Black Vs. White — It's Not As Black And White As It Seems
	found on AlterNet written by coquito, edited by George (Plastic) [ read unedited ] posted Wed 26 Feb 11:51am
		"Many arguments have surfaced recently against affirmative action, decrying it as a racist policy," coquito reminds us, adding, "but fewer arguments have surfaced arguing why, despite its blatant racial preference, affirmative action is still needed. Enter Tim Wise, who posits that whites in the United States just don't understand that they live in a country that grants them privilege because of their race. They are, as he puts it, like fish who don't appreciate water, with no understanding of their privileged status as Caucasians because it surrounds them every day. They take for granted that

	white America is the biggest collective recipient of racial preference in the history of the cosmos. It has skewed our laws, shaped our public policy and helped create the glaring inequalities with which we still live... Yet few whites have ever thought of our position as resulting from racial preferences. Indeed, we pride ourselves on our hard work and ambition, as if somehow we invented the concepts. "To illustrate his point, he tackles the current University of Michigan controversy, arguing that not only are blacks and other minorities not disproportionately helped by their race or minority standing, but are, in fact, discriminated against by the rest of the policy(see sidebar near bottom of page), which shows preferences 'for students who will almost all be white.' He also directly takes on the heart of the claim made by those suing U of M: "If I had only been black I would have gotten into my first-choice college." The ability to believe that being black would have made no difference (other than a beneficial one when it came time for college), and that being white has made no positive difference, is rooted in privilege itself: the privilege that allows one to not have to think about race on a daily basis... to not have to worry about being viewed as a 'out of place' when driving, shopping, buying a home, or for that matter, attending the University of Michigan."

[ more plastic... ]    

show almost all: 148 commentsmost: 29 commentsbest: 5 comments by oldest first (ignore threads) newest first highest scores first oldest first newest first (ignore threads)

1.  Yes, but...   by Imp777       at Wed 26 Feb 11:55am score of 1     Try getting somebody to say that on prime time TV. Onion, Potato, zucchini, carrot, STEW!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

2.  I Asked my black wife about this...   by mekon       at Wed 26 Feb 12:10pm score of 1.5 interesting     ..(I am white) and she said -"Duh". So, really. "Duh". It would seem to me that this is obvious. most people nowadays don't think of themselves as racist, but still unconciously behave according to subtle racial indoctrination.     For instance, I was watching the news (in Pittsburgh) yesterday, and it was said that police found lots of heroin in the house of a man they arrested for going into people's homes and killing them (a home invader) --they said nothing of his race; he turned out to be white, but when they discussed another similar crime, they made sure to mention that the perpetrators were black. -da mekon "I heard Tom DeLay's blood was in the water and the sharks were encircling, but unfortunately, it turned out a metaphor   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

3.  maybe you missed the point...   by coquito       at Wed 26 Feb 12:17pm score of 1.5 astute   in reply to comment 2     if you had to ask your black wife about this, it isn't so obvious. it wasn't to you anyway, and not, Wise is arguing, to other "whites." that's the point. In Hindu, you have not one God, but many, many, many, many, many gods -- learned Hindu scholar   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   6.  Re: maybe you missed the point...   by mekon       at Wed 26 Feb 12:31pm score of 1   in reply to comment 3     you had to ask your black wife about this, it isn't so obvious. it wasn't to you anyway, and not, Wise is arguing, to other "whites." that's the point. Okay. I see now. Thanks. I think I jumped the gun a little in responding. -mekon "I heard Tom DeLay's blood was in the water and the sharks were encircling, but unfortunately, it turned out a metaphor   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

4.  Balance   by shadarr       at Wed 26 Feb 12:19pm score of 3.5 nuanced     Whether this is true or exaggerated, the question is whether creating deliberate "reverse" discrimination counters the more subtle discrimination, or adds to it? Does it do more good than harm? Does affirmative action, in fact, reduce racism in society as a whole, or does it merely reduce the effects of racism in specific cases? I don't have answers for these questions, but I think they need to be asked. I want to live in a world that is actually free of discrimination, not one that is statistically free of discrimination.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

8.  Re: Balance   by Lemmy Caution       at Wed 26 Feb 12:37pm score of 1.5 scholarly   in reply to comment 4     The missing component, and the most ambiguous one to deal with from a policy perspective, is that of "communities;" the abstraction which aggregates the affiliatory practices of people of like race, class, and culture into real economic unities and neighborhoods. We want affirmative action to improve the well-being of black and other poorer minority communities; however, a successful member of those communities is quite likely to simply move to increasingly-diverse middle-class and upper-middle-class communities and participate in them socially and economically. Which is good for them, but doesn't really help the bulk of the people left behind. And the part of the equation that is uncomfortable for progressives is the fact that, for historically valid reasons, those communities are often suspicious of success, or may have structural problems - rooted, to be sure, in history - that make it less amenable to the sort of intervention that affirmative action could provide. The conservatives who oppose affirmative action tend to ignore history and economics; the progressives tend to ignore, surprisingly, culture and social psychology.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   16.  Re: Balance   by Anonymous Idiot       at Wed 26 Feb 12:58pm score of 1 interesting   in reply to comment 8     We want affirmative action to improve the well-being of black and other poorer minority communities Yes, but where does it say we only want to help poor blacks living in poor black communities? Wealthy blacks suffer from discriminatin as well. I assure you that white males in Mercedes are by far not pulled over as frequently as black males driving one, regardless of whether he lives in a black or white community. In fact, maybe more if he lives in a white one. Besides, the belief that every wealthy black person moves into a white neighborhood is overstated and a bit racist in and of itself. Prince George's County is one of the wealthiest suburbs in the nation, and predominantly black. Atlanta has many black suburbs that are black neighborhoods. You'll find that most educated and wealthy blacks are still not comfortable around whites (mostly because whites remain uncomfortable around them) and fear loss of their racial identity so prefer to maintain their own communities. As I call it, "a self-segregation born of a self-righteous integration."   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   64.  Re: Balance   by Lemmy Caution       at Wed 26 Feb 5:51pm score of 2 informative   in reply to comment 16     Wealthy blacks suffer from racial profiling, not from lack of access to educational institutions or employers. And the fact that the loss of racial identity is conflated with a middle-class lifestyle suggests that there's a cultural component which is now distinct from racism: success is viewed as "not black," and self-sabotage creeps in. Incidentally, virtually no one is "comfortable around" anyone. On a social level, wealthy white people tend to treat each other as poorly as they treat wealthy non-white people - I know than many non-whites treat the aloofness of upper-middle-class people as hostility, not realizing that the aloofness is pretty universally dispensed.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

5.  An impressive article.   by Lemmy Caution       at Wed 26 Feb 12:30pm score of 3 astute     I'm not a strong advocate of affirmative action, but this piece does a good job of supporting the case for it. The nice work it does on selective counterfactuals like "If I had only been black..." is noteworthy, and putting some real numbers on the material and financial advantage accorded by inheritance was an eye-opener. Still, it should be recognized that there is a difference of class within races: that there is a thriving black middle-class that can send its children to good private schools and who can inherit wealth, and that there are large numbers of white families who don't get the benefits allotted to other white people. There is definitely some range of privilege accorded to skin color: people who have jobs to offer tend to give them to people who remind them of themselves, and most of them are white; and racial profiling and assumptions of criminality remain a real problem. But race, class, culture and ethnicity are four different, yet intertwined things, and any effective and fair policy needs to recognize this from the outset.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

10.  great point   by coquito       at Wed 26 Feb 12:43pm score of 1   in reply to comment 5     But race, class, culture and ethnicity are four different, yet intertwined things, and any effective and fair policy needs to recognize this from the outset. the question now is (at least, in the case of U of M) does the University's policy take this into account? at first glance, it seems to, in that points are awarded no just for "race," but also for economic standing and geography, which helps cover "class" and, in some way, culture. (and note, the points awarded for "race" and those awarded for "class" are mutually exclusive). a more in depth analysis, though, may reveal that it falls short. also, just how many things should we account for? is "ethnicity" something that should be factored separately from "race," insofar as the school is concerned? how do you account for "culture," specifically? lots of questions, few answers... In Hindu, you have not one God, but many, many, many, many, many gods -- learned Hindu scholar   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   12.  Re: An impressive article.   by Screename2000       at Wed 26 Feb 12:48pm score of 2 clever   in reply to comment 5     I find it odd that the people of this nation were so easily able to discriminate based solely on color, and yet find it so difficult to rectify the situation solely based on color. If I remember correctly, America was not concerned with a person's class, wealth, culture and ethnicity when passing racist laws. They were simply concerned with whether you were black or white. Why is it so difficult to use that as the standard in determining the individuals who should benefit from rectifying policies?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   15.  equal and opposite reaction   by coquito       at Wed 26 Feb 12:51pm score of 1   in reply to comment 12     the short answer: because people fuck (so not everyone is either white or black) and also because those old laws aren't the issue anymore, their after-effects are the issue. it's all muddier and harder to fix. if we'd stuck with 40 acres and a mule to begin with, we might have been better off. In Hindu, you have not one God, but many, many, many, many, many gods -- learned Hindu scholar   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   24.  Re: Yea, right   by plutocracywatch       at Wed 26 Feb 1:59pm score of 2.5 clever   in reply to comment 12     It is inconceivably historically illiterate to claim that discrimination was based solely on color in this nation. Never heard of the NINA signs? A cosmopolitan would know that Jews were regularly excluded by land title covenants until that law was overturned in 1948. A renaissance man would be aware that woman of all colors possessed few legal protections until the 20th Century. An educated poster should know that the anti-vagrancy laws were used to supply temporary slave labor of all colors, ethnicities, and cultures to local landowners until mid-Century. So the cure for 400 years of AA for white males is to reverse it and have AA for non-whites? So discrimination in and of itself is good. The only question is who to discriminate against. So to amend for the horrors of kidnapping, enslaving, and subjagating Africans, the liberals extended AA to the sons of Cuban and Brazilian slave owners, the sons of Arabic and Spanish slave traders, and the daughters of the Confederacy. To make amends for the genocide against the indigenous peoples, the liberals grant AA to sons of the Conquistadores, and the historic discriminators and colonizers of color who voluntarily moved to this country. In the U of M case AA is even given to residents of the UP, which is overwhelmingly white. The article exemplifies Manicheanism at its worst. read   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   61.  Re: An impressive article.   by Lemmy Caution       at Wed 26 Feb 5:43pm score of 1   in reply to comment 12     Historically, the basis for racism is other forms of discrimination. Racism has its historical roots in nationalism, in classism and colonialism, in simple xenophobia. Evoking racism as the simple kernel of evil is a misleading myth of origins: racisms are the product of specific histories, not some sort of original sin. Those original racist laws were the product of the conflation between race and class - they were justified by the difference in behaviour by groups of people which themselves were caused by class and cultural difference, and if the original Africans were genteel, bourgeois Christians with only a difference in skin color to distinguish them from the Europeans when they were brought to the Americas, I seriously doubt that anything resembling the Jim Crow laws (or, for that matter, slavery) would ever have come into existence.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   17.  Re: equal and opposite reaction   by Anonymous Idiot       at Wed 26 Feb 1:09pm score of 0.5   in reply to comment 15     People fucking makes it more difficult to address the issue of race? Tell that to a mulatto during Jim Crow. Civil Rights laws were passed only one generation ago; I'd say they haven't yet been fully realized. Why are we suddenly talking about after-effects? Discrimination, as well as slavery, IS based on race. Ameliorative policies must be based on the same. I see very few muddy questions. Native American officially means 1/8 Native American. Let's make black mean 1/2 black or more. As for your questions regarding taking ethnicity into account at U of M as separate from race, sure why not? How about we let schools determine what they want to do and quit getting in their way with lawsuits and childish interpretations of the Constitution (Well, it says no decisions based on race, that must include policies meant to correct racial discrimination just as much as policies meant to promote racial discrimination!).   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   14.  Re: An impressive article.   by eidilon       at Wed 26 Feb 12:50pm score of 1   in reply to comment 5     Wise completely misses the point. Only "underrepresented minorities" benefit from affirmative action. Most universities, for instance, don't give preference to Asian minorities. Yet is Wise really going to sit there and argue that people of Asian decent have the benefits of "affirmative action in society" that he claims whites are the recipients of? And what about Indians or Pakistanis? I doubt they get much preferential treatment from society-at-large or universities they are applying to. And then there are the other little questions like, "Does it even work?" Affirmative action has been going on for a while now but even at schools that practice it, "underrepresented minorities" are still underrepresented. If we all agreed that working under the Marcusean mandate of affirmative action is okay, how long do we keep doing it before we decide, "Hey, maybe this is just attacking a symptom and not dealing with the root cause at all"? And then there is last tricky issue that even if we decide affirmative action is a) effective and, b) a good thing we want to do, whether it is legal. There are a lot of things that we can argue are good ideas. But the laws are pretty clear about discriminating about race. They don't have loop holes about making it okay to discriminate as long as you are doing it for a worthy cause. Wise is making arguments that, frankly, I don't care about and don't think are relevant.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

