than your race. I would imagine that your friend probably had better credit or a higher income, and that's why he was approved.

As far as the Chryster lender goes, I didn't really hear about it, but I have no doubts as to whether or not it actually could happen. However, the difference lies in the type of loan. Mortgage loans are government monitored and lenders are given specific guidelines that they are required by law to file. Unlike vehicle loans, race is actually required with the HMDA (home mortgage disclosure act). If we take an application in person and the customer chooses not to disclose their race, we must make a visual observation. And like I previously stated, non-whites get approved meeting less stringent requirements than whites.

I hope you see the difference now. That particular Chrystler bastard made life miserable for quite a few black people, but it isn't universal, affecting people all over the country - put into place by our own government. People are entitled to different opinions and although wrong in my opinion, certainly can be racist if they choose to be. The Government, however, is not.

EDIT: I reread your post, and I see that I may have misinterpreted it. By "Those were the Days" I am now unsure as to how long ago that was, the HMDA came out in 1975, I believe - so if the time period you are talking about came before than, you would have a much more valid opinion than I, as I wasn't really alive then...

NoSoup

It just occured to me that I didn't even mention the original "purpose" of the HMDA reporting laws. Never was this originally set out to ever have any effect on the outcome of the underwriting (approved, denied, ect) It was simply going to be a tool to make sure that lenders weren't discriminating when it came to borrowing out money.

However, due to suble changes throughout the years since it's inception, suddenly there are lending decisions based on race/sex.

Sorry about that, being in the business I sometimes overlook things that I know and realize that it certainly isn't common knowledge...

Shades

Jesus Kadath (Hail!),

You don't seem to be able to get it, so I'm going to break it down as granularly as possible.

And that support group is, what, white males? Or is it composed almost exclusively of others of the same minority/gender? Why is someone of the same skin color automagically of the same group? Why do you consistently equate gender and race as a group that we not only could, but SHOULD identify with?

Again, who the hell says that some other random white male is part of "his group?" We're not all in the Klan. What is is about "identifying with people based on the false connection of skin color makes you a racist" don't you understand? Even if I went to India where white people are a minority, if I still said "I wish I was surrounded by more good old whities because I don't feel comfortable around these brownies" THAT WOULD MAKE ME A RACIST. In fact, if I was all alone on the Moon, saying or thinking that would STILL make me a racist. Where you are and what proportion of people are part of your "group," as you define them, is completely irrelevant. A racist attitude could exist even in vacuum.

I'm aware that "three" == 3, thanks.

It's low. Is it low because AT THE COLLEGE LEVEL they're discouraged from signing up? Let me assure you, the answer is no. By the time you get to college, whatever damage has been done. If you want to really fix it, don't slap a band-aid on at the end of the race. Fix it at the source. If you have any proof that any one of the top, say, 20 (twenty) engineering schools have tried to keep women out in the last however many years back you care to go, you get back to me.

NoSoup

I just reread this post again... This is EXACTLY what I am talking about. Although I stated in a previous post that it was probably due to poor credit, let's say for the sake of arguement that it was indeed because you are black. Did you like being denied because of your race? Do you think it's ok that your white friend got the loan even though he had more debt?*

If we are using this as an example, this is exactly what is taking place all over the US thousands of times a day. Whites have stricter underwriting guidelines than non-whites. Basically, in non lender jargon-

If a white person and a non-white person, with identical credit, income, bills, ect. walked into a bank & asked for a mortgage loan to buy a house, if the white person gets denied, there is a chance that the non-white may get approved.

I think that it's B.S., and probably feel much the same way that you do about being denied because you are black. However, the difference lies in the fact that this is government sponsered, so it isn't just the occasional bank that is discriminatory, it is mandatory for all banks to be.

*I am not trying to give the impression with those questions that I am in any way hostile about this, I am simply trying to show that regardless of who is discriminated against, is still sucks.

For all those people out there saying that white people are just whining, you may be right. But, we didn't just say that non-whites were just whining when they said they were being discriminated against. I will be the first to admit that white people aren't nearly as affected by discrimination as non-whites were in America's History (lynching, ect) but, discrimination is discrimination is discrimination.

To be honest, this probably is the first time in American history that discrimination against whites has really happened on a large scale, and to call us whiners or think that we are just pitying ourselves is ignorant, while at the same time complaining about discrimination against non-whites - because it is the same thing. It is simply percieved differently because whites were gernerally doing the discriminating in the past.

