Affirmative action as the equal opportunities given to women

If one is to discuss and problem solve an issue, he or she must first know what the issue is truly about. Affirmative action is defined as the equal opportunities given to women, minorities, and small groups so they will have the same tools, education, and allotment to achieve their goals in life. Since affirmative action came about, debate arises daily about if it is truly equal and fair. Was it a word made as a cushion to the people so they will feel equal? Another interpretation is did this word actually make the white male group less important and unequal to the minority group, doing more harm to others than good. Affirmative action is not used unequally in the world, but in actuality if it was not for it these people would have nothing.

Julie A. Mertus supports the need for opportunities given to women in the work force. In the work force today many women are overlooked and pushed aside because of their gender. Many of the big wigs in businesses today feel that a woman is inferior to a man’s intelligence of work skill trades. A woman can simply not handle the stress on the body or the mind thinking dilemmas in which a man can supposedly accomplish. Affirmative action however has allowed the women a chance to display their skills but what the debate arises is, because of the gifts given by affirmative action is this good for the world of today. Mertus gives an example of a German landscaper that was excluded from his promotion due to his company’s quota requirements. The company’s quota requirements stated that if a man and a woman are applying for the same promotion and there is a tie, the woman will be given the job if less than half holding the job are women. Another example given is that of a male teacher who did not receive his promotions due to the same law. In both situations the quota requirement that affirmative action laws made for the work field, the woman was chosen. The debate by most individuals is that I lost my job or pay increase because of affirmative action. They feel that this law is unfair, taking away more gifts that I can give to myself or my family. Also, in that women are not capable of doing this type of work. The true idea of affirmative action is giving the lesser people of the world what our country promotes. In the constitution everyone is equal and is to be given the proper chances in life. Affirmative action simply, allows this so that the people in charge cannot disregard someone, a woman, because they simply do not like it. What is not seen by the people losing the extra money is that maybe she can actually do a better job than they can. She will give more to the world thus helping all of humanity and would not have had this chance if it was not for affirmative action. Also, the people who had nothing in life now feel a worth and are able to give more to the ones they love. This is the good that is unseen by most, that would not be possible if not for affirmative action being put into effect in the world.

Ethan Watters shows his opinion on that affirmative action is providing an unfair advantage over one race to another. People throughout the world scream to be treated as the constitution states, “ To be treated as equals.” Watters proves his misconception of the right that having affirmative action play a part into the work force is giving unfair advantages. He states that minorities say they need this to be seen as an equal in a interview for a job. This right although allows them to have lower scores than another employee but still be able to obtain the position. Isn’t this hurting the company thus hurting the world. For the employee hired is not right for the job then how is this equal treatment when the worst person is chosen for the job is not the best, but only because of a right is hired. The author asks how could a law promote equal treatment for minorities but at the same time take away from majorities. Another situation in which affirmative action will play a part in is the physical work load, both body and mind. Women cannot produce the same amount of body power for a job in which a man can. This point is scientifically proving and if they were hired would be hurting the company in that the job could not be done properly. An example of this would be a jackhammer, or caring heavy loads. So in many times bosses are not discriminating because of race or gender but of pure power. Jobs require strength and brains, not just brains.

John David Skrentny provides proof of the true need and equal treatment affirmative action provides. In a interview, a boss happens to like a certain race and that race is applying for his job opening. A white man also wants the job. What is weird is that the white man was chosen even though scores and experience went to the minority member, is this fair treatment? With affirmative action playing in the race is the same just a person and scores are looked at and the right person is chosen regardless of the boss’s preference. Also how is to say a woman cannot do the same work load as a man? What it is, is the want inside the person. There are women of the world that work with steel and power. But would not have the chance to prove their strength if not for affirmative action. It is also stated in polls taken that many people will not complain about something if they cannot perform the task equally well or better than their competition. So affirmative action just gives them the chance to prove it but the best person is still chosen to the race because affirmative action says so. Affirmative action only allows the opportunity to perform the job position, it must be obtained on its own. If it was not for affirmative action many people would have no chance to work and no work, means no money to live on. If you cannot have a goal in life to achieve why live, affirmative action allows you to have a chance not an actual job.