7.  Right.   by smadrid33       at Wed 26 Feb 12:36pm score of 0.5 incoherent     They are, as he puts it, like fish who don't appreciate water... Guess he hasn't been in Wal-Mart lately.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

11.  Re: Right.   by liminal999       at Wed 26 Feb 12:43pm score of 1   in reply to comment 7     I know...those Wall-mart fish don't know how good they have it. ugly design for beautiful people   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   13.  Re: Right.   by coquito       at Wed 26 Feb 12:48pm score of 1   in reply to comment 7     OK, i have no idea what that means. that said, the original line read "like fish who 'would likely have no explanation for the element they swim in every minute of every day of their lives...'" it's a direct quote from the article. at least, it was until it was changed by the Plastic editor. In Hindu, you have not one God, but many, many, many, many, many gods -- learned Hindu scholar   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

18.  In my opinion   by spartyms2       at Wed 26 Feb 1:10pm score of 1     Prejudices in general are automatically being lumped into the "racism" catergory, just because a person of color is involved. I don't like black people that are assholes. I don't like white people that are assholes. Does that make me racist, based on the first sentence alone?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

23.  Re: In my opinion   by nathanTeske       at Wed 26 Feb 1:47pm score of 1   in reply to comment 18     Actually yes, because you included the race qualifier on each where it really has no bearing: spartym2 does not like assholes, regardless of race. Why not just leave it at, "I do not like assholes"? Then you're just painting assholes with a broadbrush rather than setting up nitpicky syllogisms. But can you hit me with your bust of Kant and at the same time will it a universalizable maxim?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   156.  Re: In my opinion   by orbweb1       at Thu 27 Feb 4:32pm score of 1   in reply to comment 23     Actually, No. QUIS CUSTODIET, IPSOS CUSTODES   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

20.  Race   by jbou       at Wed 26 Feb 1:25pm score of 2.5 astute     Good conservatives would love to see it go away, bad conservatives use it to their advantage, good liberals acknowledge it, bad liberals dwell on it, and all in all no one knows how to make things fair when dealing with it. If I could I'd go back in time to even up the odds, but I can't, till then I hope on a human level we can try to not judge people till we spend at least an hour with them. I am a white male, and because of this I'm afforded certain benefits? I'd say yes, and no, it really depends on how I dress, speak, and act, but as my black friends have told me at least you get the benefit of the doubt. Arguments have no chance against petrified training; they wear it as little as the waves wear a cliff.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

47.  Re: Race   by dylanr       at Wed 26 Feb 4:05pm score of 1   in reply to comment 20     ...really depends on how I dress, speak, and act, but as my black friends have told me... Not these friends, though... right? :-) In theory there should be no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there usually is.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

22.  Ok, but...   by philipmarlowe       at Wed 26 Feb 1:43pm score of 2.5 compelling     Actually, it sounds like the system at University of Michigan offers the most help to middle class blacks. The students who take the 20 point economic disadvantage bonus are unlikely to have attended one of the top schools or to have taken lots of AP courses. But a middle class Black student can grab that extra 20, plus the other bonuses for going to a top school and taking AP courses. What seems to be missing here is the acknowledgement that not all white people have an impressive legacy to fall back on. My grandparents were all poor farmers or construction workers. My dad went to college when I was 15, and he funded the whole thing with loans. I've financed my education with loans and scholarships (which, believe it or not, I got with hard work). So where's my piece of the big socioeconomic bonus stolen from minorities? Who got a hold of it? People who are getting into colleges anyway because their parents and uncles are alumni or state senators or just rich enough to make huge donations. They aren't getting screwed. It's the people who HAVE worked for everything they have, and committed the sin of being born white, that are at a disadvantage. The way that Texas schools handle their preferences these days is to give preference to those with economic and social disadvantages. That would seem to include Blacks, Hispanics, etc. that truly need the leg up without screwing the poor whites that could also use some help in favor of wealthy minorities that don't. Frankly, that strikes me as the only fair way to do it. this is not a sig   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

25.  Re: Ok, but...   by coquito       at Wed 26 Feb 2:05pm score of 1   in reply to comment 22     The students who take the 20 point economic disadvantage bonus are unlikely to have attended one of the top schools or to have taken lots of AP courses. for the sake of argument, we can probably grant this is true just by common sense. but add to that Wise's comment: Ten points are awarded to students who attended top-notch high schools, and another eight points are given to students who took an especially demanding AP and honors curriculum. As with points for those from the Upper Peninsula, these preferences may be race-neutral in theory, but in practice they are anything but. Because of intense racial isolation (and Michigan's schools are the most segregated in America for blacks, according to research by the Harvard Civil Rights Project), students of color will rarely attend the "best" schools, and on average, schools serving mostly black and Latino students offer only a third as many AP and honors courses as schools serving mostly whites. So even truly talented students of color will be unable to access those extra points simply because of where they live, their economic status and ultimately their race, which is intertwined with both. in other words, minorities are less likely to be able to acces those points than most people, meaning the kids who get the points for race may be as unlikely to get the "top-notch" and "AP" points as the kids who get points for being economically disadvantaged. without numbers, we don't know if it's more or less. and as for your "middle class black student," if you're a middle class white kid who grew up in the U.P. and who has a parent who went to U of M, you get just as much help. but that doesn't describe the average white kid, does it? your "middle class black student" isn't the average black student either, at least according to Wise's argument. In Hindu, you have not one God, but many, many, many, many, many gods -- learned Hindu scholar   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   35.  Re: Ok, but...   by philipmarlowe       at Wed 26 Feb 2:57pm score of 1   in reply to comment 25     "meaning the kids who get the points for race may be as unlikely to get the "top-notch" and "AP" points as the kids who get points for being economically disadvantaged. without numbers, we don't know if it's more or less. " Well, that's the problem. There are no numbers here at all, so a lot needs to be clarified. I would guess that the sparse, poor UP has few "top notch" schools. It's also unclear whether or not the U.P. points can be combined with the "economic disadvantage" points. That information would help us decide. Frankly, I think that both of those are pretty unfair. I think the whole thing could be made more fair, however, if someone who went to a school considered "top notch" was therefore forbidden to use any of the disadvantage points. But anyway, here's my point. A middle class black kid who went to a top school and took a bunch of AP classes starts out with 38 points. 38 out of 150 is a pretty strong start. And a middle class (non economically disadvantaged) kid who grew up in a rural or industrial area not in the Upper Peninsula and wasn't lucky enough to go to a 'top' school that had a great AP program is starting with nothing. Now which one of these students is disadvantaged? So it's understandable if that kid is a little pissed. I would be too. this is not a sig   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   37.  Re: Ok, but...   by Imp777       at Wed 26 Feb 3:00pm score of 1 irrelevant   in reply to comment 22     100 years later thismight seem like splitting hairs to you. But your poor white grandparents were not chained into a bucket of shit to get here, weren't hanged upon arrival, weren't systematically raped in the name of "civilizing influence" were probably able to find work when they looked for it and were most likely allowed to live anywhere they can afford and vote on their representation in government. They might have even been counted as a whole person by said government. Your dad was admitted to a college, he was able to get a loan officer to talk to him. It's good that you worked hard to get your education, but its also nice to live in a world where you can feel confident that your hard work would have such a payoff.       I wish people would stop whining that their lack of overwhelming advantages and wealth has the same affect on them as three centuries of codified dehumanization.       And Mr. Marlowe, If you framed your family history in terms of class differences, it might sound like you want a better world, as you said it it just sounds like you don't want anybody else to have anything that you didn't. Onion, Potato, zucchini, carrot, STEW!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   41.  Re: Ok, but...   by philipmarlowe       at Wed 26 Feb 3:30pm score of 1   in reply to comment 37     "I wish people would stop whining that their lack of overwhelming advantages and wealth has the same affect on them as three centuries of codified dehumanization. " I said nothing of the sort. I said that, no matter what anyone says, not all white people inherited some great benefit that allowed them to walk into college. There were some that did, but they are walking into colleges anyway. You're rhetoric here is completely tiresome (and, I should add, you sound like a real prick). But to start with, my dad went to school in the freaking 90s. Affirmative action was in full swing, so loan officers were, in fact, talking to black students. My grandparents were able to vote, but then a black person my age would have had grandparents born well after the 13th amendment. Has the situation of black people in this country been awful? Absolutely. It was a crime and should never be forgotten. Does that mean that it's fair for some kid to not go to college because he wasn't born black? What did he do to hurt black people? 300 years of dehumanization was terrible, but almost anyone currently applying to U of M grew up in the post civil rights era. They learned about this horrible history in school or from stories that their grandparents told. Does racism still exist? Absolutely. But every university in the country is fighting to attract qualified minority students. this is not a sig   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   154.  Re: Ok, but...   by shadarr       at Thu 27 Feb 2:43pm score of 1   in reply to comment 37     "your poor white grandparents... weren't hanged upon arrival Odds are you're right.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   132.  White wealth and public university admissions   by Thornstein       at Thu 27 Feb 10:25am score of 1   in reply to comment 41     The Homestead Act provided land at a low cost to anyone who would clear, farm and live on the land for a certain period of time. This was a windfall for Northern European immigrants between 1860-1890 (the act continued after that, but nearly all the good land was gone.) About 3/4 of the white population of the Upper Midwest (including me) can trace their ancestry to this group. This land is the source for a large portion of the middle-class wealth of the area. They were hardworking people just trying to do the best for themselves and their families, but they had opportunities that were systematically denied most Mexican and black residents. (And blacks who did manage to acquire land were frequently dispossessed up until the present day.) But even acknowledging the history, I don't know if U of Michigan type preferences are appropriate for a public institution (all the preferences, not just the racial one). My two-step proposal for admissions to public universities. 1. Does the transcript and application indicate the person has a reasonable chance of being successful at this institution? 2. If yes, write the person's name on a slip of paper - take all the slips and throw them from the top of the administration building. Have a sheet (decorated with school colors) on the ground below. Adjust the size of the sheet as needed to get the proper number of admissions. If desired, add a second larger sheet below the first to collect names for an admissions waiting list.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

26.  Tim's U of M analysis is partially flawed.   by halfwit       at Wed 26 Feb 2:11pm score of 2.5 informative     He said minorities get 20 points. Poor people get 20 points, but that's not cumulative with minorities. People from rural Michigan get 16 points. If parents are alumni, 4 points. Attend a good school, 10 points. Take AP courses, 8 points. He concludes that most minorities have a 20 point edge while whites can have a 20+16+4+10+8 = 58 point edge. That kind of edge would be astronomically rare. The number of poor white kids living in rural Michigan with U of M grad parents attending a top notch school and tackling an honors program has got to be near 0. The average white middle class applicant probably has 10 to 32 points in their favor. A poor white kid probably doesn't attend a good school, so they have 20 or 24 points in their favor. Kids living in rural Michigan have a big advantage, but it's only reasonable for Michigan to recruit its own residents. It still isn't fair to minorities, but it's not nearly as lopsided as he made it out to be. The guy makes a good case in his article. It's a shame he misrepresented the admission process to reinforce his point. It wasn't necessary.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

