Publishing Web for Students' Final Papers
Publishing Web for Students' Final Papers |
|
From: Julie Sheehan
Email: jnitz@cats.ucsc.edu
Course: Psych100G: Diversity in Psychology
College: Stevenson, UCSC
Instructor: Eugene Matusov
ClassWeb: http://www.ematusov.com/psych100G
ChildrenObservations: No
Date: 13 Dec 1996
Time: 18:53:17
Remote Name: mingong-pc16.ucsc.edu
Ideas and beliefs related to the purpose of Affirmative action vary according to different or individual perceptions and interpretations. From these interpretations, confusion and misunderstanding has occurred and clouded the truth of Affirmative action. This paper addresses important myths of Affirmative Action. Included are the myths that Affirmative Action is no longer needed because racial and gender inequalities no longer exist, that Affirmative action denies merit and increases racial tensions. This paper attempts to shatter the disillusions by presenting undeniable facts and shocking empirical studies that prove Affirmative action is indeed a necessary policy. This paper would be of interest to anyone worried about the lacking diversity in today’s society in education and the workplace.
In this paper I am going to discuss the issues and myths surrounding Affirmative Action. I will support my beliefs and opinions with actual facts and empirical studies. I didn’t know much about proposition 209 until I started taking an independent study on Affirmative Action and race relations with sociology professor Hiroshi Fukurai. I didn’t understand all the facts and politics behind 209 and I tended to side more with most white males. I tried approaching the class with an open mind. I continued to learn overwhelming information throughout the quarter that influenced my stance on proposition 209. I was disappointed when 209 passed, yet in the back of my mind I knew it would. However, I don’t feel that the issues behind Affirmative Action should be simply discarded because 209 prevailed. It is far from the end of the subject.
Through this paper I would like to educate the public about the myths and realities behind Affirmative Action. I currently have no argument for opposing Affirmative Action. Before I was educated, I could understand how some Caucasian men felt discriminated against. Now I realize that they don’t like the idea of people other than themselves being given preferential treatment, especially women and minorities. Some reasons for opposing Affirmative Action include the beliefs that it denies merit, it allows under qualified people into slots that should be filled by qualified white males and it increases racial tensions.
My personal favorite is the belief that Affirmative Action is no longer needed because racial and gender inequalities no longer exist. I chalk all of these fallacies up to pure ignorance. I don’t believe that this ignorance is full of hate and spite but rather a lack of knowledge and understanding that allows people to make hasty judgments. To start with the basics, Affirmative Action is a policy that encourages equal opportunity and attempts to level the playing field for groups of people who have been and continue to be discriminated against. One could argue this policy by saying that racism and gender inequality are a thing of the past. If that is indeed true, I pose these questions: Why is it that African Americans experience twice as much unemployment as whites (Bergmann, 1996)? Why do women make significantly less money than white men? The 1990 Census revealed that while white men make up 40% of the employed population, African American and Asian men and women represent a low 16%.
Empirical studies have found that an equally qualified Caucasian and African American job applicant would not have the same chance of gaining employment. The African American applicant is usually rated more negatively than the Caucasian applicant. A recent study done by the Urban Institute paired subjects making them similar in all aspects except race. They went on interviews for various job positions. Male Caucasians were offered jobs 45% more often than African American men and 52% more often than Hispanic men (Bermann, 1996).
Enrollment in UC’s also reflect the racial disparity in 1996. Combining both undergraduates and graduates enrolled in UCs, 44% are white, 12% are Hispanic, and 4% are African American. According to the 1990 Census, of people 18 years or older (the usual age range of college applicants) whites represent 61.2% of the population, Hispanics 22.5% and African Americans 6.7%. There is an obvious unequivalent ratio when the enrollment at UC campuses is compared to the total population broken down by ethnicity. The enrollment of minorities at UCs is not equal or reflective of their population in California. These statistics indicate that diversity is not being found at UC campuses.
Women also suffer incredible discrimination in employment, politics and income. 60% of Americans working for minimum wage are women [1]. Women represent 45% of the work force yet 87% of the top positions are held by men [1]. According to the 1990 Census, white men exemplify 33% of the population but still represent 88% of all tenured professors, 95% of Fortune 500 chief executive officers (CEO), 85% of partners in law firms and 97% of school superintendents. Women have very low political representation. They make up 8% of the Senate and 10% of the House [1]. As of 1995, for every one dollar earned by a white man, white women earn 73 cents, African American women 64 cents and Hispanic women 54 cents (“Gender Gap,” 1992; Bursting and Edward’s, 1994; Duncan, 1994; Bernhardt, Morris, and Handcock, 1995). I believe that these earning disparities speak for themselves.
As with the studies done on race, studies on gender indicate that the same resume with a woman’s name on it received a significantly lower rating than when a man’s name was on it. This suggests that a gender bias operates even when there is no direct contact with the person being evaluated (Rhode, 1988, p.1207). A eye catching disparity can also be seen in wealth amid whites and minorities. Wealth is defined as accumulated assets like cars, homes, savings and stocks. The median wealth for whites is $44,408, $5345 for Hispanics and $4,064 for African Americans. This wealth acts as a back up if economic hardship occurs. When minorities do not have this to depend on they can lose their house and other assets if they lose their job (Delone, Spohn and Walker, 1996, p.64). This low median of wealth experienced by minorities affects their opportunity to be successful in life as well as affecting their children’s chances. Wealth is often passed down through generations. If a person doesn’t have previous wealth in the family, it is often difficult to achieve it alone. Since minorities have such a low median of wealth, it is very difficult to save money. It is hard to attend college without saved money to pay for it. It is then difficult to compete with Caucasians for higher paying jobs without a college degree. Without high paying jobs minorities are unable to save and/or invest money to send their children to college. It is this very cycle that needs to be shattered in order to give all races equal opportunities.
To address the myth that Affirmative Action denies merit, I would like to define merit according to Haney and Hurtado (1994): “The very concept of ‘merit’ and the associated notions of ‘ability’ and ‘qualifications’ are socially constructed categories. How we define, measure and value those concepts, as well as the specific manner in which they are applied in any given setting, are social conventions rooted in a dominant cultures view of society.” So I ask those believing in this myth, merit according to who? Are you referring to merit measured by standardized tests? College admission tests like the SAT are culturally biased because they gravitate towards questions designed to be answered by the experiences of middle class students who have an access to higher quality education rather than the experiences and education available to minority students.
Opponents of Affirmative Action believe that in order to receive qualified job applicants, hiring processes should rely solely on “merit.” This assumes that other factors, like prior work experience and specialized training are not usually taken into account. Opponents of Affirmative Action also argue that it gives preferential treatment to minorities and forces unqualified people to be hired. Preference is not a foreign role in hiring. It never has been. Employers have a tendency to hire people like themselves and view them as the most qualified. It is harder to visualize the qualifications of someone who is different. However, preference and the idea of “lowering quality” did not arise until it began to be applied for the benefit of women and racial minorities.
Affirmative action nudges employers to have a diverse staff. Many job opening are spread through word-of-mouth. This leads to continuous discrimination because many people associate with people very similar to themselves in social class, ethnicity or other social ties. Therefore, it is very unlikely that a highly diverse pool of people will apply for the job ( Jones, 1994, p. 2361). Without this extra encouragement from Affirmative action to increase diversity, employers would continue to claim that they could not acquire a “qualified” woman or racial minority. The employer would than turn around and hire the first white man they wanted.
It is believed that Affirmative action increases racial tensions. It is almost impossible to quantify that the apparent rise in racial tension on predominantly white campuses is due to the integration of few minority students. I would have a hard time arguing this myth due to the unfortunate comments I’ve heard among my fellow students. “I (a Caucasian male) didn’t receive my financial aid but an Asian student did. We had the same qualifications and he even turned his in late!” “I got a C on my midterm and this African American girl got an A. I read her paper and it sucked! The teacher is just afraid to give her bad marks because she’s a minority and a woman! Two Brownie points for her!” I’ve also heard blatantly racist remarks such as, “I was the only Caucasian person on the bus today. I was surrounded by all these Asians and Blacks. How the hell did we get so many of them on campus? Affirmative Action, that’s how!” I think it’s incredibly unfortunate that some Caucasian students feel that the only reason for their misfortune and a minority student’s benefit is due to Affirmative action.
I therefore propose that we focus on the positive effects Affirmative action can have on employment and UC campuses in the future. Including diverse and formally deprived groups in our dominantly white society can be equally beneficial. I feel that all races and genders would greatly benefit from interactions with each other. I believe that other cultures and ethnicity’s have so much to offer the world in terms of experience and wisdom. Positions of influence and prestige have been closed to minorities for far too long. If we wish to prevail as a functionally integrated society where the gender or the color of one’s skin do not predetermine the opportunities that await in one’s future we must be willing to open doors to all humans.
Race and gender are a universal concept but they are treated differently all over the world. There is South Africa for instance where African Americans are treated in an inhumane and unspeakable manner. They could learn a little something from Affirmative action over there. Then there are places deep in the jungle where men do women’s jobs and vice versa. Deep in the jungle, it must be so dark that they can’t see the color of anothers skin because they certainly appear to be a color-blind society. We could learn so much from them!
I feel that the passing of proposition 209 limits my access to diversity among my fellow students and my contact with minorities. I don’t understand why the younger generation especially, who I feel is so much more open minded, wouldn’t want to take advantage of the opportunity to gain knowledge and experience and communication skills from other ethnicity’s and cultures. We college students are always saying how we would love to study abroad and learn about other cultures. Why spend all that money when you have the resources right in your own back yard? I am a young woman who is incredibly motivated to change the way this society views race and gender. I intend to raise my children to believe that everyone is their equal and no one is a lesser. They will grow up learning the truth about history, not the distorted picture textbooks like to paint. They will never know the phrase “a man’s job” or “a woman’s job.” It may be a long process but it will prove very rewarding as continuing generations learn to truly honor equality.
Bibliography
Bergmann, Barbara. In Defense of Affirmative Action. New York: Basic Books, 1996.
Bernhardt, Annette, Martina Morris and Mark Sttandcock. 1995. “Women’s gains or men’s losses? A closer look at the shrinking gender gap in earnings,” American Journal of Sociology 101:302-328.
Burstein, Paul and Mark E. Edwards. 1994. “the impact of employment discrimination litigation on racial disparity in earnings: Evidence and unresolved issues,” Law and Society Review 28: 79-111.
Delone, M. et al The Color of Justice. Belmont: Wadsworth, 1996.
Duncan, Kevin C. 1994. “Racial Disparity in earnings and earnings growth: The case of young men,” Social Science Journal 31: 237-250.
“Gender Gap” 1992. CQ Researcher 2: 471-472.
[1] http://orioncsuchico.edu/archives/volume34/issue10/opinion/gpailsociehtm/
http://www.shss.montclair.edu/english/furr/affactn.html
Jones, Marvin D. 1994. “No time for Trumpets: Title vii, equality and the fin de siecle,” Michigan Law Review 92: 2311-2369.
Rhodes, Deborah L. 1988. “Occupational Inequality,” Duke Law Journal 1207: 1219-1220.
Acknowledgements
I would like to recognize and thank my sociology teacher Hiroshi Fukurai, for all of his criticisms and encouragements on this paper. He spent many hours working with me during class on my ideas about Affirmative Action. He is partially responsible for the final outcome on this paper.
I would also like to thank my entire Independent Sociology class for their comments and criticisms. They all acted as my editors and contributed to the final outcome of this paper.
