So I’ve been having a bit of a discussion with a few users @ArkNebradia @James0909 @fireman1294 @firsttimecaller about Affirmative action and how they believe that someone being chosen based on the color of their skin is racist for a job. A question, or should I say statement was made by @ArkNebradia that more qualified people could be overlooked for a lesser qualified candidate that is the product of affirmative action. He and myself debated the usage of could and will. As it applies to the narrative that Poc are less qualified by his assertion. What are your thoughts on this usage of could and will ? Do they both imply that people of color are less qualified? Or do they mean the opposite ?
Affirmative Action
- Thread starter Nigel Atkinson
- Start date
Not sure why Nigel felt the need to bring this here... but... ok.
And his prose isnt very clear, so allow me to elaborate:
If someone says the following:
"Affirmative action leads to the possibility that someone who is more qualified COULD be overlooked for a lesser qualified candidate in the interest of diversity..."
can you then deduce that this person believes that ALL people of color are unqualified to work?
I personally dont believe that people of color are any more or less qualified for any type of work than anyone else... but Nigel apparently believes otherwise. And last I checked, Nigel wasnt the arbiter of what me, or anyone else is thinking... but I digress.
Feels kind of like posting in the lions den here, but whatever. It would be nice to have a legitimate discussion about the pros and cons of affirmative action if thats what anyone wants. But I dont understand how I can say I mean to say one thing, and someone else can say "No you mean this." Feel free to discuss.
And his prose isnt very clear, so allow me to elaborate:
If someone says the following:
"Affirmative action leads to the possibility that someone who is more qualified COULD be overlooked for a lesser qualified candidate in the interest of diversity..."
can you then deduce that this person believes that ALL people of color are unqualified to work?
I personally dont believe that people of color are any more or less qualified for any type of work than anyone else... but Nigel apparently believes otherwise. And last I checked, Nigel wasnt the arbiter of what me, or anyone else is thinking... but I digress.
Feels kind of like posting in the lions den here, but whatever. It would be nice to have a legitimate discussion about the pros and cons of affirmative action if thats what anyone wants. But I dont understand how I can say I mean to say one thing, and someone else can say "No you mean this." Feel free to discuss.
Did I not say I was going to bring this discussion here ? I like your attempt at trying to clean it up, but not doing a good job of it. My post was clear and described what was discussed. I also love your attempt at trying to turn what you said back on me. SMH typical. But yes let’s discuss
- b.c.,
I don't read could and will as being synonymous in any situation. Will implies a definite outcome whereas could only implies "might."
Could a more qualified individual be overlooked because of Affirmative Action? Yes. Could a qualified minority be overlooked WITHOUT Affirmative Action? Absolutely, and I know that from personal experience.
In fact minorities are statistically more likely to be overlooked, even qualified ones, and even WITH Affirmative Action in place. This was the subject of a discussion somewhere in this forum quite some time ago, in which two studies were linked - one showing that people with Black sounding names on their resumes were most likely to have those resumes immediately TOSSED without any further consideration and even WITH appropriate qualifications and credentials.
And another in which it was found that for a particular job, Black applicants were required to undergo drug testing that their White couterparts didn't have to take.
.
Could a more qualified individual be overlooked because of Affirmative Action? Yes. Could a qualified minority be overlooked WITHOUT Affirmative Action? Absolutely, and I know that from personal experience.
In fact minorities are statistically more likely to be overlooked, even qualified ones, and even WITH Affirmative Action in place. This was the subject of a discussion somewhere in this forum quite some time ago, in which two studies were linked - one showing that people with Black sounding names on their resumes were most likely to have those resumes immediately TOSSED without any further consideration and even WITH appropriate qualifications and credentials.
And another in which it was found that for a particular job, Black applicants were required to undergo drug testing that their White couterparts didn't have to take.
.
This, right here.
b.c. And I may not agree on much politically, but even we agree that COULD implies a chance, while WILL implies a definite outcome.