27.  Laaaaame   by kbrownecon       at Wed 26 Feb 2:17pm score of 2 interesting     Actually, whites aren't necessarily the biggest victims of affirmative action. The biggest victims of affirmative action (at least in California) tend to be Asians, who get no affirmative action love because they're already so well-represented in the top UC schools. So why should I support a policy that screws Asians in the name of diversity? This whole "white people are so priviliged" line is tired and simply wrong. As I've pointed out time and time again, plenty of non-white ethnic groups in the United States actually have median incomes higher than that of whites. These groups include Chinese and Japanese Americans; Indian-Americans (i.e. immigrants from India and their descendants) achieve higher median incomes vs. whites within one generation. The simple fact is that being white doesn't really confer any special priviliges or position, and affirmative action itself doesn't necessarily screw whites; it screws any member of an overachieving ethnic group. That's what makes it stupid.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

32.  wrong   by jbou       at Wed 26 Feb 2:36pm score of 2 compelling   in reply to comment 27     The simple fact is that being white doesn't really confer any special priviliges or position I hate to tell you this, but it does, and as a white male I can attest to this. I'll share with you one example, I was pulled over by the cops because of an expired inspection sticker, my licence was expired, the cop didn't fine me he just told me to get my licence renewed, and the car inspected, gave me a summons for court, told me I couldn't drive the car away, but he told the tow truck driver that my car broke down so the towing company charged me their regular rate instead of the jacked up police rate. Let me add I know no one on this towns police force, and I have no relatives in the town government. My friend Ricky, who is black, got pulled over in the same town, and was cuffed, fined, and his car impounded for basically the same offense. The cop even let me have the tow truck driver take me to work. The town is a middle class college town. Arguments have no chance against petrified training; they wear it as little as the waves wear a cliff.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   42.  Re: wrong   by rombuu       at Wed 26 Feb 3:34pm score of 1   in reply to comment 32     Wow, and we all know how useful one whole data point is in drawing a conclusion. http://drlunch.com The site that helps you decide where to go to lunch!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   49.  Re: wrong   by Lakaien       at Wed 26 Feb 4:12pm score of 1   in reply to comment 32     Interesting story, but it really doesn't mean much unless the cop was the same. Perhaps you lucked out and got an officer that was having a particularly good day and felt like being a little nicer than usual, while your friend simply had the misfortune of getting a cop that did everything by the book. I am well aware that there are some police officers in the world that would willingly and knowingly give preferential treatment to a white male vs. a minority, but to infer that that was the case in this instance seems a teeny bit presumptuous. if you had a funeral- i'd be there with bells on- Chris Murphy   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   52.  Re: wrong   by dylanr       at Wed 26 Feb 4:18pm score of 1   in reply to comment 32     I was pulled over by the cops because of an expired inspection sticker, my licence was expired, the cop didn't fine me he just told me to get my licence renewed I got my driver's license suspended for expired tags. White privilege wasn't doing mt too much good that day. My friend Ricky, who is black, got pulled over in the same town, and was cuffed, fined, and his car impounded for basically the same offense. And as we all know, all cops are the same. The white ones, anyway. I wonder what you think might have happend to an Asian man of the same age who was caught in the same offense. In theory there should be no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there usually is.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   123.  I have the solution   by kbrownecon       at Thu 27 Feb 9:07am score of 1   in reply to comment 32     Assuming your sample of one is enough, then I think the proper act of "affirmative action" to correct this unacceptable imbalance should then involve giving African-Americans twice as much time on their automobile registrations and inspections.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   130.  My data point cancels out your data point   by BigBoote66       at Thu 27 Feb 10:06am score of 1   in reply to comment 32     Before I begin, let me state that I believe that whites have plenty of built-in social advantages that allow them to have a leg up against minorities, particularly blacks. However, if an intelligent black child manages to make it to high school graduation, they have a big advantage over similarly skilled whites the same age. It just doesn't happen that often, which is why I believe affirmative action type programs should really be most heavily geared towards earlier age brackets. That said, jbou, I seem to recall that you live in Massachusetts (Boston area?). I too live in Boston, am white, and a year and a half ago I was pulled over by a trooper for expired tabs (near Worcester), which led him to discover that I also had an expired license. Although I was extremely polite and cooperative, I was very painfully handcuffed (with the manacles that are held together by a hinge, as opposed to the ones with a chain), kept handcuffed for the ride back to the barracks (a total of about an hour in cuffs), and held in a cell for 4 hours until a relative could come pick me up and pay the $40 bail (I only had $15 in cash at the time, and the trooper would not stop at a cash machine on the way to the barracks to allow me to withdraw some money). Does this prove that cops aren't racist because they treated me in a manner that was out of proportion with the offense? No, it probably just means that I was unlucky enough to have an asshole for an arresting officer, as you were lucky to have a forgiving one. But I could have easily blown it out of proportion had I been raised in a climate where it was assumed that cops were out to get you and the system was racist. As an ending to the story, during my hearing, when I was facing about $1200 in fines, the D.A. representative talked to me and decided that I was a "good egg" and said he'd only ask the judge for a $300 fine. As I had been sitting in the courtroom for 7 hours at that point (they had screwed up my paperwork, of course), I mentioned to him that I had seen 4 or 5 people come before the judge with identical offenses (of various races) and were getting $100 fines. "Really?" he said. "Okay, we'll give it a shot". So I managed to only have to pay $100. As an additional upshot, the whole experience allowed me to reach a level of righteous indignation that I was able to summon the energy to break off my horrible 4-year relationship with my "you'll never leave me no matter what" ex- (who was indirectly responsible for my getting into trouble in the first place). So it all turned out well in the end. -BbT   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   45.  Re: wrong   by jbou       at Wed 26 Feb 3:54pm score of 1   in reply to comment 42     I could go into many more examples, but you still wouldn't agree white guys get most of the breaks. Arguments have no chance against petrified training; they wear it as little as the waves wear a cliff.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   55.  Re: wrong   by Screename2000       at Wed 26 Feb 4:46pm score of 1.5 succinct   in reply to comment 45     Jbou, you're exactly right. And this is essentially the point of Wise. White people who have such advantages of friendly cops will never understand the disadvantages of blacks because their reality is white-washed. And if you ask me, argumentation is far less about finding "truth" and far more about who has better debating skills and rhetorical flourish. For anyone to sit here and make arguments, which are all truly valid, but whose political motivation seems to be denying that your example properly reflects what I think is an obvious general truth that black people are subject to far more stringency under the law shows that people will always take any opportunity to defend whatever principle that supports their personal lifestyle, privilege and morality (or, IMO, lack thereof).   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   56.  Re: wrong   by snidleywhiplash       at Wed 26 Feb 4:47pm score of 2 astute   in reply to comment 45     I'm somewhat conflicted on affirmative action, but not-at-all conflicted on the idea that isolated, apocryphal examples are no way to really know what's going on in the world. I'm willing to believe that there's some subtle racism ingrained in some percentage of white people which makes things worse for other groups, but I'd be hard-pressed to point to much empirical data which proves it. I'd also have a hard time arguing that racism is a trait only exhibited by the whites of this country.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   163.  stereotypes lame, yes...ALL stereotypes lame   by ravenastro       at Thu 27 Feb 11:08pm score of 1.5 scholarly   in reply to comment 27     Ok, so not all whites are rich. That's so shocking. But if you REALLY wanted to try your hand at exploding stereotypical lines, you might want to have a better understanding of American history and politics. You claim that: plenty of non-white ethnic groups in the United States actually have median incomes higher than that of whites. These groups include Chinese and Japanese Americans; Indian-Americans (i.e. immigrants from India and their descendants) achieve higher median incomes vs. whites within one generation. The simple fact is that being white doesn't really confer any special priviliges [sic] or position But all that you are doing is recanting the "model minority" myth, in which all Asian Americans are so hard-working and over-achieving that like magic, they come to this country, and wham! Presto! A college degree, a job and instant success. However, when you make the above claims, you ignore the fact that these median incomes are based upon household statistics, and that Asian American households (particularly 1st generation immigrant ones) tend to have more people than the average American household, and that more of the people within the household are working. The the "average" American household has two adults, in which at least one adult works one job, whereas in Asian American households, there will be more than two adults working, or two adults working more than one job. Consequently, this just means that more people are working more hours in Asian American households, for more overall pay. What a surprise! That they manage to achieve this higher median income gain within one generation is not shocking at all either, since immigration quotas make it near to impossible to come from China, Taiwan, or India unless you are a highly skilled (and highly educated) worker. Imagine if you had several highly-skilled PhD holders in your household, and tell me if your household median income wouldn't naturally be higher. But this is the rub - the other side of this is that an adult might be working more than one job because maybe they are paid less for each job than the equivalent "American" worker, and they need extra jobs to support more family members. So as intelligent as immigrants from these countries might be (cream of the crop or not), they are still paid less for their labor. And you are only looking at Chinese, Japanese and Indian Americans, in effect homogenizing Asians and Asian Americans into one big monolithic group when in fact, Hmong or Cambodian Americans, often fare poorly here, as the refugees amongst them do not necessarily speak English as fluently, do not thrive in classes, or make it into the top UC schools, or continue on to college at all. Actually, there are many instances of Asian Americans of all types with poor socioeconomic backgrounds, but you will practically never hear about it in the national media. After all, the model minority myth is just a myth, popularized by articles in Newsweek and U.S News & World Report (articles included "Success, Japanese American Style", from the 1960s) and this tired old stereotype has been hyped ever since. This is the same line repeatedly trotted out by white conservatives who love to use wedge politics to "praise" Asian American "successes" especially in contrast to African Americans, who are blamed as being "failures" who cannot work hard enough and depend on welfare. Lastly, your patronizing "pity" for what you call "The biggest victims of affirmative action (at least in California) tend to be Asians, who get no affirmative action love" just affirms your belief in the model minority stereotype, that Asian Americans are suffering at the hands of other minorities who are taking their places. This is an erroneous presumption. In actuality, the only REAL limiting factor to the number of Asian Americans who should be at top schools is the high percentage of white students at elite (public and private) institutions. (This opinion on relative merit is one offered up by my friend who works in Admissions at one of the nation's top 10 schools who has seen scads of ridiculously qualified Asian and Asian American candidates with stellar applications rejected to maintain an unpsoken 10% quota.) So if you're really in favor of a policy that doesn't "Screw Asians in the name of diversity" I am sure that you won't mind giving up even more spaces. And please, leave the pity party at home if you're going to burst stereotypes. Next time, bring your glasses and critical thinking cap. ravenastro the practice of forming words to make thoughts, arranging their inevitablities into new possibility, has been one lost   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

28.  Tim is Not so Wise   by Zi       at Wed 26 Feb 2:19pm score of 2 astute     The major flaw in Mr. Wise's argument, and that of affirmative action arguments in general, is the use of the word "white" to describe what he sees as the oppressive elite that utilized slavery, set up Jim Crow laws, and uses "soft" discrimination to this day to help themselves at the expense of minorities. White is a broad term that includes many people who have no interest in bigotry or power to "oppress" anybody. "White" people are a wide a varied group, including a vast range of social, economic, and genetic variance. Mr. Wise's statement that "whites swim in racial preference" is specious in the extreme. Not all or even most whites receive preferential treatment by government, corporations, or other public entities. There is a subset of people, who get preferential treatment, and yes this subset is mainly white. It is not in anyway organized, but consists of relationships among individuals and organizations that rely on family, money, and power. Think if it as the old boy's network, if you will. It is the American version of European aristocracy. Most "whites" are not part of this group, and do not benefit from its coziness. Anyway, my problem with affirmative action is two fold: 1. Discrimination, due to uncontrollable criteria, is a bad thing. Affirmative action is discrimination based on skin color. 2. The people hurt by this discrimination, ie "white" people who are "bumped" due to their skin color, are usually not the ones who have benefited from past institutional racism. Rather they are poor whites just trying to get ahead themselves. Here's a useful metaphor for affirmative action: You get mugged. You go to the police, and you and they find a person, who didn't mug you, and take his wallet. Mr. Wise, by broadly castigating "whites," lumps a group of people into a category based solely on their skin color, and then advocates a punitive government action against them. Isn't that the very definition of racism? And if Mr. Wise really does think all "whites" benefit from racism, I suggest he spend some time as a poor, poorly educated, rural white and see just how he likes it. So it goes. - Kurt Vonnegut   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