Debate over affirmative action in the government is reviewed as unequal treatment of the race, a misconception.. The government indeed did make the law of affirmative action for the people; but do the high office holders truly believe in what they promote? Do they believe affirmative action does bring the joy of opportunity to people or the gift of pain to others? John Skrentry goes into the real feeling of some people by quoting books from others who also have debated this. In the “Politics of Preference: Democratic Institutions and affirmative action in the United States and India” by Sunita Parikh and “Affirmative Action: The Pros and Cons of Policy Practice” by Richard F. Tomusson, Faye J. Crosby and Sharon D. Herzberger, the debate is whether the government truly believes in their laws or if they are simply using it as campaign fuel. These books give examples of officials not believing in what affirmative action promotes. Although the good can be seen in their actions they may not believe in it and their morals of self worth come out. Just because one does not believe in something does not mean they do not respect it. The officials know that this is needed for people to succeed and they would not have if it was not for this. They know affirmative action does provide good not bad and that the country does practice what it preaches and will take the proper actions to see that it is carried out. Just like other laws, affirmative action has to see it is followed and not overlooked to have the best person for the job and the equal opportunities this country offers to all kinds of people.

Stephan Thernsrom sees affirmative action as a right that is reversed in the actions that it gives. Affirmative action is a right that is to make equalness among the races. In actuality it is putting a race above the other. Companies, schools and courts are forced to make exceptions to the minority members in the decisions that they make. This law sets quotas that puts a race above the other. As though this race needed an extra chance. Many issues that minority members must deal with in race and gender do not play apart anymore. These two discriminations are stricken form the issue. Affirmative action puts the two discriminations back into play as if they were a problem. This is putting a race above the other as it has to be race-sensitive to them. Why should a right be used in society that does not promote equalness among the races.

Curry shows the need for the use of affirmative action in the government. People are viewed differently in life because of skin color. Some races are seen as not being as smart asothers or committing more crimes simply because of color. Studies show that more blacks or Mexicans are pulled over simply for not doing anything wrong but on they simply looked suspicious. There are people that see a race to be lesser than themselves and in turn make them pay in a way for being different. Affirmative action was created by the government to counter act these harmful accusations. The government uses it to enforce people to view another as equal in all they do. By making companies use certain quotas on workers, by having to have so many people of a race in their work. Schools that must allow certain students to enroll though their grades may no be as high as others. Affirmative action makes these chances to minorities an achievable goal. There are people in the world in which will do almost anything to have a chance for their dreams to become a reality, but because of their race or gender this is an unachievable task. Affirmative action allows the task to happen. It does not give them the dream itself, but the chance to be put in the spot where it can come true. Without this use of affirmative action this could not be done. This makes everyone seem as an equal, as they should be. To have the same goals and opportunities as everyone else but now the chance to fulfill them is on their own.

Joanne Barkan admits that affirmative action has its flows but would hesitate to give it up. The true reasons for the arguing of affirmative action for so long between people was not the unfairness or edge it might give to someone, but the value of color blindness. Affirmative action does not promote an edge to one race, but that of equalizes between the races. Barkan gives an example of a man who states, “ It is okay to be race-sensitive to blacks but not to others simple because it is doing better.” This is were the flaw is, but without these people too could not go to college. Yes, there are changes that need to be made in some cases, but many others benefit from it’s perfection’s. Affirmative action provides so much for so many. The government runs this country and it is it the responsibility to practice what they preach. By affirmative action playing apart and giving its rights to people through their daily lives the government is doing the job. The government is making everyone equal and if one situation is compromised affirmative action neutralizes it.

The reason behind affirmative action used in the allotment of higher education for minorities is also wondered to be fair or unfair. Ronald Dworkin explains that may people view affirmative action as unconstitutional, violating the Bill of Rights or other amendments. Others will disagree with this statement. They believe that if it was not for affirmative action they would never receive the rights which we as a country promote. This thinking of fair and unfairness, ties into the seeking of higher education in that many students are pushed away because of their gender or skin color. Thus making their goals unachievable and the American Dream a mire myth. It is because of affirmative action that many minorities reach their so called American Dream, because their skin is not viewed not their sex or test scores. Debate flies back and forth every day on the problem, is this right or wrong to the majority members. The right decision can only be made by that person in which it is affecting. So, some people may not receive any choice. Affirmative action is necessary in the farther pursuit of minorities in higher education.