And now that bc has come out and said the exact same statement.... @Nigel Atkinson . are you going to accuse bc of believing that all people of color are unqualified to work?
Or can you please just apologize for misunderstanding me and we can move on in this discussion ?
Last edited by a moderator:
oh, and id like to address the rest of bc’s post as well so Nigel can’t just accuse me of picking out the parts I find convenient.
bc pointed out that a qualified person of color COULD get overlooked simply because of the color of his skin. And I also wholeheartedly agree with this. Yes, there are assholes in this world that genuinely hate minorities more than they love success. And I condemn that 100%. I just don’t believe mandating that you MUST have people that have “x” physical trait (whether it be skin color, or gender, or whatever) is a proper solution to the problem.
I’m not even sure I could possibly imagine an all-encompassing solution that solves that problem without introducing new problems to the mix.
- b.c.,
Yes, on the meaning of the words we are in agreement. But I guess I'm wondering (and in keeping with the title of the thread) in what context did this particular question arise.
EDITING FROM MY ORIGINAL QUESTION AFTER YOUR ADDENDUM ABOVE:
So do you or do you not agree to the need for Affirmative Action, even if admittedly not perfect, in order to combat discrimination in hiring and employment, especially considering the rise in white nationalism, supremacy, fascism, Nazism and other increasingly open expressions of hate based sentiment?
Or do you think that because there might not be "an all-encompassing solution that solves that problem without introducing new problems to the mix" we should not attempt any solution at all.
I think the best way to answer this question would be to say... something needs to be done to punish those who discriminate based on race. Unfortunately, I understand that sometimes it’s incredibly difficult to prove.
I do not believe affirmative action is a good way of solving the problem.
I’d like to see an anonymous kind of system where people are maybe just given applicant numbers, rather than names, and the employer/school has absolutely no method to judge their race. The only thing the employer sees in qualifications. But that sounds a little impersonal as well, without a face to face interview.
it’s a really tough problem to solve, I’m afraid to say.
I’m also kind of a big fan of companies being at the peril of their own actions as well, though.
For example... I recall a story many years ago about a small wedding cake designer who wouldn’t make a wedding cake for a gay couple getting married. And there was a big lawsuit about whether or not the cake designer HAS to make the cake for them.
from a free business perspective, I actually believe that the cake designer has every right NOT to make wedding cakes for whoever the please. I believe it’s their business and they have the right to run their business however they see fit... AT THEIR OWN PERIL.
I was delighted to see the community come together, and boycott that particular cake designer, and drive him out of business basically. The community made him pay dearly for his backwards beliefs.
that’s the kind of free system I’d love to see. Unfortunately, most Americans aren’t educated enough/motivated enough to really do much as far as small conveniences in order to make that kind of an impact all the time.
Take Amazon, and how they pay their workers. People argue that Amazon should pay its workers more. I argue that Amazon can pay its workers whatever it wants, provided its abiding by all the minimum wage rules and whatnot. And if people want Amazon workers to be treated better, perhaps they should try boycotting Amazon to send a message. Unfortunately, I don’t see that happening anytime soon lol, but you get my point.
justice imposed by society is the best kind of justice that can be served to a business. Even better than justice imposed by the government.
like.... I’m absolutely LOVING what these normal people are doing to the hedge funds on Wall Street right now. Living proof that if enough people band together, awesome shit can get done.
I see you edited your question, so I figured I’d respond with an updated response.
I’m definitely not saying we should just give up and attempt no solution at all. I’m just not convinced that affirmative action is the correct course of action we should take.