60.  Another Point   by uncarved block       at Wed 26 Feb 5:41pm score of 1   in reply to comment 28     2. The people hurt by this discrimination . . .       Interesting how this exact point can be used to oppose legacy admissions. The current 'poor white people trying to get ahead' are also screwed by lacking the foresight to have the right parents. Yet should legacy admissions be brought up, you will be accused of "class warfare" . . .       To complicate things, I saw an author on C-Span 2 who had (I believe) written about lynchings, and the racial politics of them. He found, to his surprise, that the wealthy were often very supportive of immigration, especially of the poorest, because these workers could be used as a method to drive wages down, not to mention breaking unions as scab labor. In this light, poor(er) whites had just as much stake in continuing Jim Crow, since it created a zone of protection for certain kinds of employment. As with most history, the closer you look the less clear it all becomes. Eschew Obfuscation Assiduously   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   78.  Re: Another Point   by Zi       at Wed 26 Feb 8:24pm score of 1   in reply to comment 60     Thank you for the interesting points you make. As for legacy admissions, I hardly admire them, as they are a meritless discrimination. I would say that college admissions departments should ignore them on that basis. And yes it would be called class warfare, by the same who call opposition to tax cuts for the wealthy 'class warfare.' I would say them that the class warfare resides in the existence of legacy admissions and government policies designed to help only those with wealth and power, not in thier removal. As to the concept of low end workers being most racist, you do have a point. When one set of people is set against another for the benefit of a third party, it's not unexpected that those sets would develop animosity toward one another. Not right, of course, but at least knowable. As for poor whites wanting to continue Jim Crow, I think this, if true, was both wrong and shortsighted of them. It still means nothing to a current poor white guy with bad prospects who gets screwed in favor a a poor black guy with bad prospects, but a hand up from a discriminatory policy. Two wrongs don't make a right. So it goes. - Kurt Vonnegut   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   80.  Re: Another Point   by ignoblus       at Wed 26 Feb 8:53pm score of 1   in reply to comment 78     As to the concept of low end workers being most racist It isn't just just low end workers. When the Nazis invaded Poland, some of the Poles became so anti-semitic the Nazis had to restrain them. When an oppressed group can find another group to look down on, it usually happens. Like you say, it's not right, but let's not be too harsh. It is, in fact, the middle and upper classes that create unequal social structures. That they support some progressive acts is undermined by their unwillingness to create more substantial changes that are necessary for true progress. It never was that simple, and it still isn't.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   101.  Re: Another Point   by gerrymander       at Thu 27 Feb 1:54am score of 1   in reply to comment 78     As for legacy admissions, I hardly admire them, as they are a meritless discrimination. Without going too far out to support them, let me at least say legacy admission preferences aren't totally without merit. Universities do have a character of their own, and it's not entirely baseless to conclude that the type of people who chose to attend due to a likeness in style would also pass that stylistic character on to their children.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   137.  Re: Another Point   by fishist       at Thu 27 Feb 10:58am score of 1   in reply to comment 80     When the Nazis invaded Poland, some of the Poles became so anti-semitic the Nazis had to restrain them. Not to nit-pick, but my father is an eastern European who had his country invaded by Nazis and according to him (he was there at the time), people would grab Nazi soldiers and lead them to the houses of Jews and Gypsy's fully expecting the soldiers to execute them on the spot. The Poles you speak of didn't become anti-Semitic; they had always been anti-Semitic. Reward good behavior. Punish poor behavior   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   139.  And A Thought   by uncarved block       at Thu 27 Feb 11:03am score of 1   in reply to comment 101     It occurred to me that legacy admissions are also a way to reward potential, and not just results. Military service is a part of our history, and not every man ever returns. As a way to encourage the college educated to add their talents to the armed forces, knowing their children will get into college no matter what happens to them removes one obstacle. I don't know if this was ever clearly formulated at any time, but social institutions are nearly impossible to untangle. Eschew Obfuscation Assiduously   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   83.  Re: Tim is Not so Wise   by Clandestino       at Wed 26 Feb 9:45pm score of 2 compelling   in reply to comment 28     The major flaw in Mr. Wise's argument, and that of affirmative action arguments in general, is the use of the word "white" to describe what he sees as the oppressive elite that utilized slavery, set up Jim Crow laws, and uses "soft" discrimination to this day to help themselves at the expense of minorities. White is a broad term that includes many people who have no interest in bigotry or power to "oppress" anybody. It IS in the interests of whites as a whole to have blacks be the focus of every domestic war and to have barriers set up to any form of advancement whether it's jobs, college admissions, or any other system. Every school system that systematically takes blacks, puts them in underfunded and understaffed schools, plus gives the parents of children in those schools a hard time of ever getting past putting food on a plate instantly gives a white school district that has not had to deal with those issues something to stand and gloat over. Every black kid arrested for smoking weed after school becomes a justification for building more jails, taking away more services for "undeserving" minority groups, and shifting those funds to "deserving" (read: white) poor people and taking the police heat off them. This is the essence of what white privilege is: no matter how poor, illiterate, or uneducated you are, you'll never be one of "those people." Most "whites" are not part of this group, and do not benefit from its coziness. Most whites at least want this coziness, judging how in the South, everyone seems to claim that they come from a family that was upper-crust - before those damned slaves were freed. If poor whites want to play that game, fine - just don't expect blacks to cheer you on as you go reenacting Bull Run. And if Mr. Wise really does think all "whites" benefit from racism, I suggest he spend some time as a poor, poorly educated, rural white and see just how he likes it. Being a biracial person with family in post-IBM upstate New York, I have spent time with poor, poorly educated, rural whites. Their worst encounters with law enforcement, by the by, have been speeding tickets when if this were a just society they would have been thrown in jail for selling speed. My cousin scrounged together money for a community college; my other cousin is presently at Julliard (even in his poorer school district, they had a music program - something I can't say about New York City's schools.) Contrast that with my experience as a person of color in New York City. The budget cuts and tuition hikes are so damned bad at the City University of New York that frankly, I don't even know if I want to finish my degree. I graduated from a fairly good Catholic school in the Bronx, I kept my nose clean, and yet still it seems as if CUNY wants me out. I cannot help but conclude that there's an overt racism here. The City University managed to be a free university system through two World Wars, a Great Depression, and Korea. After the Black and Puerto Rican population agitated (and got) access to the university, and the demographics of the university began to look more like that of New York City itself, they put in tuition. In the '90s, they started instituting tests that no one, not even in the days when City College was "poor man's Harvard," had to take. And so on. To me, it just proves that when the white power structure has the will, there is a way, even if the way steamrolls non-whites; when non-whites have the will, the white power structure just says "there is no way." Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you mad   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   113.  Re: Tim is Not so Wise   by citric       at Thu 27 Feb 7:42am score of 2 astute   in reply to comment 83     Your logic is bad. Every black kid arrested for smoking weed after school becomes a justification for building more jails, taking away more services for "undeserving" minority groups, and shifting those funds to "deserving" (read: white) poor people and taking the police heat off them. This is the essence of what white privilege is: no matter how poor, illiterate, or uneducated you are, you'll never be one of "those people." You see things as an us-or-them society. This is unfortunate, but it is not true, and it is not supportable. This is a "me" society. It is composed of individuals, not aggregates. There is no "those people," and you seem to be accusing "those other people" (also nonexistent) of a vast conspiracy to divide this society into teams. Although your post doesn't address it, has it occurred to you that affirmative action is exactly this process, manifest? That it is the only widespread, sanctioned, real effort to create your teams? Most whites at least want this coziness, judging how in the South, everyone seems to claim that they come from a family that was upper-crust - before those damned slaves were freed. If poor whites want to play that game, fine - just don't expect blacks to cheer you on as you go reenacting Bull Run. You, my friend, are a ra-- well, disingenous at best. "Most whites" don't want, or think, anything. There is no "most whites." "Most whites," that vile animal, does not live in the south, either; or the north, or anywhere. You then talk about "poor whites" -- is that what you meant by "most whites"? Because you cannot speak of some all-inclusive group called the "poor whites" either. Michigan has a number of poor whites who mingle and thrive with poor blacks. Eminem, anyone? East Detroit? The poor whites don't have your conspiracy, either. We don't all carry walkie-talkies and whisper to each other to peg the black man we see on the street or in the business... we are not all whispering to each other, plotting the doom of "those people". In fact, "we" are just a vast field of "I"s, fighting for our own individual success, like anyone else. Personally, as a U of M grad app, I receive none of those "white bonuses," and the affirmative action bonus is just one more thing for me to fight against. Contrast that with my experience as a person of color in New York City. The budget cuts and tuition hikes are so damned bad at the City University of New York that frankly, I don't even know if I want to finish my degree. I graduated from a fairly good Catholic school in the Bronx, I kept my nose clean, and yet still it seems as if CUNY wants me out. I cannot help but conclude that there's an overt racism here. This is incoherent? How do you conclude, from the universal education cuts, that there is racism? I hate to inform you of this, but I, a White Man (privileged and with the backing of a vast "our people" movement, right?) am also having trouble getting placed. So are my professors. All of higher education is in a mode of cutback and economic pain. But all you see is racism. And there is the problem, that attitude of victimization and finding fault, taking things personally when in fact a dozen other factors are at play and you are not the only one affected. To me, it just proves that when the white power structure has the will, there is a way, even if the way steamrolls non-whites; when non-whites have the will, the white power structure just says "there is no way." To you, I think, a Magic 8-Ball would prove the white power structure was laying against non-whites. There is no racist power structure. If you would like to leaf through my pile of paperwork, or open your eyes for a goddamn moment and look at other people, you might realize that. My papers show, at the bottom, a sterling GPA (3.85 overall), top-10% GRE scores, top 25% subject-GREs, four recommendation letters from tenured known professors, and an astonishing writing sample that I've been told just needs a couple secondary sources to be publishable. Then if you sort through to the top you'll start finding a number of forms for financial aid -- not filled in, because they're only for minorities. You'll find an equally large pile of "begging letters" as I call them, pointing out that I've had to work my way 40-hour-weeks through college and asking for a Teaching Assistantship; and then you'll start hitting the rejection letters. Yeah. I'd trade my skin. The same kind of work from a black guy from Detroit instead of a white guy, would change some of those rejections to acceptances. takot ako sa kamatayan   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   161.  Re: Tim is Not so Wise   by Clandestino       at Thu 27 Feb 10:05pm score of 1.5 interesting   in reply to comment 113     There is no "those people," and you seem to be accusing "those other people" (also nonexistent) of a vast conspiracy to divide this society into teams. "Those people" is a term whitefolk use, of course when they're safely at a distance from "those people." I know this. I've both been "one of those people" (according to my cousins' white friends), and been warned by my white relatives not to sit too close/associate with/go to a college filled with/or in general be around "those people" From its founding this country has divided its people into "our people" and "those people." To say that being able to sit in a restaurant and not have people call you "boy" means we've gone beyond racism means you're either a fool, a liar, or D'Nesh D'Souza. Although your post doesn't address it, has it occurred to you that affirmative action is exactly this process, manifest? That it is the only widespread, sanctioned, real effort to create your teams? One cannot address a problem without admitting to it. Since this nation's founding, there's been an "us" and "them" with regard to who gets the power. What I suspect critics of affirmative action are really steamed over is not "reverse discrimination" but the fact that it exposes the very nature of the system. This is incoherent? How do you conclude, from the universal education cuts, that there is racism? Because education cuts have never been universal. While equal opportunity programs get cut, I don't see a movement to get rid of legacy programs at the Ivy League. I don't see a movement to get rid of sports scholarships which - once you get out of the mostly black dominions of college football and basketball - are largely given to whites. Pell aid gets cut, sure - but don't you dare fuck with tennis, golf, fencing, hockey, equestrian, croquet, swimming, wrestling, or rowing. Don't fuck with the Bush twins' education. Of course, another factor enters the picture, like class or gender. But let's be realistic; the more expensive you make education, and the higher up the class ladder students have to be to afford education, the more the ivory tower becomes an accurate description for college - pricy, white, and whose top levels are more and more out of reach. But all you see is racism. And there is the problem, that attitude of victimization and finding fault, taking things personally when in fact a dozen other factors are at play and you are not the only one affected. I've argued all along that there are in fact a dozen other factors that are at play, and that I'm not the only one affected. You think you've had a hard time at admissions? How about someone who's first grade class is in a hallway. Or someone who does make it into high school - but who is in a class with forty other students. I'm not talking about just myself - I'm talking about 30,000 students at CUNY alone, mostly non-whites, who have been systematically had to give up our college in order to survive. With regard to college admissions whites are complaining about not getting filet mignon and having to settle for hamburger. With non-whites it's a matter of still being called "boy" and denied a menu. There is no racist power structure. When Clarence Thomas is the only black member of the SCOTUS - yes, Virginia, there is a racist power structure. Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you mad   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

