Angry White Men

[B. de Corbin]

What with affirmative action and all that, which are implicitly in place to force a certain "percentage" of minorities into particular employment positions, while also displacing the "white men" who have traditionally held those jobs, white guys are getting angry.

Here's an article that takes a look at the issue.

What's your take?

Are quotas & extra-credit points given in job interviews for skin color or gender reverse discrimination, or a fair and reasonable readjustment?

[XIII]

Re: Angry White Men

My opinion is that when it comes to jobs or anything for that matter, don't "force" anyone in because of "equality".
Hire people who are qualified. Pay no attention to race or gender. If they're qualified for the job then they're qualified for the job.

That's the sad sad truth about this world, people would rather judge race or gender than actual skill.

If someone replaced them in their job and they were less qualified, then yes I can see why they would be angry.
but I just wish people would shut up, calm down and stop paying so much attention to pigment and parts between people's legs.

[Maria de Luna]

Re: Angry White Men

I was of the opinion for quite a long time, that affirmative action was a horrible idea and had no place in society. It is clearly discrimination in its own right and should be done away with so everyone can move forward without race being a consideration. I was naive enough to think that our society was in the sort of enlightened position where that is sensible or even possible. We don't really and anyone saying we do doesn't really know what they are talking about. We live in a world where people in certain geographical areas and wealth settings tend to be less educated than those in other geographical areas and tax brackets. Many of the people living within poorer and less well funded areas are what angry white guys call "minorities" (sorry not fond of how people get lumped into that word) The fact is that these people have already NOT had the same access to education and proper job training for better paying jobs, as people in more affluent and possibly Caucasian dominated areas may have had. I know alot of people are sure that this doesn't happen anymore but it does. I grew up in a little town where many of the residents were quite well off, and when I say that this town was predominantly white, I mean I knew 2 African Americans because that is how many were in my grade year at school. (the town was small but not that small.) We even had a young Hispanic man, he spoke absolutely no Spanish, and was clearly American for more than a few generations. I bring this up because it was one of the better school districts in the area. the next town over had, at the time, one of the worst, this schools population was far less affluent and made up of a much larger portion of "minorities" than any where I had encountered. They would be bussed to our school monthly sometimes so some of them could use our facilities, this school scored poorly academically, (which I realize is not a wonderful metric, but it influences college acceptance,) had a much higher dropout rate, and the students who attended were less likely to move on and get great jobs. So while I do not like the way affirmative action is worded or how it ends up being enforced, I understand that things need to be done to equalize the world.

apologies for the rambling essay...

[DanieMarie]

Re: Angry White Men

If equality were already in place, I'd disagree with quotas and affirmative action. However, it's not. Sometimes, they're needed in order to break through.

To be honest the angry white men mentality can make me really angry. I think there's still a lot of entitlement there, like it's the right of every white man to have a job, and whatever is left can go to everyone else. Not everyone feels this way, but there are a lot of guys out there who get resentful when there are men who are unemployed and women and minorities who have jobs, as if those people "took their jobs".

EDIT: To those who call for hires based on equality, that would be fantastic, but that's often not what happens. Sometimes even the rules of the game are against us. In the business world, we're plagued with long hours and a work culture that makes it difficult to be an active parent and do that job. There's still a huge attitude that "if you can't play the game, don't join in", but this is false. The rules of the game need to change. If more women and minorities are in senior positions, that'll be more likely. As of now, they're still extremely unlikely to get there, so there needs to be a push.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Angry White Men

To be honest the angry white men mentality can make me really angry. I think there's still a lot of entitlement there, like it's the right of every white man to have a job, and whatever is left can go to everyone else. Not everyone feels this way, but there are a lot of guys out there who get resentful when there are men who are unemployed and women and minorities who have jobs, as if those people "took their jobs".

So - if a man gets hired over a woman because the man is a man, it's OK for a woman to get angry.

But if a man gets angry because a woman is hired over a man because she is a woman, the man has no business getting angry?

I dunno... it doesn't sound fair to me.

[DanieMarie]

Re: Angry White Men

I don't think quotas are exactly about a woman specifically getting hired over a man. It's more like, you're a board of directors and you have to have at least 20% women on your board, or you're a political party and at least 20% of your candidates running have to be women. All things considered, when you look at it, it's still INCREDIBLY more likely that you'll get these positions if you're a man, even WITH such quotas in place (few places have 50% quotas). Considering that in a some fields, women make up more than 50% of the graduates, but are barely a blip in management, there are clearly a lot of problems. There are clearly men being considered over women MORE qualified than they are. If this didn't happen, I'd say that yes, it's incredibly unfair. But it does. So this is how it has to be for a while until it's not like that anymore. It's also really rare that you'll have just one person qualified for an open position. Usually, you'll have a number of candidates, and they'll likely be a mixture of men and women. Quotas ensure that at least some of those women get those positions. I don't feel this comes at the expense of men.