I’m afraid I’m not creative enough to come up with a solution of my own that would still have the positive effects of affirmative action, while reducing the negative effects. But if there’s one out there, I’m all for it.
malakos
Superior Member
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2012
- Posts
- 8,378
- Media
- 30
- Likes
- 6,583
- Points
- 223
- Location
- Cumming, GA, USA
- Sexuality
- No Response
- Gender
- Male
In 1996, the electorate of my state struck down affirmative action as violating our non-discrimination protections, and last year we rejected a bid to overturn the 1996 proposition (by a somewhat wider margin than it had passed in '96). I don't want to comment on the question of how this relates to racism, but as it regards the question of discrimination, I side with the Californian majority in this matter.
Affirmative action is just the wrong approach to dealing with issues of inequality. By the time decisions are being made at the phase of admissions to institutions of higher learning, or job hiring, it is at that point counterproductive to favor a candidate who is at all less qualified just because the given candidate belongs to some disadvantaged class. I fully support attempts to bring greater opportunity to different classes of people further upstream (i.e. in the home, access to affordable healthcare, provisions for sufficient nutrition, good public education for all, etc). Affirmative action is trying to address the problem too far downstream.
Affirmative action is just the wrong approach to dealing with issues of inequality. By the time decisions are being made at the phase of admissions to institutions of higher learning, or job hiring, it is at that point counterproductive to favor a candidate who is at all less qualified just because the given candidate belongs to some disadvantaged class. I fully support attempts to bring greater opportunity to different classes of people further upstream (i.e. in the home, access to affordable healthcare, provisions for sufficient nutrition, good public education for all, etc). Affirmative action is trying to address the problem too far downstream.
- b.c.,
Yes I support programs and real initiatives (not just attempts) to bring greater opportunity to people further upstream as well. However those upstream approaches STILL wouldn't alleviate the discrimination QUALIFIED minorities are facing "downstream."
It almost sounds as if you're saying if "different classes" of people had better healthcare, ate well, and had a good education they wouldn't face discrimination in hiring and employment.
.
It almost sounds as if you're saying if "different classes" of people had better healthcare, ate well, and had a good education they wouldn't face discrimination in hiring and employment.
.
If you use could and will differently then it can imply two different things. But that’s not how you used the words and that’s what I was referring to. Maybe I didn’t explain that clearly here. You kept insisting that a more qualified person would be overlooked because of affirmative action and then changed to could later after I kept asking you why and to elaborate. We were talking about minorities being hired because of the color of their skin and the unfair nature that you all believed it held for the more qualified people. I love how you keep changing things.
Yeah, once again. I’ll Reiterate that we were talking about minorities being hired because of affirmative actions and you guys believing it’s the basis of only being considered because of the color of your skin. At no point was minorities ever brought up as being apart of the ones who are overlooked. From y’all at the very least. So you’re trying to switch up the narrative again.
oh no no no... you don’t get to change your story now. You had 2 pages worth of posts to do that in the other thread!
Please go back to the other thread and and find the quote where I said WOULD!
You are flat out lying now!
change my story ? You sure. I’m going to post what you said so others can get a picture of it clearer.
Please do. I will personally pay you $1000 if you can find a statement where I clearly said or implied that people of color are less qualified to work than white people.
Yeah, once again. I’ll Reiterate that we were talking about minorities being hired because of affirmative actions and you guys believing it’s the basis of only being considered because of the color of your skin. At no point was minorities ever brought up as being apart of the ones who are overlooked. From y’all at the very least. So you’re trying to switch up the narrative again.
The topic we were discussing was how affirmative action isnt fair because it could overlook qualified applicants and choose less qualified applicants for the sake of diversity. You never brought up minorities being overlooked.
Perhaps you should take notes on how b.c. debates... and instead of saying "YOU BELIEVE THIS!" you should be asking "Do you believe this? Why or why not." THATS how debates are done. None of this repetitive strawman bullshit youre peddling.
I'll admit, I dont technically agree with a lot of the things he posts on here... but at least Ive never seen him accuse anyone of saying something they never said, and then using THAT strawman as an attempt to discredit them.
Because guess what... I wouldnt like that person either. Anyone who believes POC are unqualified workers simply because of their skin color can go suck a dick.
Similar threads