I personally stand for equality, true equality where nothing is judged based on race or sex. I certainly think that lowering the standards to be able to incorperate a more diverse workforce is the worst thing that we can do. Instead of everyone striving for excellence, certain genders/non-whites have less stringent requirements that could have a terrible affect in the end.

An example of this would be firefighters. To be a firefighter, you have to be able to perform certain physical tasks, such as carry a hose X feet, drag a person X heavy for X long, ect. However, women are usually not as strong as men. (Please don't read to much into this, there are many of buff women out there and weak men, but generally speaking, this holds true) To combat this, they lowered the physical requirements for women to meet to become a fightfighter.

If a loved one of mine dies in a fire because a women that was put there so that we could live in a more politically correct world is unable to carry/drag that person out, when a man's requirements would allow him to do so, I will be one pissed off guy. I am all for equality, but to put peoples lives at risk to be politically correct just seems assinine.

Kadath

This is going downhill fast. I apologize for taking us down that particular road. Maybe we could try for civility.

Or...maybe not.


You exhaust me. I'm not the one who thinks we should identify with our own group. I am explaining to you, who apparently never wanted for a peer group, why they would want others like them.


You're right. The Society of Black Engineers exists solely to form a protective barrier of brothas against the crackers. I do grant that you could be a racist anywhere.

Not an uncommon technique in written media, much like, say, using the double equals to indicate equality rather than definition when one is experienced in coding.


They aren't actively discouraged from signing up for a career in engineering. It's a societal attitude. And in order to fix it at the source, we need more female/minority role models such as the bevy you listed so that people could look up to them. I note that you have conceded the point that there are very few women in the program, but I wonder if you would do me the favor of giving me numbers, that we might both be edified. If you do, I will be glad to explore your question regarding discrimination against women in the top twenty engineering schools.

__________________
it's quiet in here

Sparhawk

Actually, NoSoup, I think Grimlok is making the exact opposite point. I'll wait for a response from him though, but it seems to me that, at least on a commercial bank level, your charge doesn't stand, and is in effect the reverse of your charge. I have different things that I can speak intelligently on, white-, or reverse-racism not being one of them (with the exception of one of my asian ex's parents). But I will keep your experience in mind when I apply for a home mortgage.

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

Zeld2.0

Great to see this thread has already degraded so fast...

Oh and I'll leave it at this:

You are who are you are. Nothing will change that. Your perspective? More often than not, it will not change either, because you are who you are.

One person sees a problem, another doesn't.

No amount of talking is going to change a person's mind when they're not going to be open about it. Claim it as you wish, but honestly unless you find a way to change races (unlikely) and start over (maybe in a few centuries ) then there's not much that's going to change because this is all SUBJECTIVE on our feelings, emotions, and experiences.

Shades

Civility is good.

I think maybe we should back up into semantics for a moment. Perhaps we could agree that racist behavior is defined by any action taken, either with positive or negative consequences, where the most significant factor in deciding how to act was the race of the people involved. So, I might decide to give Sally a sticker for the sole reason that she was asian, or I might decide to slap Sally for the sole reason that she was not asian. Both are racist actions.

If that definition is OK, then perhaps we could make an assertion- racist behavior is bad. It's bad because it is not based on an honest appraisal of the other person's individual merits, but on a superficial quality that they have no control over.

Peers are generally fine. "Peers" as defined by skin color are not. Again, I just need to know how defining a group by its skin color isn't racist. Someone may define their peers as other people from the same area, city, or social strata, but defining them only on skin color is racist, period.

So much for civility. My point was this: creating a Black Engineers Society creates a solid, tangible delimitation between black engineers and non-black engineers (not just the crackers). This is exactly identical to constructing a conceptual "us" defined by the same skin color and a "them" defined by any other skin color. Doing so enforces the conceit that black people are somehow different than the rest of us. This only perpetuates the racial divide in our society. How could it not?

This is an assertion, not a fact. Please back this up in some way. By your logic, the fact that my advising professor is Chinese, my undergraduate boss was black, and the most skilled professor was a woman, not to mention the fact that not one of my friends, neighbors, or relatives have Ph.D.s, should make me feel discouraged about being an engineering graduate student. How does it give you confidence to do something just because someone with similar physical traits has already done it? If you're sitting around, waiting for someone to inspire you to do something, rather than being self-motivated and doing it because you want to, you're not going to have a successful life.