29.  The point is simple   by netchick37       at Wed 26 Feb 2:20pm score of 0.5 disingenuous     What I think I will never understand, is why people think that minorities need an extra boost in order to get admitted to institutions of higher learning. That is the equivalent of saying that they don't have the discipline or the intellectual capability to compete on the same level with non-minority students. That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Black Americans are extremely capable people and don't need any extra help.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

34.  uh netchick   by jbou       at Wed 26 Feb 2:51pm score of 2 succinct   in reply to comment 29     Sometimes black folks come from areas of America called ghettos, and in those ghettos the schools are very poor, teachers have many problem children, and the parents of these children aren't what you would call good parents, the kids in these schools don't get a good education. Sometimes these kids in the ghetto need a little extra help because of where they grew up, and if you've been to the ghetto recently you'd notice a lot of these kids are black. Also netchick, there are white folks in this country that believe blacks are not as good as they are, and don't deserve to go to college, or have a job, we call these people racists, and sometimes these racists are in charge, and in order to counter these racists affirmative action laws were put into place. Hard work will only get you so far, sometimes you need a helping hand. Arguments have no chance against petrified training; they wear it as little as the waves wear a cliff.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   50.  Re: uh netchick   by Anonymous Idiot       at Wed 26 Feb 4:12pm score of 0.5 astute   in reply to comment 34     I almost created an account just to respond to this but then I figured it wasn't worth it. There's probably somebody out there with bad parents who deserves an account more than I do. Maybe they're black too. I'd like to point out that for every situation you pointed out, the "blacks" could be replaced with "whites" or "hispanics" or any other race. Racism is NOT JUST white people discriminating against black people, though that's the tact most people seem to take. I guess because blacks are a large minority they deserve special supplementation? Anyone can have bad parents or come from the ghetto or go to a bad school. And while I agree that hard work may only take you so far, I find it very difficult to believe that an exerted effort at making a decent living would fall short of the goal in most cases. Besides, just cause your parents suck doesn't mean they should get accepted to the college I worked hard to attend, no matter what race I am nor what race you are!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   67.  y'know, jbou...   by deeluxx       at Wed 26 Feb 6:13pm score of 1.5 astute   in reply to comment 34     you could replace the word 'black' with the word 'white' in every instance of your post and it would be no less true.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   70.  Re: y'know, jbou...   by jbou       at Wed 26 Feb 6:51pm score of 1   in reply to comment 67     deeluxx, think about the 2nd paragraph, how many black guys are in a position of power that denies people jobs, or chances at an education? Arguments have no chance against petrified training; they wear it as little as the waves wear a cliff.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   72.  Re: y'know, jbou...   by deeluxx       at Wed 26 Feb 7:23pm score of 1   in reply to comment 70     Well, if you're going to suggest I reread what you wrote then I'd like to suggest the same. Here, I'll even save you a click. I said: "you could replace the word 'black' with the word 'white' in every instance of your post and it would be no less true." I never suggested you could replace the word 'white'.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   104.  Re: y'know, jbou...   by laurbrown       at Thu 27 Feb 2:31am score of 1   in reply to comment 72     yeah, you're right. there are whites ALL OVER THE PLACE who don't believe that white people deserve to go to college! i mean, if i had a nickel...   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

30.  From cradle to grave   by Saadiq       at Wed 26 Feb 2:32pm score of 1.5 interesting     They are, as he puts it, like fish who don't appreciate water, with no understanding of their privileged status as Caucasians because it surrounds them every day. I'm a Caucasian American of German/Scottish heritage - I demand a great deal of efficiency from my sheep - who converted to Islam 5 years ago. After 9/11, and for the first time in my life, I began to realize that a system that had once been geared entirely in my favor was now geared against me, simply because of my faith. The media, the administration, the populace...if they weren't actively condemning my ideology and community, they were apathetic to the caricatures and over-generalizations. My frustration still took it's toll until, after only a year, I expressed to some African-American friends of mine the utter disbelief that they had to deal with this system from cradle to grave. I had only had a taste; being white, I can become an 'invisible' Muslim if I choose. Not so for my ethnic friends. People who claim that affirmative action is a 'racist policy' are have no inkling of what it means to live in racial (or cultural) subjugation.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

51.  Re: From cradle to grave   by charlies       at Wed 26 Feb 4:12pm score of 1   in reply to comment 30     Thank you very much for your post, and ignore the grammar critiques. Your point is very well made, much like the white reporter who chemically blackened his skin in the 1950s, went across the South and wrote the book, "Black Like Me". I recall that he said the experience was incomplete because he went back to being white. We're fighting in a war we lost before the war began.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   166.  Re: From cradle to grave   by Befalas       at Fri 28 Feb 10:43am score of 1   in reply to comment 30     Saadiq wrote, "I'm a Caucasian American of German/Scottish heritage - I demand a great deal of efficiency from my sheep - who converted to Islam 5 years ago." Those Muslim sheep will NEVER get into U of M. Although I suppose they ARE arguably poor and from the rural part of the state...   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

31.  misuse of Caucasian   by Laputan Machine       at Wed 26 Feb 2:35pm score of 1.5 informative     Just wanted to say that Caucasian actually includes people from India, Latinos, Arabs, etc etc. The term Caucasian originates, I believe, from when racism was initially being developed as a legitimate system of thought. There were three racial groups, Caucasian, Mongoloid, and Negroid. I don't know how or why Caucasian was shifted away from its original physical characteristics and to our current skin color system, but I'm guessing at some point white people weren't happy to be connected to those 'other caucasians'. You can say this post is for political correctness, although I would say it's more about scientific correctness... that is, if one thinks racial categories were born from what we would consider science.. which I don't... which means this is all politically incorrect. LOL. The nation is divided, half patriots and half traitors, and no man can tell which from which. - Mark Twain   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

43.  Re: misuse of Caucasian   by stankow       at Wed 26 Feb 3:35pm score of 1   in reply to comment 31     Hey, they're not "white" either. "White" indicates a combination of all colors. Those people are obviously pink or tan.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   53.  Re: misuse of Caucasian   by dylanr       at Wed 26 Feb 4:35pm score of 1   in reply to comment 31     Just wanted to say that Caucasian actually includes people from India, Latinos, Arabs, etc etc. An interesting theory, but you'll be hard-pressed to find any historical example of that usage. The term Caucasian originates, I believe, from when racism was initially being developed as a legitimate system of thought. Racism existed long before the word Caucasian. At some point in the 18th century, anthropologists developed a theory that the white races had originated from the Caucasus Mountains. So they called white people Caucasians. They were wrong but we're stuck with the word. In theory there should be no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there usually is.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   86.  Re: misuse of Caucasian   by Laputan Machine       at Wed 26 Feb 10:21pm score of 1   in reply to comment 53     As comment 57 shows, the Supreme Court dealt with the anthropological belief that whites and Indians were of the same race. So, it's not just an interesting theory of mine, but something that was pretty well established in the past. Even Hitler considered certain Indians as Aryans, a www.dalitstan.org link It's kinda funny that the Nazis themselves were never about "white power" in such an exclusive way, while the neo-Nazis in America and elsewhere seem to forget this. Uh. Maybe funny isn't a good word for it. My understanding is that racism ends with "ism" because it's not just any ol' word, but actually an ideology, like communism or capitalism, with a real visible beginning in history (and eventual end, we hope). And that this beginning was really represented by the creation of the racial Caucasian, Mongoloid, and Negroid groups in 'scientific' circles. The reason I think this is because when people think race, they think "He's Asian (Mongoloid)." "He's black (Negroid.)" "He's white (Caucasian)." "He's Latino (I just made this up sometime in the past 50-100 years)." Now, you can say racism preceded the creation of those terms, but the racism that we as Americans live with in daily life today, wouldn't be the racism we know and love if it wasn't for those concepts. (PS -- I'm thinkin.. if we do say that racism, as an ideology in America, is about these racial terms.. does that mean by simply believing that these racial terms are legitimate, we are participating in racist conversation? I mean, if I run around saying society is class-based, with one class called 'bourgeoisie' and another called 'proletarian', I'm participating in Marxist conversation, aren't I? My take on this: the fact that whites and blacks have made a genetic-cultural connection in their own identity labels was a severe mistake in American history, and continues to damage our society every day.. especially immigrant families, people who come from other nations and inevitably get to watch their children ally with a compatible racially-inspired culture). The nation is divided, half patriots and half traitors, and no man can tell which from which. - Mark Twain   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   96.  Re: misuse of Caucasian   by dylanr       at Thu 27 Feb 12:07am score of 1   in reply to comment 86     The Vedas are veriably a fountain of poison that has periodically infested the veins world with its dangerous dogmas. Ramaite apartheid, Kautilyan totalitarianism and Brahmanic Fascism are some of the deadly venom that Hinduism has spewed forth onto the world. Nazism is another such deadly scourge invented by the Brahminist Vaishnavas that has devastated the world. Uh... you're trying to make a coherent point using this as a source? Seriously? Not only is it just ethnic pissing, it doesn't even say what you say it says. If Hitler considered some Indians as Aryans, that isn't demonstrated here... just that some Indians fancied themselves Aryans. My understanding is that racism ends with "ism" because it's not just any ol' word, but actually an ideology Or maybe racism is like priapism, a painful and embarrassing problem. the racism that we as Americans live with in daily life today The racism we live with today is different from the racism of 20 years ago, which is just as different from the racism of 40 years ago, etc, ad infinitum. Racism has evolved and shifted with the times. The racism practiced in the 1700's was simple, brutal and lethal. The racist philosophy developed in the mid 1800's was sophisticated, brutal and lethal. Perhaps you can say racism was "invented" around the time people came up with taxonomic racism, but I'd say it was just another phase in an ever-evolving attitude. Francis Galton, the phrenologists, and the eugenicists didn't invent racism... they just helped it feel good about itself for a while. Some of the terms stuck... it doesn't mean the originating philosophy is still at work. In theory there should be no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there usually is.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   138.  Re: misuse of Caucasian   by madison       at Thu 27 Feb 11:03am score of 1   in reply to comment 96     Not only is it just ethnic pissing, it doesn't even say what you say it says. If Hitler considered some Indians as Aryans, that isn't demonstrated here... just that some Indians fancied themselves Aryans. Actually there is a relationship between Indians and Europeans. Northern Indians, Iranians, and Europeans all speak languages that are part of the Indo-European family. The name Iran is actually a variation of Aryan. I believe "aristocracy" also comes from the same root. Some Dalits (aka untouchables) consider the discrimination against them to be a form of racism and not a form of classism. Some take the additional unjustified step of accusing the upper-caste people who discriminate against them of being responsible for Naziism and they use the Nazi use of the word Aryan to make this connection. The Hindutva movement, which does bear a family resemblance to Naziism, on the other hand, actually tries to deny the idea of an Indo-European migration into India, because this interferes with their construction of a national identity which would allow them to distinguish more easily between indigenous and non-indigenous. The speakers of Proto-Indo-European originated somewhere in central Asia, possibly the Caucasus mountains. No body really knows exactly who the original PIE speakers were and exactly where they came from. Archaeologists, linguists, and even climate researchers are all trying to piece that together. Racism has evolved and shifted with the times. The racism practiced in the 1700's was simple, brutal and lethal. The racist philosophy developed in the mid 1800's was sophisticated, brutal and lethal. Exactly. It used to be that the "mark of Cain" was a favored justification for racism. Now that Biblical literalism is not as popular racists try to justify themselves by borrowing scientific jargon for their purposes. The existence of the Indo-European family was known by Hitler's time, and he borrowed the scientific jargon of the linguists to build his own racist jargon. I think Hitler's thesis was that the Germans had maintained the racial purity of their Aryan ancestors where others had not, and that recent hardships that had befallen the German people were due to a loss of purity, which he blamed on the Jews. So Hitler borrowed from a linguistic theory and twisted it into a race theory in order to scapegoat the Jews, and to build a sense of German national identity.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   142.  Re: misuse of Caucasian   by dylanr       at Thu 27 Feb 11:49am score of 1   in reply to comment 138     A very interesting set of points. What I think is missing, though is that there are lots of examples of Nazi philosophy throughout history. Racial identity politics have been around since humans climbed out of trees... and perhaps since even before then. That such trends can be seen in Indian history and politics simply makes them like everyone else. The Nazis may be the most overtly deadly manifestation of political racism, but they were hardly a historical singularity. Indeed, much of the philosophical basis of Nazism was already gaining a full head of steam by 1800 when Malthus started publishing his demographic tracts. By 1850, it was all but inevitable that someone would give it a try. Indeed, the US already had considerable experience with extreme racial politics by that point. The roots of Nazism go much deeper than one sect of Hinduism. The Nazis exposed a deep human trait that we had never seen carried to such a brutally efficient conclusion. The Nazis forced us to confront our inner demons and we tend to think of them as being unique. They weren't. They played a unique role in history, but it is not because their philosophy was particularly unique. Indeed, it was racism's very ubiquity that made their actions such a shocking revelation. In theory there should be no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there usually is.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   57.  Re: misuse of Caucasian   by Screename2000       at Wed 26 Feb 4:56pm score of 1   in reply to comment 31     Just wanted to say that Caucasian actually includes people from India The Supreme Court disagreed.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