William Forbath and Gerald Torres are not in favor of affirmative action. They to believe that it takes more away than giving good to people. While trying to make equal races between the people of today it puts one in front of the other, as if they were more important. These students do not have the same grades as those being turned away. This is strange, why is one of lesser value allowed in while one of a stronger stature is turned away. Forbath and Torres are in favor of the 10 Percent Plan. The 10 Percent Plan provides the top ten percent of students in poor schools the opportunity to go to U.T. and other colleges. This act does not put one race above the other like affirmative action, but simply gives finical aid to the students that deserve to go to school though they cannot afford it. The chance to make something of themselves is given in an unfair manner. This does not put one race above the other just financial help to the less fortunate that cannot help the cards that they where dealt.

Dinesh D’Souza sees the need for affirmative action to play apart in the seeking of high education. It can allow a person who has not had the easiest life a chance in the world to come about. Many view a person of a different race as poor or not having moral respect as their-self to be a lesser human. Affirmative action allows each individual the right to be viewed the same, color blindness. All which is seen is their names and scores. Affirmative action allows the equal opportunity to succeed. The misconception that people get is the success is given, not true. The opportunity to succeed is given the rest is up to the individual themselves. If they want a chance in life to succeed affirmative action is the helping stone that makes all equal as it should be.

Curry too, supports the use of affirmative action playing a role in the seeking of higher education. Curry explains that though we promote and believe that everyone is equal to one another this is not true. There are those who still see one race lesser than that of themselves. Because they are a different color or gender they are not as important or cannot do as much good in society. Affirmative action allows their color to not be viewed. For those of a lesser background to have a chance in life. Studies show that those who are without, respect and go the extra mile in the gifts in which they are given. Affirmative action allows the gift of education and minority members are proving to receive more diplomas in their classes than that of the majority members. Affirmative action does not put a race above another but a chance to succeed for the ones that are viewed less in life. This is the land of opportunity, affirmative action gives the person the shot and what they do with it is up to them.

Ben Gose argues the reasons behind affirmative action’s value of race-sensitive admissions policies in selective universities for blacks. Many people believe that affirmative action playing a role in admissions acceptance for blacks to selective colleges is taking away future learned skills from others. These people believe this use of admissions unfair to the other higher scoring students. Tests have shown that the black students perform less academically than the white students in their studies. Although what was unseen by the studies of this so called bad use of admissions is that the black students are earning more degrees. The black students, even though showing lower scores on test, are actually earning more degrees in their percentage of student body that the whites’ percentage with higher grades. What is still strange though is that the blacks with the same degrees are earning less than the whites are. It appears that no matter how much of an attempt is made to make it equal, others are out there to take back what was given. This is a losing battle not pleasing anyone. We, on the other hand, must look at it as if we do not allow this admissions to these few students who are brave enough to make an attempt to survive the racial battles of the world these people may never succeed, being held back in all aspects of life.

How is this admissions ruling unfair? Mr. Thernstorm explains how it is an unequal scale in admissions ruling. The scale on which they weigh acceptance is equal, viewed the same for all. A student at a college explains his research done. See, Timothy Maguire received a part time job in the registration office. After becoming couriers he found the admissions forms that are reviewed. It showed that though the black race students were admitted, their scores and entrance tests were lower than that of the white students that were turned away by the college. This was at one of the top law schools in the states. If this type of admission selection is reviewed in this manner at all schools how are some students going to get in. So is this equalizer affirmative action really a tool for reverse discrimination. Thus given unfair advantages to those minority members that claim to be viewed as unequal, but by having this they are viewed as better or more important, for the college has to fill their quota ruling for having so many students in the college of a certain race. In turn rejecting the people that can make a better tomorrow.

Mrs. Fuentes sees the need for affirmative action use in college admissions. Still today people are not viewed as equals. Though our country promotes this, it is not always the case. There are many admission advisors in colleges that to do not see only one color. They view the students forms as many different races, instead of one race not letting their moral attitudes play apart in decision making. Affirmative action gives this blind look of color making all students appear the same. Fuentes tells that because of affirmative action use on many admission forms the race is not a question asked by the school. See if the race of the individual is not on the form the person who decides whether your are accepted only sees a name. So without affirmative action playing a part in admissions many students would no chance of seeking a higher education. Education is the key to life, without it a person is nothing. This action just allows a person to be treated in the way our country promotes, “Equal.” This gives everyone the same chances in life to do better but taking the initiative to do well in them is up to the person themselves.