According to the Women in Engineering Program, it's 22%. I would have guessed 25%, but I guess I should have factored in the dearth of ladies in Electrical Engineering. I'm not sure how that proves that women are being discouraged from enrolling at the college level. As long as all women have the free choice to apply and an equal opportunity with respect to every other applicant to be accepted to the college of engineering, then I say the system is good. Even if the percentage of women enrolled was 5%, as long as they had the exact same opportunity and odds of getting in, the system is not broken at the college level. If you want to say that more women SHOULD WANT to be engineers, you've slipped into social engineering, which I believe is beyond the scope of this topic.

In 2003, there were 51.2% women in the entire university. As there are less than that in the college of engineering, there must be another college that has a less than 48.8% men. Should we not find that college and try to boost male enrollment? Or does that sound stupid?

Shades

Zeld2.0

Thanks for reminding us that the universally relativistic argument is alive and well.

Kadath

Shades: This is just a placeholder to let you know I'll be back, probably around noon EST tomorrow to fight with you some more. I notice you do the majority of your posting in the night hours for me, and I didn't want you to think I'd abandoned you.

__________________
it's quiet in here

tecoyah

I am so very glad I left this thread.......

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

NoSoup

Hmm... not sure what you mean by a commercial bank level, if you could elaborate, I'd be more than happy to respond

analog

*SIGH*

Every post from now on will be made in a respectful manner and in accordance with the rules and values set forth for debate on this forum. You have all been warned.

I'm tempted to kill it NOW, but I see a real debate kicking and screaming to come out of all the petty bullshit I'm reading.

Thank you.

NoSoup

Thanks analog
for keeping this thread open. Please review my posts and if you see me borderline-rule breaking, please feel free to PM me. I am rather new here in politics, and am not sure what exactly passes as status quo.

Thanks again

Grimlok

Hey... Finally got a chance to get back.

I guess what I was trying to say in tired rambling was that I don't think that what I experienced with the loan and what you noticed with your job is indicative of American Society as a whole. I think there are some people who abuse the system and use their position of power to actively promote their own race and in essence, discriminate against others.

So I'd make the assumption that the person making decisions in your company is either 1) Black or 2) a Black sympathizer or 3) a Black racist (as in racist against whites and this can be a white person). On the same note, I could assume the person who made the decision in my situation was either 1) White or 2) A White sympathizer or 3)A White racist (and I should note could be a black person).

To answer your question about how it felt to be denied... it felt like crap and for a few days I was even bitter towards my friend because he's the one that suggested I go get the loan because it was "sooooooooooo easy." But I got over it quick... I didn't take it personal and I chalked it up to another one of those roadblocks life threw my way. As far as When it happened... I'm talking mid-90's so it was fairly recent.

In looking back I'm shocked that I considered the color of my skin a road block because even though I grew up in a rough neighborhood... my parents always told me it was more out there and more importantly that it was attainable. I went to a college that was 95% White and most of my friends were white. We'd go out drinking and they'd all be like "How does it feel to be black?" and I would tell them stories about my youth and they'd be like "holy shit." But it never ever occurred to me that my Childhood was that amazing... it was normal for me to see the things that were going on but they just couldn't believe.

What I'm trying to get at is, in looking back to that time, when I was being denied credit and my white friends were so amazed at what I thought was a "normal" childhood, I never ever chalked it up to racism and I never realized how divided our cultures were and still are. This discussion started with an observation by a white guy and then others started to speak up... they had noticed the same thing. Then others started to contradict that observation with observations of their own...

I've never experienced preferential treatment as a black man in anything that mattered; namely, School, Jobs, Credit. Nor do I expect to receive preferential treatment. I'm the type to give the benefit of the doubt when things don't go my way in those situations. I just work harder to achieve the desired results... I may have to work harder than some others but I accept that.

Like my dad says... builds character.

The real question for you NoSoup is where do you work at... I'm looking to buy a house pretty soon and I could use a good loan.


Please Note: This post probably did nothing but progress this thread but it was mean to expound a little more my first post. I'll reread and post any other thoughts that I may have forgotten.

__________________
Your future looks very very grim!

NoSoup

Grimlock -

Thanks for replying

I see that we are not quite yet on the same page as far as my original concern goes. I must not have explained myself well enough, so I'll give it another whirl.

