From: primeaux@wham-o.cs.utk.edu (David Primeaux)
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
Subject: Re: Hiring quotas and faculty positions (Repost #2)
Date: 11 Sep 92 19:45:56 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 <1992Sep11.162439.26974@tc.cornell.edu>, bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor) 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:
|> >|> In article <1992Sep9.215223.22997@netnews.noc.drexel.edu> David.Koert@CoE.Drexel.EDU (Dave Koert) 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.
|> 
|> Why should anybody have to pay for crimes he/she did not commit0000 ? If there is
|> still discrimination today then punish the people who do it, not the innocents.

Well, it looks like a good point you raise here.  But put the shoe on the other
foot.  Suppose you were a black female and that some twenty or twenty-five
you were just beginning your education in the US South (forget the flames, I 
grew up there).  If you were in the same town I was in, you went to the "colored
school" and I simply went to school. You had teachers with training inferior 
to the training of mine, and teachers who were paid less than mine were.  In
many cases your teachers were subject in their education to the same victimization
you were subjected to.  You had textbooks that had been discarded from my 
school in favor of newer ones and your school offered a more limited curriculum
than my school offered me.  It was assumed that a relatively large percentage of
my class would continue its education beyond high school.  It was also assumed
that very, very few of your classmates would make it to college.  As a final
insult, since you arefemale, you get less attention in the classroom than do 
the males.

Sure, the injustices of the "separate but equal" school system are not as
prevalent today as they were twenty-five years ago.  But where are the 
-- to use your word -- "innocents" who were victimized by it?  They are 
the ones competing with me for a job.  Assume for a moment that I am 
innocent of the "crimes" (your word, again) perpetrated by generations of
my forebearers.  Surely, as you said, I should not then have to pay for
those crimes.  But why should the innocent *victim* of those crimes have
to continue to pay for crimes *against* her?  I submit that so-called "strong"
affirmative action is an attempt not so much an attempt to force you or me to 
"pay for crimes [we] did not commit" as it is an attempt to halt the continued
victimization of persons today.

Yeah, paying for crimes one did not commit does not seem fair. Life's not fair.
But so far it's been one hell of a lot fairer to me than it has been to a whole
slew of other folks.  


|> 
|> >
|> >|> 
|> >|> Cheers,
|> >|> Chris
|> >|> 
|> >
|> >
|> >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.
|> 
|> Fine. The real problem is that some people who think like you do feel
|> free to enforce their social agenda on others who dont agree with them,

Agreed.  And, of course, the contrary should hold true: people who think
differently from me should not feel free to enforce their moral agenda 
on those who disagree (I don't believe for a moment that you think they 
should).  Everything we do as a society has some moral ramifications. 
It seems to me that it is largely those at various levels of power who 
decide what the direction of our society's moral agenda will be.  I am 
free to dissent, if I wish, but as an individual I frequently feel 
powerless.


|> whenever they have the power. Why should I trust a bunch of senior 
|> faculty member to correct societal problems ? 

Ahh! Exactly!  *That* is why affirmative action regulations were put in 
place:  because we *cannot* "trust a bunch of senior faculty member[s]
to correct societal problems."  But if corrections are not made at 
their level (or at analogous industry levels) where will they be made?
And if we, as a society, decide that they don't need to be made, then
are we not perpetuating the "crimes" of others? 

|>I did not vote them
|> into office nor do I have the power to vote them out - they have a job
|> for life.
|> 

I didn't vote for the Department heads and headettes, the Deans and Deanettes
either.  I know a lot of senior faculty I wouldn't vote for if they were 
running for dogcatcher  (and some of *them* can spell "potato").  But I did 
vote for some of the group of people who appointed the people who decided 
that those hiring types needed to change from their old ways of doing things.
That's representative democracy for you.  I don't like a lot of what goes on
in government or as a result of government regulation (or lack thereof).  But
I know that it happens either despite the people I voted for or because of the 
people I voted for.  I know I don't need to remind you, this year especially,
that we can vote (indirectly) for or against some issues that concern us.



|> >
|> >My opinions.  
|> >
|> >david
|> >primeaux@cs.utk.edu
|> 
|> Dov
|> 

david
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers