cbd@iham1.UUCP (deitrick) (05/15/85)
>> Why do *I*, as a white adult male of Northern European descent, have to pay >> for what *someone else* did more than 200 years ago? > >I don't think anyone's asking you to make retribution for something in which >you weren't directly involved...... > .........So, things >like EEO are not intended to penalize you in particular, they're intended to >ensure that other groups get a fair crack at the things that have come so >easily to white males for the last n (n being large) years........ > >[Note: no defense of EEO intended here -- I think it's a pretty abysmal > implementation, too ... ] >-- >Melinda Shore >University of Chicago Computation Center Sorry, I don't agree. Your reply is contradictory: You say I'm not being asked to pay for what someone else did in the past, yet you claim I have to give up my 'privileged' status, status I supposedly have because some other white adult males did something in the past. I strongly resent the implication that whatever I have was given to me because I happen to be white and male. Nobody *gave* me anything. Whatever I have cost me a lot of very hard work and God's own helping of self-discipline. If I sound angry, it's because I am. The idea that I have to pay for what someone else did in the past is simply NOT FAIR. Discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin is NOT FAIR, regardless of which direction it goes. No matter how thin you slice it, it's still baloney. Carl Deitrick ihnp4!iham1!cbd ****************** The opinions expressed herein are entirely my own, and do not reflect the opinions of AT&T Bell Laboratories. ******************
syn@uo-vax3.UUCP (syn) (06/08/85)
Not a great deal of logic in your statements, Carl. It makes you angry to be asked to "pay" for what other white males have done, but obviously it does not bother you to be paid for what they have done. And you are. As long as your efforts, your hard work and application are rewarded at a two to one ratio over a woman's hard work and application. Which the statistics on employment and income prove. I'm not unsympathetic with your reaction, because I have that same reaction when accused of racism. I didn't choose to be born white, never enslaved anyone, etc. But I do lead a life of privilege compared to a black woman's life, and as long as I am content to do that, I continue to be racist. If you want to consider this problem beyond the knee-jerk stage, you're going to have to accept the fact that your sex and your color DO affect your status in this world, just as being born in the U.S. affects how much health care you will receive in your life and how many calories you consume. If you don't want to think about it, don't want to admit that you are privileged (while continuing to enjoy the benefits of being born into a privileged class) consider South Africa. Whites there would agree with you.
cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) (06/13/85)
> Not a great deal of logic in your statements, Carl. It makes you angry > to be asked to "pay" for what other white males have done, but obviously > it does not bother you to be paid for what they have done. And you are. > As long as your efforts, your hard work and application are rewarded at > a two to one ratio over a woman's hard work and application. Which the > statistics on employment and income prove. > The statistics on employment and income "prove" nothing of the sort. There is *more* of a disparity now between male and female incomes then there was in the 1950s. Does that mean there is more discrimination in jobs based on sex? Of course. A lot higher percentage of women are working now --- and a lot of them are women with limited job skills. (This has a lot to do with the epidemic of divorces in the late 1960s and and 1970s, and a little to do with the fact that a lot of women in this country view being a mother as more important than being a breadwinner.) It is not surprising that average incomes for women are lower than for men. Secondly, for a lot of married women in this country, their job is secondary to their husband's job; if he's transferred, they may be unemployed while looking for a new job. Additionally, many of the women who work in this country are working to bring in additional money for buying a house, or a second car --- their income is being used to buy non-essentials. When the job becomes a nuisance (as most jobs seem to as some or another), women in this secondary breadwinner roles are more likely to quit those jobs because the job is not necessary, or not necessary any longer. Third: a lot of women, both in the past, and even today, take time off to have and raise kids. Not surprisingly, a woman who has been child-rearing for two to six years is going to be starting at a disadvantage when she returns to the job market. At the same age, she will have less years of experience than a man. Even for the same number of years of experience, her experience has been fragmented by being out of the work force. There is no reason to assume discrimination based on the statistics which are usually thrown around on this subject. Compare *comparable* populations of men and women (if you can find a way to define comparable) --- then we can talk. > I'm not unsympathetic with your reaction, because I have that same reaction > when accused of racism. I didn't choose to be born white, never enslaved > anyone, etc. But I do lead a life of privilege compared to a black woman's > life, and as long as I am content to do that, I continue to be racist. > This is the most absurd linkage I've ever seen in my life. > If you want to consider this problem beyond the knee-jerk stage, you're going > to have to accept the fact that your sex and your color DO affect your status > in this world, just as being born in the U.S. affects how much health care > you will receive in your life and how many calories you consume. If you > don't want to think about it, don't want to admit that you are privileged > (while continuing to enjoy the benefits of being born into a privileged > class) consider South Africa. Whites there would agree with you. No. Whites in South Africa would agree with the absurd idea that the government should be in any way interested in a person's race.