Well, whereas the person who made the decision on your loan could be one of those options, "The Company" that I work at has no decision makers here when it comes to loans. The underwriting processes are Federally Mandated. Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac are basically governmental agencies that have a huge effect on underwriting (approving) policies and guidelines, and as a result every approval or denial are based on their policies. In essence, what the quote should read is

"...So I'd make the assumption that the government is either......"

Does that make sense? Some people out there certainly are asses and may allow racial issues to come into play when making decisions, but all Mortgage lending is federally mandated - and it isn't just "may allow racial issues" - in fact, it requires racial information & then makes decisions based off of it.

So in answer to your question - apply with pretty much any bank out there, as you will experience the same underwriting guidelines, including HMDA info, anywhere you go. Preferential treatment based on race is basically required by law.

Hope this clears things up - I'm looking forward to your response

matthew330

Long before I ever heard of the TFP I used to visit a board called "blacktalk", and this thread reminded me of something someone whose name happened to be "blackconservative" said (obviously the only one of his mindsight, aside from little old white me) and I thought it was pretty cool.....

"Our ancestors spent their lives dreaming of freedom, and now that we have it - we spend our lives dreaming of slavery."

AngelicVampire

I am a student currently, studying engineering. However a few years ago when I applied to study engineering I applied for scholarships, there were a fair number:

Academic Bursaries (10)
Financial Support Bursaries (25)
Company funded Scholarships (36)
Female Engineering Scholarships (10)
Female Support Scholarship (5)
Black Engineering Scholarships (5)

(and a few more that I cannot remember). Now I did well out of this picking up an academic bursary (because I had exceptionally high grades) and a company funded scholarship (because I am aware of how to deal with interviews and know enough about my subjects to actually discuss them with the interviewers). I was running against people of all races and genders, however there were some of these that I could not apply for, not becuase I was not qualified but becuase I was a white male.

Ok, firstly I am from what is considered a deprived area (while not poor we are not exactly rolling in money), our school was good however not on the same par as some private ones. However I achieved good grades and so did a few others in my school. I have no racist problems, I hang out with people of all religions and colours (pink, brown, light brown, dark pink etc...).

I find this wrong however, people are not equal, not becuase of colour or gender but because they are human. I know people who were infinitely better academically and more in need financially of some of these bursaries and scholarships than some of the people who achieved them, and the reason was that these people could not apply.

I don't know why colour has anything to do with this, if I apply for a loan you should look at my financial state, my previous investments etc, not my colour. If I apply for a course I want you to look at my grades and suchlike not my gender. Ok I am probably "privelaged" in some way however I cannot see this, from my perspective everyone is equal, I know that I do not discriminate based on things so why should people do it against me... I have felt this as people who are in worse financial states are offered loans and things despite the fact that they cannot afford to pay them back nor do they consider not paying to be wrong.

Society should be non-discriminatory, heck take the "race" part off of forms totally... quotas and ratios are inherently wrong, its not about having 10 white men 5 blacks, 2 women, 3 gays and a guy in a wheel chair in your work place its about having the 21 best people that can fill the jobs, if a disabled person gets a job over a non disabled person to fill this quota it is wrong, if the best person for the job is that gay black disabled female then she should get the job... I know people who have been told that they will not get a job because they are white and the company needs to meet "integration targets". What happened to the good old system of the best person for the job.

smooth

Do you have a hard time believing that companies can't find qualified people from minority groups?

When a minority gets a job, or you don't get one, why the sudden blame on affirmative action? It sounded like you received a fair amount of financial help from your illustration above.

Why can't a company fill the 21 slots with the best people while still maintaining a high degree of integration. The person with a disability might even be better qualified than the person without one, but I received the impression from your post that you would attribute the highering decision solely to the external factor--the person could have disabilities and be the best qualified.

When people who hire others come on this board and start explaining how they are constantly forced to turn away the best candidates for sub-par ones, then I will believe such claims.

Otherwise, I don't know how the candidate (posters in this thread who feel they were treated unfairly) could even know why he or she was not hired. Every candidate I ever knew thought he or she deserved the job more than the person hired. It's not as if you think to yourself, oh yeah, that person really does deserve the job more than me.

It's also not as if you even know who actually gets the job. I've never received a call along the lines of, "oh yeah, we hired that guy sitting next to you in the lobby." I don't even know anyone who received a call along the lines of "we would like to hire you but we had to hire that guy sitting next to you in the lobby because of his race." I think that's a pretty unlikely scenario--but maybe someone actually experienced that.

