From: primeaux@wham-o.cs.utk.edu (David Primeaux)
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
Subject: Re: Hiring quotas and faculty positions (Repost #2)
Date: 15 Sep 92 19:32:22 GMT
Organization: University of Tennessee, Knoxville - Department of Computer Science
Distribution: world
Reply-To: primeaux@wham-o.cs.utk.edu (David Primeaux)
NNTP-Posting-Host: wham-o.cs.utk.edu

In article <1992Sep13.224610.298@mailhost.ocs.mq.edu.au>, wskelly@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au (William Skelly) writes:
|> In article <lb1cbgINNelp@utkcs2.cs.utk.edu> primeaux@wham-o.cs.utk.edu (David Primeaux) writes:
|> >In article <1992Sep10.233803.17047@mailhost.ocs.mq.edu.au>, wskelly@laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au (William Skelly) writes:
|> >|> I too *feel* that I have just run into this sort of thing.  I am also
|> >|> a little confused as to how one is *supposed* to feel.  This is an
|> >|> excellent topic for discussion in this group, and perhaps instructive
|> >|> as to the general backlash that this bit of political correctness is
|> >|> having within the general workforce (I can't prove this it just seems
|> >|> to be case with friends employed particularly within the public service).
|> >|> 
|> >|> The only arguements against this practice I can think of (and maybe 
|> >|> they alone are sufficient) are:
|> >|> 
|> >|> 1. Why and how long do *we* pay for the mistakes of past generations
|> >
|> >*We* have to pay for the mistakes of past generations because the 
|> >results of those past mistakes still pervade society today.  And withour
|> >affirmative action laws, IMHO, the mistakes of yesterday would be repeated
|> >today, leaving *our* children and grandchildren wondering why *they* had to
|> >pay for our mistakes.
|> 
|> My question was somewhat retorical.  

And it is a good question at that.

|> However, how long must white males
|> (in particular) face an "unlevel" playing field?  I think that this is
|> a fair question.  When the number of faculty from each racial group is
|> represented according to their population within the community?  How
|> long will this be?  Wouldn't it be more efficient in terms of achieving
|> the same goals for us white males to face the situation at university
|> entrance time rather than after completing our education in a field 
|> where society wants to equal out the racial/ethnic composition?
|> 

Unfortunately, bureaucracy seems to have an inertia all its own.  Even
though I support AA, I fear that (regardless of the criterion used to 
evaluate its continued need) it will persist as the "way things are done"
for some time after this criterion is met.

|> >|> 2. Being that it is the *polictically correct* attitude is reason 
|> >|>    enough to challenge it.
|> >
|> >I don't see any smileys here, so I assume that this comment is meant 
|> >to be taken seriously.  I don't believe that the fact that a position
|> >has been anointed "politically correct" (PC) is a reason in itself
|> >to embrace that position -- whatever the group who did the anointing.
|> >On the other hand, such an anointing should not be a reason to eschew
|> >such a position either.  Suppose Dan Rather declared, "Such and such
|> >an organization is now espousing the position that it is PC to be 
|> >opposed to the murder of innocent children"?
|> >
|> >I know the above is rather far afield of the original topic.  However,
|> >it seems to me that opposition to the PC "movement" or "label" was
|> >probably initially the result of persons objecting to being told how
|> >to think.  But a person who discards a position simply *because* it is 
|> >PC is allowing others to think for himself or herself.
|> >
|> 
|> I *did* say "challenge" it, not "discard" it.  Change in society
|> only occurs when the politically correctness of the day is 
|> challenged, e.g. the civil rights movement.  The government
|> and beauracracy in particular live for the status quo, they are
|> generally monuments to "inertia."  No smiles intended.  I firmly
|> believe that the best students in my class are the ones sitting
|> out in the lecture theater thinking..."this guy is full of shit!"
|> These students "challenge" intellectually what their lecturers
|> spew forth they tend to read more than the average student, and
|> sometimes they jump on a stupid "off the cuff" remark that 
|> lecturers often make...I really hate when that happens! :-)

Very good point.  I must have read your original post too hastily.
I completely support challenging PC notions.  I (incorrectly) inferred
that you were tossing the idea because it is PC.  Sorry.

|> 
|> >A final note.  As a white, male, USA citizen of European heritage,
|> >I support affirmative action.  I have been engaged in an as-yet-unsuc-
|> >cessful job search (PhD in CS -- any offers?) and have probably been
|> >"victimized" by "reverse discrimination."  While I would prefer to have
|> >job offers pouring in than to be still looking, I would prefer that 
|> >the playing field be leveled now, letting past injustices become exactly
|> >that -- *past* injustices.
|> >
|> 
|> Well dave, I'd of rather never had anyone screw up the "playing field"
|> in the first place!  But thats life, eh? ;-)
|> 
|> I have not said that I am opposed to the spending of public money to
|> encourage underrepresented minority groups to get represented.  What
|> I have said is that I'm a little confused as to how I should "feel"
|> (being a Sensitive New Age Guy, SNAG) at the end of the day when I
|> believe (perhaps incorrectly) that I lost the job competition to 
|> someone on some basis other than qualifications.
|> 
|> Another poster mentioned that the real idea was to encourage minorities
|> to get into these fields, i.e. get the education and apply for the
|> jobs.  Its not supposed to be a quota system, involved in filling slots.
|> But this is not a perfect world, that, I think, we all except.  However,
|> yet another poster suggested that "minority" status was of _equal_
|> importance to _qualifications_, or any other consideration.  This I
|> disagree with.
|> 
|> Cheers,
|> Chris

david
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers