Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
In what way is benefitting any Black people who had previously been denied opportunities a problem?The problem with AA Admissions is that they weren't really benefiting the poor black kid from the ghetto, they benefit the affluent black kid from the suburbs whose parents were lucky or hard working enough to make it.
“Teflon Theory of American History.”This has nothing to do with race. These colleges have been graduating blacks at least since 1970. Every one of those blacks can claim a legacy spot for their children. Either they don't want to donate in the amounts that are necessary to secure a spot. Or, their affirmative action education didn't result in a high enough income to allow them to be this charitable.
Our government does not agree:Because they don't need it. Except for a few intersectional feminists, most women know that they can rise or fall on their own merits. They don't need set-asides for jobs at this point.
With the exception of Coyote and a couple of other we are in the midst of a group of people either with amnesia or dementia. Because they ignore how long whites have been given help. And the excuse of whites pay taxes forgets that we also pay taxes and most of our tax money has helped whites. So as the great Angela Davis has said:In what way is benefitting any Black people who had previously been denied opportunities a problem?
And being poor doesn't mean being mentally deficient. A poor Black student who is admitted would have the same access to scholarships, grants and loans that anyone else would, correct? How is that a bad thing? And how does this not help that student coming from poverty?
So.... blacks don't think their kids are worth paying for a legacy spot. Thanks for clearing that up.“Teflon Theory of American History.”
“Anything that took place over 30 years ago is Ancient History. It has Absolutely No Effect on the present. Or not much. Unless it was something good like the light bulb or the Declaration of Independence. Therefore those who make a big deal of the bad stuff in the past, like slavery, are Living in the Past and need to Get Over It.
Jim Crow laws were overturned by the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s. Therefore according to Teflon Theory the Jim Crow period is now Ancient History. It has Absolutely No Effect on how White Americans alive today think and act. None whatsoever. Or not much. So racism is pretty much dead.
Instead of Jim Crow’s effect slowly weakening over time like you would expect, Teflon Theory would have you suppose that it just disappeared like magic one afternoon sometime in the late 1960s. Even though many White Americans alive now were alive back in Jim Crow times. Even though many others were brought up and shaped by those who were alive back then: parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, teachers, writers, film directors, television producers, news editors and so on.”
This is what right-wing whites think justifies their opposition to Affirmative Action. The stroke of a pen made racism magically vaporize and no one today is impacted by the legacy of that racism.
White racists automatically default to the "lack of merit" argument when it comes to Black people and always it is alleged that Black people are displacing "substantially more qualified" white people when they are given job opportunities allegedly "not due to merit but solely based on skin color".That doesn't address the question. Does your opposition to legacy admissions extend to HBCU or just to traditionally white ones? IOW, are legacy admissions universally negative in your eyes (it would seem so, since you always complain about them) or not?
Again, your answer was rejected by the First Circuit Court and the case was argued using the Equal protecrion clause of the 14th Amendment. If legacies are allowed to stand it, is just more evidence of white privilege.To answer my question, yes, their complaint is based on disparate impact.
This is going to be a tough case to win.
Only a racist idiot even tries that tactic.So.... blacks don't think their kids are worth paying for a legacy spot. Thanks for clearing that up.
It sounds like I thought that your question was too stupid for me to waste time answering.It sounds a lot like you're arguing HBCU can't be held to the same standard as others, thus making your antipathy towards legacy admissions a race-based decision.
Oh de WWAAYYCISS be commin! Holy de lawsy laws. Gots to be skeered ub dem WWAAYYCISS.Only a racist idiot even tries that tactic.
Why? The EEOC makes cases due to disparate treatment and disparate impact all of the time.To answer my question, yes, their complaint is based on disparate impact.
This is going to be a tough case to win.
Apparently you do care, and you're really going to care in a few years when whites are the minority.Oh de WWAAYYCISS be commin! Holy de lawsy laws. Gots to be skeered ub dem WWAAYYCISS.
No one is ignoring anything. Whites don't care. Go, suffer, it's comedy.
They are fishing.Why? The EEOC makes cases due to disparate treatment and disparate impact all of the time.
We know that, we all saw Felicity & the other one get a slap on the wrist for scheming to get their kids in college by falsifying their sports involvement in order to obtain scholarships slated for certain athletes.So, it’s not because they are white, it’s because money talks.
You're completely wrong. White conservative women who marry white men may believe they don't need AA but not women in general. Something like 70 percent of the Asians in America support AA. And by the way you're talking, you really don't know what it is.More equal time refuting...
Okay, IM, but here's the thing.
Women may have benefited from AA when it was first introduced, but they don't need it anymore.
Asians have concluded that AA doesn't benefit them, because they can make it on their own despite what an awfully racist country this is.
The problem with AA Admissions is that they weren't really benefiting the poor black kid from the ghetto, they benefit the affluent black kid from the suburbs whose parents were lucky or hard working enough to make it.
So what we are likely to see is "life story" considerations in college admission in the future, which will benefit poor people of all races.
As I have said, I've had a couple of times I've been passed up for opportunities to advance an AA agenda. One time they promoted a woman who had no business being a supervisor because another woman who had no business being a supervisor had been fired and was suing.
Another time, they brought in a black female even though I had been doing the job for more than a year as a contractor. This woman couldn't keep up with the work and spent about half her day shopping on Amazon.
So please, please, please don't tell me that AA never results in unqualified people being advanced. It doesn't pass the laugh test.
.
Companies that accept funding from the federal government are required to submit information on their workforce annually if they want to remain in compliance and continue to receive funding.They oppose it because it’s bullshit and lies. SOME women may have been hired due to gender and race but prove that they are the majority. Don’t post so called studies, how do you even find out the truth?
It's amazing that there is no set of circumstances in your world apparently in which there areWhat about from the other side? What about the students, such as the Asian with a 1560 SAT and a perfect GPA, who was rejected from all IVYs because he was of the “undesired” race - a factor that has since been ruled unconstitutional? What about all the middle-class whites who were brilliant students, also rejected because the IVY wanted more blacks? And Lord knows that they rejected amazing Jewish students because we sure don’t need no more Jews!
Why is it fair that top students - valedictorians, perfect GPAs, and 1560+ SAT scores - be punished under rules that are unconstitutional?
who also are Black.valedictorians, perfect GPAs, and 1560+ SAT scores
