Savannah StineMr. HamiltonAP Language and Composition30th October 2017“Place, Not Race: A New Vision of Opportunity in America” With and Against the GrainWith the GrainThe introduction from Sheryll Cashin’s book “Place, Not Race: A New Vision of Opportunity in America” rightly suggests that the primary barrier to students and higher education is not related to their ethnicity, but rather their geographical location. Cashin shows the difficulty that the college admissions process presents to qualified white Americans compared to their minority counterparts. She continues by noting the existence of a ‘perception gap,’ a misunderstanding between races that prohibits any fair affirmative action to correct the education system. Cashin also laments …show more content…
However, Cashin is correct when she brings to light how race bias, in particular, can prevent potential students from attending certain colleges based on the color of their skin. She uses Abigail Fisher–a student applying to the University of Texas–as an example, explaining that the applicants who got in before her on a premise that relied only on the color of their skin “violated her right to equal protection under the Constitution” (713). Fisher’s constitutional rights had been violated because she was not viewed equally compared to other applicants. Cashin is right to assume this when all the applicants had similar test scores but were not chosen out of merit, causing Fisher and other white Americans like her to work harder for the same results as African Americans, Latinos and other …show more content…
Considering the inequality caused by this bias, Cashin is correct when she argues that college acceptance should not be based on race to provide a fair admission process to everyone who applies.This race bias found in education is an obvious example of the perception gap that Cashin identifies. She appropriately recognizes that this gap is mostly responsible for the lack of affirmative action taken to benefit those in poverty-stricken locations. Cashin proves that African Americans and the white majority are not seeing eye to eye, explaining that “it is hard for non-blacks to see blacks as disadvantaged and needing affirmative action when examples of black success are ubiquitous, from Obama to Jay Z” (717). Because different ethnic backgrounds have different opinions on how issues of race should be handled at the federal level, they will typically disagree. Therefore, no decisions regarding affirmative action will be made, and those in poverty and class-segregated areas receive no
In 1973 a thirty-three year-old Caucasian male named Allan Bakke applied to and was denied admission to the University of California Medical School at Davis. In 1974 he filed another application and was once again rejected, even though his test scores were considerably higher than various minorities that were admitted under a special program. This special program specified that 16 out of 100 possible spaces for the students in the medical program were set aside solely for minorities, while the other 84 slots were for anyone who qualified, including minorities. What happened to Bakke is known as reverse discrimination. Bakke felt his rejections to be violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment, so he took the University of California Regents to the Superior Court of California. It was ruled that "the admissions program violated his rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment"1 The clause reads as follows:"...No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor without due process of the law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."2 The court ruled that race could not be a factor in admissions. However, they did not force the admittance of Bakke because the court could not know if he would have been admitted if the special admissions program for minorities did not exist.
A Critical Analysis of Racism in Canadian Law and the “Unmapping” of the White Settler Society in “When Place Becomes Race” by Sherene H. Razack
This power keeps the behavior of the oppressed well within the set guidelines of the oppressor (Freire, 2000, pg. 47). Critical Race Theory outlines this system of oppression as it relates to white and non-white races. By using the critical race theory coupled with the system of oppression described by Freire (2000), I propose that within the system of oppression, the oppressor must keep its own members in line with the prescribed guidelines by reinforcing the social norms from birth. Freire (2000) suggest that the interest of the oppressors lie in “changing the consciousness of the oppressed not the system” (pg.34). Identifying as white, therefore, starts at birth when members of the white class work to reinforce social norms that began with our founding fathers at Plymouth Rock. This long history of white privilege was taught to me and I continue to teach it to my children. As an educator of white affluent high school students, I believe we provide college and career counseling based on this white privilege system of oppression as well. Here, I journey even closer to unraveling the myth of white privilege as I encounter the intersection of an affluent white student choosing a career after high
concerns racial equality in America. The myth of the “Melting Pot” is a farce within American society, which hinders Americans from facing societal equality issues at hand. Only when America decides to face the truth, that society is not equal, and delve into the reasons why such equality is a dream instead of reality. Will society be able to tackle suc...
McIntosh, Peggy. "White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack," in Race, Class, and Gender in the United States, ed. Paula S. Rothenberg. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1998.
Affirmative action, the act of giving preference to an individual for hiring or academic admission based on the race and/or gender of the individual has remained a controversial issue since its inception decades ago. Realizing its past mistake of discriminating against African Americans, women, and other minority groups; the state has legalized and demanded institutions to practice what many has now consider as reverse discrimination. “Victims” of reverse discrimination in college admissions have commonly complained that they were unfairly rejected admission due to their race. They claimed that because colleges wanted to promote diversity, the colleges will often prefer to accept applicants of another race who had significantly lower test scores and merit than the “victims”. In “Discrimination and Disidentification: The Fair-Start Defense of Affirmative Action”, Kenneth Himma responded to these criticisms by proposing to limit affirmative action to actions that negate unfair competitive advantages of white males established by institutions (Himma 277 L. Col.). Himma’s views were quickly challenged by his peers as Lisa Newton stated in “A Fair Defense of a False Start: A Reply to Kenneth Himma” that among other rationales, the Fair-Start Defense based on race and gender is a faulty justification for affirmative action (Newton 146 L. Col.). This paper will also argue that the Fair-Start Defense based on race and gender is a faulty justification for affirmative action because it cannot be fairly applied in the United States of America today. However, affirmative action should still be allowed and reserved for individuals whom the state unfairly discriminates today.
