- Joined
- Sep 14, 2012
- Messages
- 10,032
- Reaction score
- 4,966
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Re: Does "white privilege" exist? If so, should it be corrected?
1) No it doesn't. It actively discriminates against whites.
Ricci v. DeStefano was heard by the United States Supreme Court in 2009. The case concerns white and Hispanic firefighters in New Haven, Connecticut, who upon passing their test for promotions to management were denied the promotions, allegedly because of a discriminatory or at least questionable test. The test gave 17 whites and two Hispanics the possibility of immediate promotion. Although 23% of those taking the test were African American, none scored high enough to qualify. Because of the possibility the tests were biased in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act,[23][24] no candidates were promoted pending outcome of the controversy.[25][26] In a split 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court ruled that New Haven had engaged in impermissible racial discrimination against the White and Hispanic majority.
I guess your definition of "ALL" is the Dick Cheney version of "ALL" which means basically "just some".
2) Sure... whatever you said.
3). Ofc not. This is just loonacy.
LOL. You, and many others who support the same view that AA/EO is not a racist policy, are just playing the childhood favorite game of "stop hitting yourself", on the receiving end that is. And it's sad.
1.) easy because REAL AA/EO is only a policy and program to make sure ALL groups are represented and given an oppurtunity, nothing more.
2.) the example is spot on because real AA/EO is defined and has a definitions and other things falsely labeled AA/EO arent factually AA/EO the same with my example.
3.) yes, sometimes this happens and its NOT factual AA/EO.
1) No it doesn't. It actively discriminates against whites.
Ricci v. DeStefano was heard by the United States Supreme Court in 2009. The case concerns white and Hispanic firefighters in New Haven, Connecticut, who upon passing their test for promotions to management were denied the promotions, allegedly because of a discriminatory or at least questionable test. The test gave 17 whites and two Hispanics the possibility of immediate promotion. Although 23% of those taking the test were African American, none scored high enough to qualify. Because of the possibility the tests were biased in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act,[23][24] no candidates were promoted pending outcome of the controversy.[25][26] In a split 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court ruled that New Haven had engaged in impermissible racial discrimination against the White and Hispanic majority.
I guess your definition of "ALL" is the Dick Cheney version of "ALL" which means basically "just some".
2) Sure... whatever you said.
3). Ofc not. This is just loonacy.
LOL. You, and many others who support the same view that AA/EO is not a racist policy, are just playing the childhood favorite game of "stop hitting yourself", on the receiving end that is. And it's sad.