Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Affirmative action and its role in modern world
Effects of affirmative action on education
Negatives of affirmative action
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Affirmative action and its role in modern world
The Problems With Affirmative Action
Tim was working as a college professor for many years at an ivy-league school. Tim was a very well liked by the students and by the administration. Tim's qualifications were hard to beat, with a book and many other writings to his credit. One day he went to work and found out that he had been replaced by a woman that had less experience and fewer credentials (McElroy).
The definition of affirmative action is as follows:
Affirmative action means taking positive steps to recruit, hire, train, and promote individuals from groups that have traditionally been discriminated against on the basis of race, sex, disability, or other characteristics. In this sense, affirmative action goes beyond equal employment opportunity, which requires employers to eliminate discriminatory conditions, whether inadvertent or intentional, and to treat all employees equally in the workplace ( What ... action? ).
Tim lost his job to a procedure that had the main purpose to make the process of hiring workers and accepting people to colleges equal for the minorities and women. However, the process, affirmative action, does not make it equal and it gives minorities and women extra rights. Affirmative action is a procedure that is unfair and unjust to the majority of the people.
It is not ethical to cure discrimination of minority's and women with another form of discrimination when the majority is discriminated against. Discrimination is hard to correct, but if laws are for discrimination of any kind, it will never be corrected. Plous argued against this and said, "the most effective way to cure society of exclusionary practices is to make special efforts at inclusion." In the statement, the word "special"...
... middle of paper ...
...ww.now.org/press/04-03/04-01.html>.
Jorgensen, Eric T. "Affirmative Action is Not So Bad." The Back Page. 4 Sept. 1998. 21 Oct. 2003 <http://www.sff.net/people/ericj/backpage/1998/affirmac.htp>.
McElroy, Wendy. "What does Affirmative Action Affirm." wendymcelroy.com. 24 Oct. 2003 <http://www.zetetics.com/mac/affirm.htm>.
Plous, S. "Ten myths about affirmative action." Understanding Prejudice and Discrimination. 2003. 21 Oct. 2003 <http://www.UnderstandingPrejudice.org/readroom/articles/affirm.htm>.
Smith, Peter J. "Affirmative action can hurt qualifited whites." The State News: Michigan State University's Independent Voice. 15 Sept. 1998. 21 Oct. 2003 <http://www.statenews.com/editionsfall98/091598/op_ltr3.html>. "What is affirmative action?" Hrnext.com. 2003. 21 Oct. 2003 <http://www2.hrnext.com/Article.cfm/Nav/1.41.105.0.6829.6829>.
3.The term Affirmative action has played a huge role in the past one hundred years of American politics. It is simply defined as an action or policy favoring those who tend to suffer. Civil Rights of American citizens have drastically changed because of Affirmative action. With almost anything in politics, there is a debate for and against Affirmative action. Supporters of this say that this helps encourage e...
Another article titled “The Painful Truth About Affirmative Action” (Source B) by Richard Sander and Stuart Taylor Jr. takes a similar stance, but walks the reader through an alternative route in reaching a conclusion by discussing the negative aspects of AA on minority students. A third article by the name of “Actually, we still need affirmative action for African Americans in college admissions. Here’s why” (Source C) by Valerie Strauss provides input from the other side of the spectrum by arguing that AA is still needed. While source A provides an extremely biased perspective on affirmative action and does little to persuade the audience with its weak language, source B presents a slightly stronger argument against affirmative through its descriptive language and academic tone, which appeals to the reader but fails to address the opposite side of the dispute. However, source C offers the most compelling argument through its thorough analysis of affirmative action that considers both sides of the spectrum with strong diction and formal tone to effectively convey its ideas to the
After long years of suffering, degradation, and different sorts of discrimination which the disadvantaged group of people had experienced, the “Affirmative Action Law” was finally passed and enforced for the very first time on September 24, 1965. The central purpose of the Affirmative Action Law is to combat racial inequality and to give equal civil rights for each citizen of the United States, most especially for the minorities. However, what does true equality mean? Is opportunity for everyone? In an article entitled, “None of this is fair”, the author, Mr. Richard Rodriguez explains how his ethnicity did not become a hindrance but instead, the law became beneficial. However, Mr. Richard Rodriguez realized the unfairness of the “Affirmative Action” to people who are more deserving of all the opportunities that were being offered to him. Through Mr. Rodriguez’s article, it will demonstrates to the reader both favorable, and adverse reaction of the people to the Affirmative Action, that even though the program was created with the intention to provide equality for each and every citizen, not everyone will be pleased, contented, and benefit from the law.