If it means anything, I'd like to see some sort of reverse action going on in professions that rarely employ men.

[AL!CE]

Re: Angry White Men

My opinion is that when it comes to jobs or anything for that matter, don't "force" anyone in because of "equality".
Hire people who are qualified. Pay no attention to race or gender. If they're qualified for the job then they're qualified for the job.

That's the sad sad truth about this world, people would rather judge race or gender than actual skill.

If someone replaced them in their job and they were less qualified, then yes I can see why they would be angry.
but I just wish people would shut up, calm down and stop paying so much attention to pigment and parts between people's legs.

Sometimes two (or more) candidates seem equally qualified/capable/experienced for the job you are offering and then how do you choose between them? Either you pick the person you like most (which will often be someone who has similarities to you and that may include race) or you pick someone who fits your policy on equal opportunities (aka "positive" discrimination).

[Moody Thursday]

Re: Angry White Men

Well, that article went from talking about affirmative action to feminism... Anyway, I do agree with XIII up there that people should just be hired by qualifications. Unfortunately, we live in a world where we have to tell people that smoking is bad, not to text and drive, and "Do Not Attempt This" when there's a commercial of someone driving a car into the ocean in Italy, then coming back up on California's shore...

What I'm getting at is, some people just don't do what's right unless they are told or forced to :-/

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Angry White Men

What I'm getting at is, some people just don't do what's right unless they are told or forced to :-/

I hate being forced to do what someone else has decided is right, without consulting me on the matter. I don't know why everybody doesn't feel this way...

- - - Updated - - -

Sometimes two (or more) candidates seem equally qualified/capable/experienced for the job you are offering and then how do you choose between them? Either you pick the person you like most (which will often be someone who has similarities to you and that may include race) or you pick someone who fits your policy on equal opportunities (aka "positive" discrimination).

There is no such thing as "two equally qualified candidates."

Two people may have roughly equivalent degrees and work experience - the people hiring for a job know what those are before the interview. However, at the interview, everything changes because now the candidate is being evaluated on things like self presentation, ability to communicate through spoken words, attitude, how well this person will fit in with the other people working for the company, etc.

No two people are alike.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think quotas are exactly about a woman specifically getting hired over a man. It's more like, you're a board of directors and you have to have at least 20% women on your board, or you're a political party and at least 20% of your candidates running have to be women. All things considered, when you look at it, it's still INCREDIBLY more likely that you'll get these positions if you're a man, even WITH such quotas in place (few places have 50% quotas). Considering that in a some fields, women make up more than 50% of the graduates, but are barely a blip in management, there are clearly a lot of problems. There are clearly men being considered over women MORE qualified than they are. If this didn't happen, I'd say that yes, it's incredibly unfair. But it does. So this is how it has to be for a while until it's not like that anymore. It's also really rare that you'll have just one person qualified for an open position. Usually, you'll have a number of candidates, and they'll likely be a mixture of men and women. Quotas ensure that at least some of those women get those positions. I don't feel this comes at the expense of men.

DanieMarie, here's why we're not going to agree.

It looks to me like you are dealing with the concept of "fair" by looking at averages. Averages have their uses, but the major flaw of them is that they don't refer to actual, real, flesh-and-blood people. When you stop looking at averages and look instead at real people with real concerns, the averages stop being meaningful.

Consider - A man and a woman are both looking for work, because they both need a job, both have expenses, both have responsibilities to their families, etc.

One person will get the job, the other won't. The one who gets the job will be in good shape, the one who doesn't will be hurting.

As soon as a decision is made based on anything other than qualifications, it becomes unfair because somebody will be discriminated against - and that person ends up being unfairly hurt -

- whether that person is a man or a woman. When discrimination occurs, somebody gets hurt. Individuals are not averages.

[AL!CE]

Re: Angry White Men

I hate being forced to do what someone else has decided is right, without consulting me on the matter. I don't know why everybody doesn't feel this way...

- - - Updated - - -



There is no such thing as "two equally qualified candidates."

Two people may have roughly equivalent degrees and work experience - the people hiring for a job know what those are before the interview. However, at the interview, everything changes because now the candidate is being evaluated on things like self presentation, ability to communicate through spoken words, attitude, how well this person will fit in with the other people working for the company, etc.

No two people are alike.

