WHAM Scholarship

[AFPheonix]

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...727693,00.html

Kind of on topic, but still interesting. Girls are starting to be denied entry into college to allow less qualified boys in to keep gender ratios the same.

As for the scholarship, it's their money, they can award it to whomever they like. Like I said in another thread, you can win a scholarship based on the fact that you're left-handed. The scholarships of this type are usually awarded by private groups and they can set whatever criteria they like for them.

[MMATM]

The argument that white men are somehow getting screwed over by minorities and women actually makes me laugh out loud. Its a ridiculous assertion.

Screwed over? No. Passed over? Occasionally. The fact that white males have had the advantage (and continue to do so, statistically speaking) in education, hiring, and money has carried over into the development of scholarships and/or positions for those traditionally less fortunate. This is totally legitimate and its removal would be a severe detriment to society. It's when scholarships start to get very specific and very exclusive, or to specifically exclude one or more protected categories (thanks Sylvia I knew there was a term for it), that the issues of racism and sexism really arise. One scholarship I almost applied for (though I wouldn't have won it, so didn't waste the 500-1000 words) was open to disabled, minority, and LGBT students only. Thus excluding only able-bodied heterosexual whites. Fair? Not exactly.

However, that wasn't the assertion of the URI Republicans. Their goal as stated was to point out the racism inherent in excluding any category, as Sylvia noted.

Several of the police and fire physical fitness tests do that. I looked at my age bracket on one of them (20-29) and for the different activities, they have different standards:

...snip...

Shouldn't they both be held to the same standard? That 300 pound drunk guy is going to weigh the same wether it is a male officer or a female officer trying to apprehend him. Why should women get an extra 2:35, do six less sit-ups, and only have to bench press under 2/3 of their body weight?

First, I need volunteers to clean up my bloody remains after someone on this site (likely female) tears me limb from limb. Nobody? Oh, well, Raps will get to it after my scraps start to stink a little. Or else he'll just let some hungry cats have a go. So here's my spiel:
- Men are physically stronger than women. Period. No pun intended. Especially in the upper body. This is due to the hormones which control muscle growth, and which initially specify and are then determined by gender (weird, isn't it?). A man's ability to bench-press 98% of his body weight versus a woman's ability to bench-press only 58% is reasonably comparable. Perhaps 65% or 70% would be more fair, but the majority of women aren't built to do that.
- Men are also faster than women. Again due to an increased capacity to grow muscular tissue (hormones once more). Thus, giving the woman an extra two and a half minutes is reasonable. The extra six situps applies to both categories: speed and strength. Women also have more *cough cough* "non-muscular" weight in their upper bodies than men, and so forcing them to be able to perform the same number of situps would be very unfair.
- Finally, men are less flexible than women (the anatomy of the hips and lower spine is different, so naysayers would be kind to look it up first). This explains the extra length of reach required of women.
- These physical differences are statistical only, and do not necessarily mean that (for example) I can bench-press more percentage of my body weight than, say, Mysty (guaranteed I can't). They're just averages.
- As for qualifications, the "advantages" given to women (or men) are there to create opportunities for the pre-disadvantaged gender. While this means that some officers are less physically strong than others, it is the only way to prevent having a police force made up entirely of physically imposing males, who traditionally (and genetically) have more testosterone than their smaller and/or female counterparts. Smaller officers, and female officers in particular, are less threatening (no offense ladies) than large males. This helps to defuse situations that could become violent, before anyone gets hurt. Physical requirements are not the only requirements for police, nor should they be.

The only instance in which I can see quotas or scaled requirements being a serious issue is in firefighting or other similar rescue work. If every male firefighter must be able to carry a 200 pound sack for twenty five yards, every female firefighter had better be held to that same standard. Why? Because when firefighters (of any gender) can't carry victims or other firefighters because they're too heavy, people die. Fires and other such catastrophes don't care whether you're a slightly built girl who can't carry your 250-pound partner to safety. They'll crisp you (and him/her) anyway. Having "cool heads" as offered by female hormones being present in tense situations (one of the big pluses of having female police officers) won't help much in a fire, since there's really no way to defuse that situation without some serious physical effort.