Over the past 15 years tremendous awareness has been raised around this and programs of preferential treatment emerged. These programs ensured equal rights for people of color and females in the work place, allowing for them to apply for executive level positions and earn the same amount of money, benefits, and prestige as a white male ensuring equality for all race and sex. Lisa Newton argues that, “reverse discrimination does not advance but actually undermines equality because it violates the concept of equal justice under law for all citizens. In addition, to this theoretical objection to reverse discrimination, Newton opposes it because she believes it raises insoluble problems.” Among them are determining what groups have been sufficiently discriminated against in the past to deserve preferred treatment in the present and determining the degree of reverse discrimination that will be compensatory. Newton outlines the importance of ensuring her argument is recognized as logically distinct from the condition of justice in the political sense. She begins her argument for reverse discrimination as unjustified by addressing the “simple justice” claim requiring that we favor women and blacks in employment and education opportunities. Since women and blacks were unjustly excluded from such opportunities for so many years in the not so distant past, however when employers and schools favor women and blacks, the same injustice is done. This reverse discrimination violates the public equality which defines citizenship and destroys the rule of law for the areas in which these favors are granted. To the extent that we adopt a program of discrimination, reverse or otherwise, justice in the political sense is destroyed, and none of us, specifically affected or no is a citizen, as bearers of rights we are all petitioners
Affirmative action has been a controversial topic ever since it was established in the 1960s to right past wrongs against minority groups, such as African Americans, Hispanics, and women. The goal of affirmative action is to integrate minorities into public institutions, like universities, who have historically been discriminated against in such environments. Proponents claim that it is necessary in order to give minorities representation in these institutions, while opponents say that it is reverse discrimination. Newsweek has a story on this same debate which has hit the nation spotlight once more with a case being brought against the University of Michigan by some white students who claimed that the University’s admissions policies accepted minority students over them, even though they had better grades than the minority students. William Symonds of Business Week, however, thinks that it does not really matter. He claims that minority status is more or less irrelevant in college admissions and that class is the determining factor.
Some feel that affirmative action in universities is the answer to the end of racism and inequality. If more black students get into and graduate from good colleges, more of them will go on to even out the lopsided numbers in the work force. Prejudice secretly slips through everyone¹s thoughts. Or so Barbara Ehrenreich believes when she writes of a quiet, subliminal prejudice that is caused by statistics that prove the fewer numbers of blacks in high profile jobs. When we see ninety percent of leadership roles in the corporate world held by white men, we begin to doubt other¹s competence in that field. With so many minorities in menial roles, people begin to believe the white man is best for ...
Clegg, expanding on the expense of discrimination towards scholars, displays how discrimination has a single benefit: diversity. Likewise, Abigail Fisher, plaintiff in the recent case Fisher v. University of Texas, has better grades than the average needed to gain admission for African-American and Hispanic students, yet was rejected from the University of Texas. Fisher, who is white, was forced to attend the l...
Today there is considerable disagreement in the country over Affirmative Action with the American people. MSNBC reported a record low in support for Affirmative Action with 45% in support and 45% opposing (Muller, 2013). The affirmative action programs have afforded all genders and races, exempting white males, a sense of optimism and an avenue to get the opportunities they normally would not be eligible for. This advantage includes admission in colleges or hiring preferences with public and private jobs; although Affirmative Action has never required quotas the government has initiated a benefits program for the schools and companies that elect to be diversified. The advantages that are received by the minorities’ only take into account skin color, gender, disability, etc., are what is recognized as discriminatory factors. What is viewed as racism to the majority is that there ar...
Rothenberg, P. 1998. Race, Class, and Gender in the United States. New York: St. Martin's Press.
The discrimination against Caucasian and Asian American students a long with the toleration of lower quality work produced by African American students and other minority students is an example of the problems caused by Affirmative Action. Although affirmative action intends to do good, lowering the standards by which certain racial groups are admitted to college is not the way to solve the problem of diversity in America's universities. The condition of America's public schools is directly responsible for the poor academic achievement of minority children. Instead of addressing educational discrepancies caused by poverty and discrimination, we are merely covering them up and pretending they do not exist, and allowing ourselves to avoid what it takes to make a d... ... middle of paper ... ...
The American Dream has never been available to minority citizens as easily as it is to American-born citizens. Affirmative action was first implemented around the year 1972, however it was not widely accepted or practiced. During this time society was just getting used to including women in higher education institutions so the concept of including minorities in higher education was almost non-existent. My Beloved World, by Sonia Sotomayor shows the challenges that a first generation, Puerto Rican, lower socioeconomic female had during this time. Through her autobiography she shows the struggles she faced throughout her life, focusing on her application to college, college experience and insight into her cultural background. My Beloved World present the ideology of White Supremacy and other phenomenon’s such as structural inequality, and socioeconomic inequality that interfere with Sonia’s inability to receive preparation for college and these things show the that America has not made good on its promise of equal opportunity for all.
Sotomayor represents the Puerto Rican students that have an awareness of being unqualified in comparison to their white classmates. Her “deficiency of...written English,” a representation for other Puerto Rican students, is because of being raised in a culturally different background than a common upper-class white student’s background (110). The “deficiency” symbolizes the common sense belief that being white, and writing and speaking fluently in English, is a classification of the prevalent culture. Sotomayor, in her dissent in Schuette v. BAMN, explicates that “discrimination against an individual occurs because [of] that individual’s membership in a particular group” revealing that a Puerto Rican’s identity as a Puerto Rican, as an immigrant, as a minority part of the lower class, racializes them, creating drawbacks that are arduous and can be impossible to overcome, as in the case of her cousin Nelson, who being just as smart as Sotomayor, is burdened with an addiction that restricts him from succeeding (Schuette 45; Sottomayor 106). In 1972, Princeton, a prestigious school, was dominantly populated by upper class white males, causing the culture and heritage of many Puerto Ricans and other minority students to clash with dominantly white, upper class