46.  My Test   by charlies       at Wed 26 Feb 3:55pm score of 2.5 compelling     Forty years ago, before affirmative action began, John Kennedy proposed a very simple test for racial equality: Would a white trade skin color with a black? Until I am willing to do that, there is need for affirmative action. There are lots of ways of looking at "equality". I am white, from a "trailer trash" background (I lived in projects that were mostly white), and got a pretty good education (BA, U of Chicago; JD, U of Washington). But the class thing has always been, and continues to be, a problem. From my parents I "inherited" a $300 Social Security death benefit. Economically I would fall somewhere in the lower half (maybe third) of Americans. Is it an advantage to be white? You bet! I have been stopped by police a couple dozen times. Every time I was doing something wrong, except once, when I drove into what turned out to be a large smuggling stakeout. I was released in a few minutes. My experience has generally been much like jbou's above, much unlike the experience of black people of my acquaintance. I never had a realtor try to limit my house search to one area. There are many times things did not happen. So George W. Bush tells me that there is no need for affirmative action any more, that's all past. He thinks the Texas college admission system is just fine. Except it only works BECAUSE TEXAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS ARE DE FACTO RACIALLY SEGREGATED. This comes from a guy who is the son of a man Anne Richards accurately described as a man who was born on third base and thought he'd hit a triple. When millionaires speak of sacrifice, I know what's coming. We're fighting in a war we lost before the war began.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

48.  amen   by coquito       at Wed 26 Feb 4:11pm score of 1   in reply to comment 46     funny you bring up that Kennedy quote. i'd never heard it.       recently, in a forum for blues musicians, one guy commented how he wished he'd been born 30 years earlier, and black, so that he could be in the middle of all that great music. he'd been reading a biography of Little Walter, a blues harmonica player, which described the time. i couldn't believe anyone would be so foolish as to wish such a thing. i'd read the same biography. there were a number of times Walter barely escaped with his life, just because of the color of his skin, and all of his days racism haunted him and shattered his idea of himself. i'd go so far as to say it killed him.       i for one, even in this day and age, am glad i was not born a black man in America. as much as i've encountered hardship and racism in my life for being latino, it is nothing compared to what i've seen my black friends go through. but that's just one personal anecdote. it don't mean nuthin... In Hindu, you have not one God, but many, many, many, many, many gods -- learned Hindu scholar   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   77.  Re: My Test   by Remo1       at Wed 26 Feb 8:18pm score of 1   in reply to comment 46     Forty years ago, before affirmative action began, John Kennedy proposed a very simple test for racial equality: Would a white trade skin color with a black? Until I am willing to do that, there is need for affirmative action.       I'm a white male, 31. Would I change skin color with a black person? Yes, provided I get to choose the class in which I am born. I'd change with a middle- class black in a second.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   81.  Re: My Test   by jbou       at Wed 26 Feb 8:57pm score of 1   in reply to comment 77     Ah yes semantics, you know what let's add that you have to go back, and live through that persons whole existence, not just take over his current life. Things were different back in the 70's, and 80's. Arguments have no chance against petrified training; they wear it as little as the waves wear a cliff.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   120.  Re: My Test   by Lakaien       at Thu 27 Feb 8:45am score of 1   in reply to comment 81     So a black man that is now a member of the middle class couldn't have come from middle class parents in the 70's and 80's? I'm going to have to notify a few of my friends parents that their whole lives have been a lie. if you had a funeral- i'd be there with bells on- Chris Murphy   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   162.  Re: My Test   by jbou       at Thu 27 Feb 10:18pm score of 1   in reply to comment 120     I didn't say they weren't from the middle class I was saying that people's attitudes were different back in the 70's, and 80's. Arguments have no chance against petrified training; they wear it as little as the waves wear a cliff.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   99.  Re: My Test   by empressrenee       at Thu 27 Feb 12:21am score of 1   in reply to comment 46     Would a white trade skin color with a black? Until I am willing to do that, there is need for affirmative action. I would have to ask a question. If I was black would I be raised in the same area that I was raised in. Receive the same education?? Because I don't see that it would have made much of a difference. Now if I was black and raised in say Texas (I went to school there when I was little) Then no way in hell!! I honestly didn't see in my high school or college and definitely not in the Army that it makes any difference. As a matter of fact a new study came out and 25% of all enlisted soldiers are Black. Considering the estimate for the population of the country is only 13%. So I don't think that just because I'm white I have it inherently easier and just because someone is black they have it harder. I think allot of other things go into it. I wish that all people grew up in a community like I did. And that is what I hope for in the future. In the meantime I will continue to treat people as people, period.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   121.  ask yourself "why?"   by coquito       at Thu 27 Feb 8:46am score of 1   in reply to comment 99     i'm not sure i understand why you brought up the statistic of the number of blacks in the Army. but it seems important to you, so i just wanted to ask -- do you know why those people chose to be in the military? that would be significant, i would think, in determining what those numbers mean. the military, to its credit, was one of the first segments of american society to accept african americans, even though it initially (and some would argue, even to this day) accepted them grudgingly, as second class citizens. thanks to their inclusion in the military, blacks in this country have had the opportunity to show they are just as capable, brave, and loyal to their country as whites can be. this is actually tru of a number of minorities. that said, a number of people, of all races, enter the military because their other chances don't look so good, or because their time in the military will make their chances better once they're out (to get a job or an education). there are many many stories of young native americans lying about their age to join the army and get off the rez, of blacks joining the army to get off the farm or out of the ghetto, and of latinos joining the army to escape poverty or lack of opportunity. that the numbers of minorities in the military (and this may include poor or rural whites) is disproportionately high doesn't comfort me, as it could well be a sign that they are there because their chances in the business world, in the academic world, in civilian life are not as good as they are in the military. while it is a credit to the military, it is also a condemnation of so-called "civil" society. if you feel that the presence of minorities in the army is significant in some way, i suggest you find out more about why they are there, so that you can discover what that significance truly is. In Hindu, you have not one God, but many, many, many, many, many gods -- learned Hindu scholar   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   147.  Re: ask yourself "why?"   by charlies       at Thu 27 Feb 12:28pm score of 1   in reply to comment 121     There have been some interesting replies to the Kennedy quote. Mostly I think it shows how muddled American public discourse on race has become since Kennedy's death. His point was simple: Would you, who you are now, same class, same home, same job, willingly change your skin color? That has to be the test. Thank you for your insights, coquito. We tend to quickly forget the details. I recall that when the FBI was hunting for the bodies of Schwerner, Chaney, and Goodman they came across several unrelated black corpses. It is easy to forget the details. We're fighting in a war we lost before the war began.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

54.  Solutions from a crazy guy   by TheCyko1       at Wed 26 Feb 4:44pm score of 1     It's obvious that people with similarities tend to band together. But, the question is, how do you get a world to see that every human being is similar, regardless of color? How can we reach a point in society where people see beyond the color of our skin? Ihe solution is simple. Aliens! Not the nice kind either, I mean the big ugly ones from outter space. Aliens who are bent on our enslavement, or already have us enslaved. Then it wouldn't matter what color we are, cuz no matter how white, or black you are, you can't possibly be as ugly as those damned aliens. This message was brought to you by the death of 30 brain cells   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

149.  Re: Solutions from a crazy guy   by iron monkey       at Thu 27 Feb 12:43pm score of 1   in reply to comment 54     You've been reading Watchmen again, haven't you? Shut up and look, I'm the winner! Take a gander...you're short and frazzled like Gilda Radner. //Mike Ladd   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   167.  Re: Solutions from a crazy guy   by Befalas       at Fri 28 Feb 10:51am score of 1   in reply to comment 54     Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

58.  But Does It Help?   by dylanr       at Wed 26 Feb 5:19pm score of 3 compelling     Affirmative action should be judged on two criteria: that it redresses a real grievance and that it does more good than harm. That racism exists, I take as a given. That black people tend to suffer the ill effects of racism more than whites, I consider a given. Even so, affirmative action is overused and used insensitively. A brief story from my school days. I went to a very good public high school. It was racially diverse, but strongly upper middle class. It was typical that about 10% of each graduating class would qualify as a National Merit finalist, but due to the scholarship's income cap we hardly ever got a National Merit Scholar. The core group of us nerds who took mostly AP/honors classes included people of many races, including a black guy named Joe. Joe did as well as any of us, took a challenging courseload and scored well on standardized tests. He wasn't in the very top echelon of over-achievers (neither was I) but the top of that pile was sort of a scary place anyway. At the end of the year, our high school did an awards ceremony where people who got awards or scholarships would have them announced and they got to come to the front of the auditorium to get their award. As happens every year, the audience was mostly the nerd squad and their families and half the auditorium got up to receive the certificate for National Merit semi-finalist or finalist. Joe stood up and was awarded semi-finalist. He did well on his PSATs, but not in the top 1%. But then they announced the Black National Merit Scholarship, which Joe had won. It was a bit of an uncomfortable moment for everyone in the room, particularly him. The message was crystal clear: you got a decent test score compared with your peers... but for a black person, that score is really something to be proud of! And that was just the beginning. Over the course of the evening, Joe went to the stage a half dozen times at least. He got several awards named for famous black people, all presented in celebration of how exceptional he was as a smart, high-achieving person of color. Joe was a smart, ambitious guy. But it was being made exceptionally clear that his achievements were being evaluated more by his skin color than by the achievements themselves. When he got spots in several competitive colleges, he was well aware that he had gotten the "black" spots. And the story continues... How is he supposed to feel any sense of ownership over what he accomplishes? How is he to demonstrate that he earned what he has? What is supposed to sustain his drive to achieve? Has affirmative action, in fact, made him less accomplished than he could otherwise have been? By lowering the bar for him and reducing his challenges, our liberal guilt insulted Joe and may have done him a great disservice. Affirmative action can be a tremendous help to those at the bottom. But it can be a thick glass ceiling for those at the top. The problem is the utter simplicity of viewing social progress through one clumsy binary filter. Affirmative action needs to recognize that some people need opportunity, but others need challenge. Affirmative action could be a great deal more nuanced than it currently is. In theory there should be no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there usually is.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

65.  Comment   by mmandell       at Wed 26 Feb 5:52pm score of 2.5 compelling     True Story: I was on the local admissions committee for a well-known, top-ranked national university. This university was seeking to be politically correct by enrolling more black students. So in my area (South Florida) they contacted the elite private schools and a couple of the highly-rated suburban schools, and asked for the names of the top black students. I suggested: Since THOSE students can get accepted to most top-rate colleges, why don't we expand our horizons and recruit at the black urban high schools-there are probably 20-30 predominantly black schools in S. Florida? I was met with DEAD SILENCE and looks such as "You must be joking." I guess affirmative action has its limitations.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

66.  Re: Comment   by Lemmy Caution       at Wed 26 Feb 6:11pm score of 1   in reply to comment 65     You've hit the nail on the head: many institutions use the discourse on race as a screen for classism. Which doesn't say that racism isn't still a reality - just that, particularly in some more elite academic environments, racial discourse is used for its cultural capital to distinguish wealthy, liberal educated whites from would-be arrivistes and social-climbers, and to fortify class and status-group barriers.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   108.  Re: Comment   by tdahnsn       at Thu 27 Feb 6:22am score of 1   in reply to comment 66     Ah, but in South Florida they've moved that to high art. They've set up schemes by which the best and brightest from all the poorest schools can be cleverly moved to the best of schools, but since they don't have the same background (elementary and middle schools) and have some hardship involved in getting to school (45 minute bus rides or having to find your own way there) they don't generally perform as well as they might if the same opportunities existed early in their education and in their local schools. They also are out of the local schools, bringing down the averages for all sorts of things (every standardized test for example) in those schools. Since now those standardized test results are being used to claim those schools are failing, shouldn't the students who were siphoned off be averaged back in? Oh, then we'd have to admit that we created a system to force poor schools to fail. The top potential from a poor school (inner-city, minority) are scooped away to programs in mainly wealthier sub-urban schools. The wealthier schools also will have more options, particularly the range of AP courses, which facilitates transfers into the school of the academically gifted. Programs are established to segregate out from poorer schools specifically those students who might raise the performance of those poor schools rather than improve those schools. The best way to transfer students around for years was abused like hell by a lot of folks: Let's say you don't want your daughter going to the new holding-pen...err highschool that will open on day one with overcrowding, an underperforming student base, and underfunded departments and would rather her go to the wealthier school in whose area you don't live. Have her take Hebrew. Yeah, Hebrew as her foreign language. Because in the early 1990's Hebrew was taught at Miami Sunset and Miami Palmetto High Schools, both of which had excellent AP programs, fairly high average SAT scores, lower classroom sizes, an experienced teacher base, excellent Principals and high (for the county) white populations. Compare that with other schools in the county and you'll see why there was a significant rise in enrollment in Hebrew as a foreign language in those years. If a class wasn't offered at a school but was available at another you could put in for a transfer and many of them were accepted, even into incredibly overcrowded schools. I'm willing to bet big money it still goes on. For the record: I have 4 close relatives who work as teachers or assistant principals in that particular system. I went through that system. I did well. Well enough to get the hell out of South Florida, in any case. I went to one of the schools mentioned above in the early 1990's, though I actually did live in the school's legitimate area boundaries. I believe that most of those who I say "abuse" that system are doing what any responsible parent would do: get their child the best education they can. I also believe that the magnet and other programs which siphon talented children out of the poorer schools do directly benefit the child but hurt the community and I harbor no ill-will toward the child or the parent, but quite a bit toward the system that forces parents to choose between their children and the community. Why? What's the most callous thing you've said today?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

87.  Why Affirmative Action has outlived its usefulness   by eduardo       at Wed 26 Feb 10:28pm score of 1     Back in the day when AA was designed, I am sure the problem it was made to solve was less along the lines of "there's not enough percentage blacks in college/workplace" per se, but that "people are discriminating against black people, and the only way to overcome people's bias is to force them to maintain a certain percentage of black students/employees whether they like it or not." Nowdays, the situation is different. An employer or college recruiter can't afford to not take blacks because he will be sued very quickly, AA or not, and happily, the number of people who would even want to do this today is a tiny fraction of what it's been back in the day. Back in the day, AA solved the problem. It made sure people hired blacks. It made sure that people were not discriminated against because they are black. The problem is different now, and the problem now is caused by the fact that AA now forces racial-based admissions/hireing, the very problem is was meant to (and has successfully) solve. AA was deffinately necessary at one point. It has made a real difference. Fortunately, we do not live in a world now where this quote based solution is necessary any more. We now live in the world where a black person has every reason to expect that his qualifications get him into the door, not his color of skin. J'ai une petite amie avec des tres, tres grandes tetons.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

89.  what every parent says.   by mudfoot       at Wed 26 Feb 10:31pm score of 1     two wrongs don't make a right. giving minorities preference over whites doesn't fix people's attitudes. it's discrimination plain and simple. i don't care who's doing it to whom, it's wrong.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

95.  An Alternative   by wsimpleton       at Thu 27 Feb 12:01am score of 1     As a lefty, I've heard all of the arguments for and against Affirmative Action time and again. I think another approach is more sensible. This is based on the following assumptions (you can take them or leave them, but I believe most would agree): 1. A disproportianate number of minorities are living in poverty due to a legacy of racism. Once born poor, it is difficult to leave that economic strata. 2. Race has no bearing on intelligence. Any measurable difference is a result of economic and environmental differences. 3. Schools in impoverished areas are not as good as affluent suburban schools. Bright children can also be poor children, and denied a decent education. 4. Issues of class and race are so muddled in this country they are often erroneously substituted for one another. My proposal is simple: Why not change Affirmative Action to target children of low-income families? This would affect precisely the people Affirmative Action is trying to assist: the people who have what it to earn a degree, but who weren't given an equal opportunity to obtain it. Of course, there still is discrimination in this country, so this isn't a magic bullet. I do believe, however, it would go a long way in ending the "old boy" network, and would address the inequalities inherent in our current system. My .02 cents.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

107.  An Alternative to what?   by EamPeB       at Thu 27 Feb 5:55am score of 1   in reply to comment 95     Don't spit on the dream.   The mythical ideal of a meritocracy where everyone rises to the level of their ability can only be maintained when it is seen to be possible, when the poor remain poor despite the "wealth" of opportunities presented to them it must be something else, consequently by focusing on Race we are buying into the fact that economic disadvantage is somehow someday defeatable but racism will always be with us.   The truth is that any system whereby the rise through academia (for example) is based predominantly on your parents ability to pay for it is not doing much for the redistribution of intellectual capital, this discrimination is not about race it's about money.   If you want to know why racism abounds is because somewhere someone is getting rich from it. If you want to know why affirmative action is based on race it's because if the action was based on income and opportunity the status quo would have to come up with a more convincing explanation for their stranglehold on opportunity than "I was born white the poor were born black"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

102.  I can't believe the ignorance.   by Antioxygen       at Thu 27 Feb 2:07am score of 1     I am just nearly speechless. After reading this I just could not fathom the ignorance portrayed here. In summary the Berkeley College Republican student group protested affirmative action by selling cookies on a price gradient determined by race. I'm really to angry to go say all i want to say right now but some highlights. 1)Berkeley is one of the least "Diverse" campuses I've been to. By diverse i mean either evenly mixing ethnic and economic backgrounds , or at least matching the demographics of the area it serves. 2) When University of California ended affirmative action African American Enrolment dropped from about 6% to not quite 2% and has seen a steady increase back up to about 3.5% still just over half. (side note it would be nice to think that since UC caters to the environment of the East Bay Area it might try to emulate the demographics of the area. Oakland the largest city in Contra Costa and Alameda counties is over 50% african american) 3) UC does not admit with preference to race, Their enrollment wasn't threatened! why do these people feel threatened by race-aware admissions? I'm not an advocate of complacency but I think the action was pretty extreme for people who seem to have little experience or understanding of the subject   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

105.  Re: I can't believe the unthinking stupidity   by gordon shumway       at Thu 27 Feb 2:33am score of 3 astute   in reply to comment 102     Do Asians count as a minority or not? Because they make up nearly half the students at Berkeley. Should the number of Asians allowed into Berkeley be restricted, to allow more room for blacks? That would make sense if college admissions are going to based on demographics. And once were done with the Asians taking all the spots away, we can go after the Jews.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   171.  Re: I can't believe the unthinking stupidity   by Antioxygen       at Sun 2 Mar 7:17pm score of 1   in reply to comment 105     Affirmative Action isn't about taking spots away from students, it's about offering spots to students with fewer oportunities. People would lose spots as a result, but in the big picture the people who would be rejected "in favor" of a underrepresented student are more likely to apply to multiple schools and be accepted to another upper tier university. what it affects on the individual level would more often be choice, and it's already a reality that you may bot get to attend your first choice for all applicants regardless of Affirmative Action. So I think the downsides of Affirmative Action programs on the individual and community levels are minimal.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   143.  Re: I can't believe the ignorance.   by DarthDarthBinks       at Thu 27 Feb 11:59am score of 1   in reply to comment 102     1)Berkeley is one of the least "Diverse" campuses I've been to. By diverse i mean either evenly mixing ethnic and economic backgrounds , or at least matching the demographics of the area it serves. What kind of hamfisted definition of diversity is that? Berkeley has no majority racial component. Berkeley has a broad swath of people coming from different backgrounds and areas of the state and country. Finally, Berkeley has a thriving community on campus that is far different than any other campus I've ever seen. Berkeley has so many different asian groups that they are able to form dozens of sub-asian nationality/religion/interest based groups. 2) When University of California ended affirmative action African American Enrolment dropped from about 6% to not quite 2% and has seen a steady increase back up to about 3.5% still just over half. (side note it would be nice to think that since UC caters to the environment of the East Bay Area it might try to emulate the demographics of the area. Oakland the largest city in Contra Costa and Alameda counties is over 50% african american) UC Berkeley does not cater to Oakland or the East bay. It is the flagship school of the UC system, along with UCLA. It serves the state, not the local level. The regional schools would be Cal-state Hayward, San Jose State, or any of the other regional based state schools, rather than the UC ones. If you look at the state as a whole, Berkeley is not doing a good job of representing the racial profile of the state (too many asians, not enough whites, latinos, or blacks). However, Prop. 206 (?) outlawed AA many moons ago, so the admissions people's hands are tied.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   170.  Re: I can't believe the ignorance.   by Antioxygen       at Sun 2 Mar 7:05pm score of 1   in reply to comment 143     You make a good point about Berkeley not serving the region but rather the state as a whole. And my hopes that the school would mirror the demographics of the region may have been unreasonable, but i stand by my statements about Berkeley not being diverse. It is far and above most of the other UCs in socioeconomic and political diversity but a lot of that stems from the feeling that conformity is bad, rather than actually expressing deeply held beliefs. I still think there is vast room for improvement in all of those areas, but that's probably true of all campuses. I think the school is a model of diversity among asian ethnic groups, and it' something that's readilly apparent as soon as you get any where near campus. But unfortunately the reason that it is so obvious is that the groups don't intermingle with other ethnic groups much, which i think is a waste of the diversity. It's particularly wasteful since enrollment of Asian and Asian American Students is rising, and their contribution to the atmosphere at schools is not so much that they are being afforded oportunities they wouldn't be elsewhere, but rather that they get to contribute culturally. As long as berkeley is racially polarized it isn't living up to it's own standards. This seems a far stretch from the issue of affirmative action, but i think increasing enrollment of other cultures would greatly increase students exposire to new cultures and since 206 passed minority enrollment is down.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