I'm more inclined to believe that any hiring manager is more likely to use that as an excuse and isn't very likely to tell the person they aren't hiring anything, must less the backroom decision making in regards to who to hire.

Basically, I'll agree that some companies want a diverse pool of workers, but I suspect this occurs far more often due to internal desires rather than external government regulations. Even so, one shouldn't conclude that just because companies are dedicated to diversifying their employee pool they are then resorting to turning down better candidates just to fill those slots--they are most likely to be finding qualified minorities. Since they comprise a lower proportion of the population, companies might turn down qualified non-minorities while they continue looking. It doesn't particularly matter in the long run, since qualified non-minorities are probably all in line--so companies can afford to be patient and selective.

I also want to point out, as someone who has been in a position to hire others, that there is no real objective way to ensure qualification. If that were they case, we wouldn't need interviews. Your belief regarding your qualifications notwithstanding, employers might be looking for qualities that aren't published, or may even decide based on what was had for breakfast. The point is hiring, like school admissions and scholarship awards, are extremely subjective matters and rarely result in what outsiders think would be better choices. But that's the point, outsiders (as in, anyone here who wasn't hired by a company or wasn't given a loan, etc.) don't have any further connection with the company deciding and aren't privy to the reasons underlying the decision. They are just speculating--and that speculation is going to redirect the cause of the rejection to an external source that is blameworthy.

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

pig

Hmmm...after reading the posts in this thread, I've got a few thoughts. When talking about the affect of not having enough minority role models in positions of authority and power, I was reminded of something that I heard a while ago. Does anyone think that there might a tendency, with the advent and maturity of race and gender based affirmative action programs, to cause any feelings of something akin to "imposter syndrome" in white males? If the basic idea behind the need to make corrective measures based on race and gender is that they have historically been discriminated against, are white males kids starting to wonder if their role models are hypocritical bastards? I think it's a good thing for white kids to wonder if their ancestors mistreated other ethnicities, just as it's a good thing for other ethnicities to be aware of the fact that their people have traditionally been discriminated against in America. However, if the minority position can lead to a complex, can the reverse - and is that healthy? Just curious.

It seems to me in a lot of the comments that I've read, many of the posters are decrying all recognition and differentiation on the basis of race, and I'm not sure how I feel about that. I agree that the definition of racism is making differentiation or judgement on the basis of race, but I think this can be taken too far. First, how can you actually appreciate diversity if you don't recognize and judge based on race? You have to recognize that there are differences to appreciate them. As for the discussion concerning the Society for Black Engineers or Women's Engineers, I've thought about that before too. And the conclusion that I've come to is that there would, in fact, be a difference between the Society for Male Engineers, and the Society of Women Engineers, or The Society for White Engineers and The Society of Black Engineers. In particular, most of the people in the "minority" societies are pretty good people, and I like to hang out them, in general, as much as anyone else. A Society for White/Male Engineering, would suck ass. I'm a White Male Engineer, and I would masturbate with a sandpaper glove before I went to that meeting. It would be a meeting of about five of my closest Klan buddies and Neocon-puking friends. Even if you would like hanging about with one of the above mentioned factions of white male society, there's a different stigma attached to the White Male societies, and it's not coincidental. I think that things are starting to change, and this dialogue is a marker of that. I also agree that a lot of caucasian groups have been discriminated against (Italians, Irish, French Hugenots), but that for a while in America, this divisions do seem to pale versus white/black.

I think that these types of discussion are useful, but the truth of the matter is that this course of dialogue is more important than any legislation, in terms of ending the negative aspects of racism. All the affirmative action programs and scholarship programs are only crappy kickstands to try to correct in imbalance in the way things are, not the way they're supposed to be, in my opinion. I personally feel that it is becoming appropriate to more heavily consider economic situation and less heavily racial profile, but perhaps not completely eliminate race. I actually detest affirmative action, but so far, no one has really come up with a better alternative that's is pragmatic and enforcable. Saying "love your neighbor" doesn't seem to have a great track record.

One last thought, because everyone's been dealing in hypotheticals. Let's assume that two candidates apply for opportunity X, and they are exactly and completely and totally equivalent, except one is a white male, and one is something else. After an interview, they are both personable and witty and well informed. They answer the questions so identically that the interviewers are wondering if they are not joined in a para-psychological bond that has been unheard of since the Gods of the Greeks rules on Mount Olympus. Who gets the job. One position, two people. No difference.