Supporting the use of affirmative action in college admissions is shared by many people of today. Mr. Ronald Dworkin is one of those people. He looks at the statistical side of the issue. The studies show that the minority students may score lower in graded tests for enrollment into college, the average grade in their group is higher than that of the majorities. The minority members see the grace in which they are receiving because of affirmative action and use their time wisely. Their grades are proving this to be true. What is also unseen by the many individuals that believe this to be unfair is the lower wages the minority members are receiving in their work they schooled in. The minority work load are receiving lower salaries that their white majority members that have the same educational background. So why is affirmative action use viewed unfair in one situation, as admissions, but no matter were the other student goes to study receives higher pay for the same effort. So without affirmative action rights many people in the world today would have nothing in life. They would have no life, money, or self-worth. Affirmative action gives this to the people. It does not give them the job, the effort still must come from the student, the chance is just there. We all know without an education, a person will get no where in life fast, affirmative action give them the chance to make a difference. The action is up to them.

There are still people in the world that believe affirmative action is stealing more than what it is bringing to others. Actually, if we look at it, the so called stealing is from someone who has something to take. The gifts are for the people who do not have anything and without affirmative action can not have anything. People need to stop being greedy and start trying to give everyone a fair chance in life to succeed. They also need to stop becoming angry when they did not gain their wealth to give someone else a start. The importance of affirmative action should now be seen and that it is necessary for the lives of many and without it would suffer.

Persuasive Argumentative Aim of Affirmative Action

Thesis: This paper will prove the argument that affirmative action is not unequally used in the world, but in actuality if it was not for it many people would have nothing.

I. Affirmative action is used properly and in an unfair manner not giving an unfair advantage to anyone.

1. Julie A Mertus supports the idea of affirmative action use in the work force being fair.

A. German landscaper in job placement.

B. Gives an example of a male school teacher.

2. Ethan Watters strongly believes that affirmative action is unfair in the treatment it gives to all members of society.

A. Women do not have the necessary physical strength to do some jobs.

B. Bosses do view employees as equals and affirmative action rights are taking the good worker away from businesses.

3. John David Skrentny supports the idea of affirmative action being a necessity.

A. It is needed to have equal views of employees.

B. Minorities can perform the same tasks as majority members.

II. The use of affirmative action in the government of today is needed.

1. John Skrentny sees the need for affirmative action in the government.

A. Officials may not believe in affirmative action but respect it.

B. The importance is see and what it gives.

2. Stephan Thernstrom states that affirmative action has no right to play apart in the government involvement.

A. Tells how affirmative action give misconceptions.

B. Explains what it actually does.

3. Curry believes in affirmative action in the government.

A. Tells of people viewed differently.

B. Affirmative action allows the peoples hopes and dreams to come about.

4. Joanne Barkan wants affirmative action though some changes could be made.

A. Tells how some changes may need to be made.

B. Shows how without it society will fall.

III. Is the use of affirmative action in the pursuit of higher education the right thing to do.

1. Ronald Dworkin wants it to play apart in the choosing.

A. Explains how it is miss viewed.

B. Tells how goals now become achievable in life.

2. Forbath and Torres like others see how unfair affirmative action is.

A. One race is put above the other.

B. Explains the need for the 10% Plan.

3. Dinesh D’Sauza sees the need for affirmative action to play its part.

A. Explains how people cannot help how they are.

B. Affirmative action can give some the chance to succeed.

4. Curry supports the use of affirmative action.

A. Explains on what people are seen as and what they seek.

B. Tells what affirmative action gives to them.

IV. The use of Affirmative action in admissions too has it’s part to play in the betterment of life.

1. Ben Gose sees the true need for affirmative action use in race sensitive admissions.

A. Test that show blacks are earring lower test grades but a higher percentage of degrees.

B. The white students though getting the higher scores are earring less degrees.

2. Mr. Thernstorm views the use of affirmative action unequal.

A. Gives an example of a student finding information in admission forms to prove his point.

B. Shows examples of the unfair advantages minority members receive.

3. Fuentes sees the need for affirmative action use too in admissions.

A. Allows them the same opportunities in life.

B. Students are viewed at racial blindness.

4. Ronald Dworkin brings support to affirmative action use.

A. The need to see people viewed the same is shown.

B. The statistics to back up the majorities misconceptions of unfairness is proved.

 

Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Reply