111.  Other races discriminating   by philipkd       at Thu 27 Feb 7:16am score of 1     Don't forget, it's not just the whites that discriminate or give preference to their white brothers, I find it alarming how immigrants are aggressively racist as well. I've encountered situations where an Asian parent was upset that their daughter would date an Black man while I've never encountered personally a similar situation among Whites. Racism is not just a white vs. black thing as a poster said before, but is something else, something larger, more complex, and messy. A concept that may be over the head of President Bush. Suicidalism is the true mark of an advanced civilization - me - philipd Philosophistry   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

112.  Let's throw the baby out with the bathwater!   by tlacolotl       at Thu 27 Feb 7:28am score of 0.5 incoherent     This just illustrates yet another problem with democratic capitalism: it will always be "majority rule", both economically and (therefore) culturally -- leaving minority populations in the dust. I mean, sure, as long as there's concepts of "race" there will be "racism", but our backwards social model certainly aggravates the situation. It's a shitty way to run a country; it's unfair, unrepresentative, and regressive -- the worst form of government, except (as Churchill said) for all the rest. Well, there's actually a better model. The only solution (yeah, it's this simple, of course) is democratic communism, with madatory voting (on pain of DEATH) and no money and no personal property. Anyone who doesn't like this idea should really reconsider your priorities: do you prefer communal harmony or material goods? Peace and justice -- or the freedom to steal from others via "free enterprise"? We worry about problems of race in this country without really looking at the real source: economic divisions. Until every person has no means to amasss more wealth than his/her neighbor, there will always be injustice, and set in a country where there is more than one "race", this will be well-illustrated in terms of skin-color. Do as thou wilt shall be the whole of thy law   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

114.  Color Blind   by mawgwy       at Thu 27 Feb 7:44am score of 1.5 astute     Base all assistance that would go for blatantly racist affirmative action on economic status instead. The poor white receives as much help as the poor black then. When it comes down to it, I'd prefer class action assistance as opposed to race assistance. This issue separates the races and divides the poorer individuals into not seeing the real problem, the tiny percentage of people whom hold some crazy amount of asset's.. something like 1% of the people holding 95% of the wealth in the United States. Compared to this I think the rest of us fighting over scraps need to open our eyes and think about wealth redistribution. Equalism.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

119.  Re: Color Blind   by eduardo       at Thu 27 Feb 8:39am score of 1   in reply to comment 114     I agree with you about class-based assistance. But those things have pitfalls too. Personally, if I just went to University and mooched off my mom, I'd be considered for financial aid. But as it is, I work and have income, so not only does the government not help me pay tuition, they want tax money FROM me, in addition to all that cash I saved them by working my way through school. Is that fair? Well, I don't complain all that much about it, but a system where it's more 'profitable' to be poor and unemployed is just as bad as a system where it's more profitable to be of a certain race - if for no other reason than because it doesn't create an ethic of work and self-sustainability that, in my opinion, too many people graduate college without. J'ai une petite amie avec des tres, tres grandes tetons.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   169.  Re: Color Blind   by Laputan Machine       at Sat 1 Mar 5:00pm score of 1   in reply to comment 114     Someone PLEASE find me a source where a minority WANTS a color blind society. It's absolutely amazing that white liberals are still ranting about color blind society, a world without race, when the minorities they claim to be speaking for do not support this! It's even more disgusting when the GOP trots out the dead specter of Dr. King, using his I have a Dream speech, in support of this, when he would have NOT. It's important to recognize, ultimately, that it's impossible to have a color blind society when the two major cultures of America have RACE/COLOR built into their very cultural identity labels. (White. Black.) Had both of these cultures started out with labels that were NOT genetically inspired, THEN and only then could a "color blind" society be possible. Also keep in mind that most minorities view color blind ideals as just another tactic to shove America into a monoculture, assimilating their groups into white culture. Oops, I mean American culture. Cough. (Come ON folks, America's OFFICIAL race was white as late as the 1930s! Official policy was to let white immigrants become citizens, and no one else. a historymatters.gmu.edu link ). Non-whites in this country are well aware of just what race "American" culture really is. Even if "culture=race" ideas were removed from America, there would still be cultures based on national/ethnic ties. Affirmative action would still be very much possible, as discrimination would simply shift from race-based prejudices to purely cultural ones. The fact that America DOES have racially-inspired cultural life simply spares it from this other, much more common in the world, discrimination. (Chinese kids become Asian, Czech kids become White, Nigerian kids become Black.. all to the confusion of their immigrant parents.) The nation is divided, half patriots and half traitors, and no man can tell which from which. - Mark Twain   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

115.  Old Money and Percentages   by Ursa Minor       at Thu 27 Feb 8:00am score of 1.5 compelling     Tan'si, I'm not sure how scientific my argument is, but here it goes anyway. In my mind a fair level of equality will be reached when there is a comparable level of visible minorities at the levels of Old Money, Stinking Rich, Wealthy, Upper Class, Lower Upper Class, Higher Middle Class as there is in the 'Status Quo'. It is my belief, that children of people in the categories above Wealthy (the vast majority of whom, in North America are 'white' males) can get into schools not matter what their grades are, so I think of affirmative action as one way to balance this. If nothing else, this percentage probably cancels out the people who are abusing the affirmative action system. Affirmative Action also takes the place of parents. The 'Status Quo's' parents and their parents can take out loans, can mortage their house to send their kids to college. In the case of First Nations, because of the reservations system, we cannot mortage the home we live in, which makes it very difficult to get loans for things like starting a small business or sending my kid through college. Where would your family be if your father or grandfather couldn't have taken out a loan? I often wonder why conservatives argue against affirmative action because the North American education system is a major tool of assimilation into the dominant culture. They do not teach me the my people's (First Nation- Cree) concept of 'Justice' when I go to college, they teach me the Western concept of 'Justice'. Yes, there are aspects of education thank can create a form of 'enlightenment', but because of the fact that education in North America is founded on Western ideals, it can't help but also being a tool of assimilation. I think arguments against affirmative action are often a case of Snapshot Perspectives. If we see a group of snapshots and the first on is of a masked man appraoaching a subdued person with a sharp knife, we may think, "Oh, my god what is going on here?" It is only as we look at the later pictures that we realize this scary scene is part of a medical procedure and the man with the knife is a surgeon. The problems affirmative action are trying to address will take generations to solve. Ursa Minor   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

140.  the deal is   by mrpiedlourd       at Thu 27 Feb 11:11am score of 1     I hate to come off as righteously indignant here, but of course there is blatant racial discrimination in America. And since most of the money and power in America is held by Rich White Old Men, most of the discrimination is towards anyone (of color? black? what is the correct term now? how about NOT WHITE). Don't forget a few points here: -Affirmative action won't atone for the slavery of blacks. Nothing really could. -AA's purpose (I believe) is to offset the racism practiced by people in positions of power who hire and fire, accept and reject other people. -AA is necessary because there is not only subconcious racism even among well-educated white tower liberals like us, but BLATANT and outright "You're black? No job for you." racism, and it is very prevalent, if not overt. I don't think it is the perfect solution, but it is good enough for me. -Don't forget that "black" is used to refer to people not only of African American descent. it could also be: hatians, jamaicans, australian aboriginals, and anyone of a million geographical origins. AA isn't about slavery, there are plenty of 'black' people who never suffered from slavery. In conclusion, whites IN GENERAL enjoy social, economic, and political privilege because those in power are white; whether they know it or not. Since this is probably -1 incoherent at this point I'll stop.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

141.  ...don't let the door hit you in the ass!   by vancegod       at Thu 27 Feb 11:43am score of 1     Why, after reading most of the suggested material, do I see nothing besides blatant assertions presented as definitive evidence? Perhaps this is a condition inherent in the attempt to debate philosophy. In my opinion such 'fuzzy' concepts as racial interaction and, race relations and so forth, are totally outside the realm of logical debate. It is simply impossible to have enough objectivity and deduction present in a discussion of racial inequity.       Many times during my reading of the material referenced by the discussion on which I am commenting; I noticed that "race" often referred only to blacks and whites. It seems to me, based on life experience only, that there is a great deal of societal friction between ALL the many races occupying this wonderful social experiment we call a country. But I also believe that if there is a more significant disharmony between any two groups of races, it would have to be between blacks and whites. So as I drift in and out of generalizations I will, admittedly, reference this pair of groups most frequently.       Bet your ass affirmative-action is racist! Its very reason for existence is inherently racist. Affirmative-action acknowledges a defined difference between races. It implies, in black and white, that Whites are different than Blacks; that Blacks are different than Asians and so on. It seems necessary to define a difference between races in order to define a solution to racist social policy. But isn't this the absolute core of racism? If you agree that it is, imagine if affirmative-action read a little something like this: "No one may be unfair." After removing language that identifies and defines racial categories what else is in there?       I realized something about myself as I began to grow up. I am somewhat of a misogynist; and this type of bigotry has enough in common with racism that I think I can create a telling analogy. I used to say to myself, in my voice that only I can hear (we all have one) that, "I hate that women are this certain way". Now it is bad enough to generalize in this way, I know. But I found an underlying condition in myself far more sinister than simply generalizing and stereotyping women. I asked myself, one day, to define what I meant by "women". When I make a statement of this sort to a woman, it means something vastly different to her than to me. To her it means herself and ALL women. To me, that is profound. Because to me, "women" meant only those females in the world with whom I would consider or otherwise desire having sex with.       Women that I would not be attracted to, for one reason or another, simply did not register on my radar. Egocentricism is a trait I found to be a particularly repugnant trait shared by all "women". I eventually made the observation that not all "women" possess this fault. I then, of course, started to notice patterns develop outlining consistent differences between women who did and women who did not. It then dawned on me that women I found attractive were more likely to be self-centered. At the same time I noticed that women I did not find attractive were more likely to be selfless and open.       I drew my own conclusions. Perhaps attractive women are treated in a way, their whole lives, that creates an egocentric disposition. Conversely, maybe women who are not attractive can't afford to adopt this personality malady. I am straying from my point. My point is this: That when I thought of women, in my voice that only I could hear, I was actually thinking of "women". I was feeling resentment toward an entire group of people based on my feelings about a minority within this group. I realized that every complaint I had about female behavior in society was based on the behavior of a few women who possessed something that I desired.       In addition to being a misogynist I am also a racist. I am guilty of the same type of thinking that I just outlined when it comes to how I view society racially. I am absolutely sure that I have an opinion of all Blacks in this country based on my opinion of a few. Why am I, as a White male, exclusively guilty of this type of bigotry? Isn't what I outlined here perhaps a part of human nature? Isn't it fair to conclude that this type of thinking knows no racial boundary? In reality though, I tend to judge people more on how they behave than how they appear to me. I cannot afford, socially, to do otherwise.       Every single human being on the face of the Earth, lives with approximately equal amounts of discrimination. Blacks don't like Latinos. Whites don't like Blacks. Asians don't like Whites. Arabic's fucking hate everybody. I, as a white male, am discriminated against because I am poor and ugly. More to the point I don't fit the media image of white male. I can't get "layed" because all the white girls I know want to be with black guys. I can't have respect in the work place because the women I work with don't want to fuck me; and the guys view me as a weakling who can't get "layed". My mother kicked th read the entire comment...   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

160.  You're in hell   by jbou       at Thu 27 Feb 9:41pm score of 1   in reply to comment 141     Clean up, dress up, and stop complaining, and heed your own advice, and get your shit together. Also I'll be teaching an adult ed class for all you anti social freaks who never learned how to pick up women, private message me I can help you.(in case anyone missed it, I was joking) Arguments have no chance against petrified training; they wear it as little as the waves wear a cliff.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   164.  Re: ...don't let the door hit you in the ass!   by zelwyn       at Fri 28 Feb 10:01am score of 1   in reply to comment 141     So.. essentially your message is that unless you are a college educated white man who would win points on "Are you hot?", you are doomed to the life of a lonely failure? Say, I'd buy that for a dollar!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]