__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

theusername

If I own a business I am hiring the minority in order to prevent him from suing my ass. Same goes with the same situation except I have to fire one guy.

Shades

Yes, clearly when we white people congregate, only the inbred, conservative among us do. In fact, all predominantly white groups have always had that characteristic. Goodness, where did I get off thinking that white people weren't inherently bad, especially in large numbers? YEE-HAA!

I'm still trying to decide how painting every white group that way, especially one peopled by engineers (who, in my experience, tend to be well-educated enough to not be racist a-holes) wasn't a flat-out flame. In case it was not,

Which, of course, presupposes that white kids will automatically choose only white people as role models, instead of minority athletes or media stars. Considering the dominance of hip hop on the airwaves, I'm thinking that maybe not every single white kid only looks up to other white people.

++

--

I'm only doing so in the interest of fairness. If I'm to believe that there is nothing good about being white, that white people have only been a plague on the Earth, and that showing even the slightest hint of even identifying as, let alone taking the slightest scintilla of pride in being white is a vicious slur upon every non-white person around me, even though I and all of the white people I personally know have never done a single thing to harm another person based in part or in whole on their skin color, then I submit that neither should any other race be allowed to do so. And if anything I claimed in that pervious (not entirely serious) sentence was false, then I submit that I would be allowed to organize a White Pride parade (we invented Tang, bitches!) and not be run out of town on a rail. But I would be. Seriously, please just give me one solitary example in your entire life when anything- an educator, a textbook, a TV show, a movie,- every once even intimated that being proud of being white was anything less than branding yourself as a racist.

And then tell me how perpetuating that attitude, combined with giving preferential treatment to non-whites on the basis of their skin color only, will someday eliminate racism in our society. The treatment is still separate, and it's still unequal. I strongly believe that the only way to do so is to make things truly fair- everyone gets the same shake. If people discriminate based on race or gender, throw the book at them hard, but until they do, don't treat them like criminals. Don't require that they hire a certain percentage of women- who says they weren't going to anyway, or that there are that many qualified women in that field in that geographical area that applied to that company? Racial quotas carry the underlying assumption that the company is run by racist turds that you can't turn your back on for one second.

Race-based initiatives in education do to the same thing. They say that the public school system is a machine built to advance the good ol' boys and hold the rest down. Even more insultingly, they say that, rather than try to fix public schools, they'll just slap a band-aid on at the end, when applying for college. At that time, your race will be taken into "consideration," meaning that, although you may have low academic and test scores, you could be admitted anyway. I don't see any other way to interpret that other than colleges just don't expect as much from minorities, which would really piss me off if I was a minority. I'm not, so I don't have the right to be.

Zeld2.0

Shades I can certainly echo your comment on colleges and minorities - it does still irk me that they allow for 'points' or whatever system to a minority based on race. I've voted heavily against that treatment in CA and a lot of times, even many other minorities have agreed to shoot it down. Now I went to a prestigious school in the end anways and did fine and all but here goes..

I thinkwe just have to be careful on what line we draw it. On the one hand, there are many people in minorities who really are brilliant and excellent students. What might shock many people outside of California though is no surprise to many living in CA itself is the fact that in the UC (University of California) system, a very large % of the schools are Asian a very small % in the country (4% last i checked).

I don't remember the exact numbers but it something like this: At University of California Irvine, the number of Asians is closer to 50% than 30%. At Berkeley, the conservative estimate is 30%.

That's a lot of students and considering each school has an average of something like 20,000 students - it leads to two conclusions/ideas:

1 - Minorities can succeed. This is true and applies to everyone. Now on the one hand its because many Asians are either first or second generation immigrants here and often there is a lot of pressure to succeed from their parents or themselves. I will say, though, that most of these people are fairly well off in society or are around the average but certainly few are in the poverty range.

2 - Minorities are taking up spaces (the other conclusion). That is what one might say - but I think that large # of people that is disproportionately Asian is hard to say. The UCs don't give points or anything to Asians and indeed most Asians feel they are cheated out by other races now since they have such a large percentage.

From my own experiences with the system, from friends, and from thoughts I can echo your sentiment that race is often times a factor.

But I don't think its worth blaming things over racial treatment as certainly there are a ton of people capable in college, jobs, wherever without a need for preferential treatment.

That being said, however, I will still say that economic factors are most likely to dictate a person's performance and not race and it should be financial and economic considerations, not race.