I agree no two people are alike but I disagree regarding no two people being able to do the same job equally well. I'm a Care Team Leader so once in a blue moon I have to interview people for the position of Carer and sometimes there is no obvious better choice based on the facts available, so it boils down to my instincts.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Angry White Men

I agree no two people are alike but I disagree regarding no two people being able to do the same job equally well. I'm a Care Team Leader so once in a blue moon I have to interview people for the position of Carer and sometimes there is no obvious better choice based on the facts available, so it boils down to my instincts.

Yes - your "instincts" occur when your mind is looking at details that you do not consciously see, but the conclusions of which are being fed to you, sort of under the mental fence.

But it probably is true that many people could do a particular job equally well. It doesn't take an exceptional person to learn how to put ice cream into a cone.

However, the more difficult the job is, the more that small differences in the worker affect the outcome - so for the bigger jobs, which pay more, and people tend to want more, very tight decisions are often made.

[DanieMarie]

Re: Angry White Men

I dunno...I think there's even a HUGE difference still between Germany and the US. In Germany, there are still a ton of places that see a working woman as a bad mother. No matter how qualified a woman is, there are a ton of men in hiring positions who wont hire her, even if she's the most qualified person for the job. I know we have a woman for a chancellor, but that's not actually overly reflective of the culture here, especially in West Germany (where a lot of companies are based and decisions are still largely made). They've been doing studies on anonymous applications, and women and minorities are more likely to get invited for an interview to a ridiculous degree...I think for women it's something like 50%. And yes, they're trying to push through getting rid of photos, status, birthdate and even names on applications, but that still doesn't change the bias you face when you get to the interview and you're clearly a woman or ethnic minority. Hell, it doesn't even have to be ethnic...I've faced discrimination PERSONALLY because I have an accent.
So how do you change in a culture like that? You'd think the threat of people retiring and low unemployment would sort itself out, but employers continue to complain that they can't find the "right people", which unfortunately for some of them, means they can't find a white man. Sometimes, you just have to push it.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Angry White Men

So how do you change in a culture like that? You'd think the threat of people retiring and low unemployment would sort itself out, but employers continue to complain that they can't find the "right people", which unfortunately for some of them, means they can't find a white man. Sometimes, you just have to push it.

While all that is true (in the U.S. as well), the problem is that curing one problem by creating another isn't really a very good way of doing things.

And you want to remember that the more you push somebody, the more they will want to push back. This, in itself, makes quotas a bad idea, and a lousy solution.

[Moody Thursday]

Re: Angry White Men

I hate being forced to do what someone else has decided is right, without consulting me on the matter. I don't know why everybody doesn't feel this way...

It would be good if you took what I said into context, with a hint of common sense. Of course if someone has decided that wearing blue is wrong, and they forced you not to wear blue, then by all means speak up, that's kinda messed up. But if someone decided it is wrong for you to come stab me in the eye with a fork, well, tough luck. You can't stab my eyeball with a fork, sir. Or if someone decided that it's wrong for John Doe to steal babies, well tough luck to him as well.

My point is, some people just have to be told not to stab someone in the eye with a fork. Some people just have to be told not to go around stealing children. We would hope that for the most part people would do what's right, but that's not always the case. That was mainly my point.

It would be good if we could trust each and every employer to make the honest decision of hiring based on qualifications and ignore race/sex completely, but that is not a realistic scenario.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Angry White Men

It would be good if you took what I said into context, with a hint of common sense. Of course if someone has decided that wearing blue is wrong, and they forced you not to wear blue, then by all means speak up, that's kinda messed up. But if someone decided it is wrong for you to come stab me in the eye with a fork, well, tough luck. You can't stab my eyeball with a fork, sir. Or if someone decided that it's wrong for John Doe to steal babies, well tough luck to him as well.

My point is, some people just have to be told not to stab someone in the eye with a fork. Some people just have to be told not to go around stealing children. We would hope that for the most part people would do what's right, but that's not always the case. That was mainly my point.

It would be good if we could trust each and every employer to make the honest decision of hiring based on qualifications and ignore race/sex completely, but that is not a realistic scenario.

I did look at it in context, even if you don't agree with my thoughts.

We weren't talking about stabbing somebody in the eye with a fork, we were talking about somebody being turned down for a job which they need to feed them self and their family, nor were we talking about people stealing children - where did the "context" of the subject we were actually discussing suddenly go?

Being turned down for a job, which one clearly needs to survive, because of skin color or gender will make people mad. It makes a white guy every bit as mad as a black guy turned down for the same reason. It makes a white guy every bit as mad as it does a woman turned down for the same reason.

That's all.

What would you expect? Do you actually imagine that white men should willingly decide to go hungry and homeless in order to make some average decided on somewhere in Washington work out on the books?

Seriously???