Affirmative action, while a great idea in the beginning, is no longer needed to make up for the past discrimination of women and minorities. It does not get rid of discrimination, but rather creates it towards whites and men. Any form of discrimination is wrong, whether intentional or unintentional. Businesses and universities will set aside a separate pool for minorities and women so they don’t have to originally compete against the whole pool of applicants. A person’s qualifications and how they got to where they are should not be questioned because of affirmative action. The only reason some people are still questioned or considered undeserving is because affirmative action still takes place. Getting rid of affirmative action in universities and businesses will eliminate reverse discrimination and ensure that their qualifications, along with achievements, will not be questioned based on the skin color or gender of a
majority, does not advance the cause of minorities in a meaningful way, and needs to be
Affirmative action, the act of giving preference to an individual for hiring or academic admission based on the race and/or gender of the individual has remained a controversial issue since its inception decades ago. Realizing its past mistake of discriminating against African Americans, women, and other minority groups; the state has legalized and demanded institutions to practice what many has now consider as reverse discrimination. “Victims” of reverse discrimination in college admissions have commonly complained that they were unfairly rejected admission due to their race. They claimed that because colleges wanted to promote diversity, the colleges will often prefer to accept applicants of another race who had significantly lower test scores and merit than the “victims”. In “Discrimination and Disidentification: The Fair-Start Defense of Affirmative Action”, Kenneth Himma responded to these criticisms by proposing to limit affirmative action to actions that negate unfair competitive advantages of white males established by institutions (Himma 277 L. Col.). Himma’s views were quickly challenged by his peers as Lisa Newton stated in “A Fair Defense of a False Start: A Reply to Kenneth Himma” that among other rationales, the Fair-Start Defense based on race and gender is a faulty justification for affirmative action (Newton 146 L. Col.). This paper will also argue that the Fair-Start Defense based on race and gender is a faulty justification for affirmative action because it cannot be fairly applied in the United States of America today. However, affirmative action should still be allowed and reserved for individuals whom the state unfairly discriminates today.
Subconscious prejudices, self-segregation, political correctness, reverse discrimination, and ignorance all wade in the pool of opinions surrounding affirmative action and racial animosity. With racial tensions ever present in this country, one might question whether the problems can be solved by affirmative action.
According to the Encyclopædia Britannica, affirmative action is “an active effort to improve employment or educational opportunities for members of minority groups and women.” However, despite its well-intentioned policies, it has been the source of much controversy over the years. Barbara Scott and Mary Ann Schwartz mention that “proponents of affirmative action argue that given that racism and discrimination are systemic problems, their solutions require institutional remedies such as those offered by affirmative action legislation” (298). Also, even though racism is no longer direct, indirect forms still exist in society and affirmative action helps direct. On the other hand, opponents to affirm...
Today there is considerable disagreement in the country over Affirmative Action with the American people. MSNBC reported a record low in support for Affirmative Action with 45% in support and 45% opposing (Muller, 2013). The affirmative action programs have afforded all genders and races, exempting white males, a sense of optimism and an avenue to get the opportunities they normally would not be eligible for. This advantage includes admission in colleges or hiring preferences with public and private jobs; although Affirmative Action has never required quotas the government has initiated a benefits program for the schools and companies that elect to be diversified. The advantages that are received by the minorities’ only take into account skin color, gender, disability, etc., are what is recognized as discriminatory factors. What is viewed as racism to the majority is that there ar...
Combined Hyperlipoproteinemia has a population prevalence of 2-5%. The abnormalities associated with this disease are the increase in very-low-density lipoprotein (VLDL)...
The tendency to build up high cholesterol may run in families, but extremely high levels are usually the result of a poor diet high in saturated fats and calories, along with little or no exercise. In some cases, high levels of cholesterol may be associated with undiagnosed medical symptoms such as diabetes or low thyroid function. According to the American Heart Association, there would eventually be a 50 percent lower rate of heart disease if Americans would lower their blood cholesterol levels by 25 percent. These statements find confirmation in a 1984 report done by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institution on the results of a 10 year study. It showed that for every 1 percent of lowered cholesterol, the chances of a heart attack are lowered by 2 percent.
Tairo, Mario. "A Critical Look at Affirmative Action - Panorama - TakingITGlobal." A Critical Look at Affirmative Action - Panorama - TakingITGlobal. Taking It Global, 05 Apr. 2005. Web. 01 May 2014.
Supporters of affirmative action claim that racism and sexism can only be overcome by taking race and sex into account in finding a solution. They think that giving everyone equal rights is not enough to overcome the burden. Therefore, for everyone to be truly equal some people must be given certain benefits. So in hiring, acceptance to college, and other related things, businesses or colleges must hire or accept applicants on the basis of sex and race. In doing so they should give preference to blacks, women, and other minorities. This preference in hiring and accepting to level out the playing field is often called equality of results. Lately, affirmative action has taken the role of trying to diversify the environment of jobs and colleges.
...o that principle affirmative action should be considered just in relationship to minorities. As a result, because equal opportunity legislation is not in accordance with the best self-interests of most white males but it is in accordance with those of most minorities, this is another example of a situation in which injustice is inevitable.
Affirmative action in the United States has sought to rectify discrimination in society by favoring minority groups and women. After emerging from debates on non-discrimination approaches in the 1940s, the debates led to implemented policies requiring non-discrimination in employment. These policies developed to bridge the inequalities between different races, ethnicities, and genders after reports suggested the unfair advantages for whites and males. However, the practice of affirmative action is in a moment of intense debate in its fifty year history. This policy is often viewed as black and white, since two sides of opposite views arise from it. First off, it is well-known that affirmative action acts to allocate jobs and opportunities to