As for quotas? They're "technically" outlawed. In theory. Not in practice. Now, "diversity" is being used (improperly) to describe the requirement of having a certain percentage of women/minority-x/minority-y/minority-z employees. Annoyingly enough, they apply to businesses too, not just public positions. Any business over "X" employees in size must match, within "reasonable" bounds, the demographic of the area in which the business is located. That means that if a largish business has a bunch of women/minority employees quit, they essentially have to fill the slots with the same genders and ethnicities that left, under penalty of law. Likewise if a bunch of white males quit. The business would have to find a bunch of white guys to fill their spots. Stupid? Hell yes. Especially in public service and safety occupations (read: firefighting).

[Seshat]

First, I need volunteers to clean up my bloody remains after someone on this site (likely female) tears me limb from limb. Nobody? Oh, well, Raps will get to it after my scraps start to stink a little. Or else he'll just let some hungry cats have a go.

Did you expect me to tear you apart for describing physical facts? No rending here.

And yes, in police work, there are advantages to having female officers that outweigh the disadvantage of slightly slower and slightly physically weaker officers.

In firefighting, there are no such advantages, and it is in fact dangerous to have firefighters who aren't physically up to the standard; therefore women should not have allowance made for the physical variation.

So yeah, I agree. Possibly not in detail, but in the substance of your arguments, I agree.

[Zyanya]

The argument that white men are somehow getting screwed over by minorities and women actually makes me laugh out loud. Its a ridiculous assertion.

Welcome then to reality.

I applied for a job.

There was another candidate which I fully admit was more qualified than I was.

I got the job.

I was told why I got the job.

I got the job because I was a woman.

Not because I was qualified. Not because I was the best person for the position. Not even because they were looking for someone they could train.

Because I was a woman.

I declined the job.


There was a girl at the high school I attended that shared my name. My junior year, there was an essay writing contest for Black History month. I entered. I received a letter with a copy of my essay telling me it was the winning essay. I arrived at the office to receive the prize. The woman awarding the prize stared at me in complete shock and informed me there must have been a mistake, I was not who was supposed to be there. I showed her the copy of the essay I had written (and which she had a copy of in her hand). She informed me again that it was a mistake and my essay was not in fact, the winning essay. The prize was awarded the next day, to a black student.

A couple months later a girl referred to me as a 'stupid white bitch'. I then referred to her as a 'stupid black bitch'. They tried to give me detention and make me apologize to her. They failed on both counts, as I steadfastly refused to do both (even showed up on school the day they escalated to suspending me and told them if they wanted to explain to the newspapers why I was being escorted off campus by the police, they were welcome to. Funny how the situation went away after that). Ironically, the girl and I became friends and still are to this day.



Yes, you can be white and get screwed over. Yes, you can be male and get screwed over. Yes, you can be a white male and get screwed over. You can be just about anyone in the world and I guarantee you someone will screw you over.

[Boozy]

You can be just about anyone in the world and I guarantee you someone will screw you over.

I was speaking from a sociological point of view.

You can find individual stories to back up any point, but that does not equate to systematic discrimination against white males. The fact remains that we live in a white patriarchal society.

That white guy that got passed up for the job in favour of you almost certainly found another opportunity.

[ebonyknight]

Norton referred me here.

I don't see that much of an outcry. I seem to see a fair amount of people say "well there are too many female/minority only " scholarships. But no real "outcry" as MadMike put it.

That is pretty freaking awesome. WHAMs are getting screwed over by affirmative action because of it being improperly used all the time. I'm sick of all these scholarships that only apply to women or minorities.

To specify by race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc etc who is able to receive it is a bit... hopefully...out-dated (but probably not)

So - in theory, I don't see anything really 'wrong' with it... as long as it would be correctly applied - that is - to someone in need.

I think the creation of that scholarship is absolutely hysterical. I've been hoping someone would do something like that for quite some time.

Fuck everyone. They should have gone through and awarded it. It's no more racist than a "black" only scholarship. It's no more sexist than a "women only" scholarship. And it's no different than offering a scholarship for "gays only."

As for the scholarship, it's their money, they can award it to whomever they like.

Outcry indeed. I find it funny how people rail against the "women/minority" only scholarships, but when a white only one comes up, the outrage is QUITE tepid. So much for equal treatment.

For the record, what black-only/female only scholarships are you guys talking about?

[AFPheonix]

I think I said about the same thing about the scholarships for minorities: The people giving the money away are private institutions, they can put whatever restrictions they like on who gets it. It can be a lefty, it can be a handicapped person, it can be someone who is a member of a certain organization. It's all good.

[Norton]

I should have clarified. The outcry wasn't from the members of Fratching. Rather:

Student Government Association of URI took great offense to the scholarship, obviously, calling it "racist" and "homophobic", as well as "intolerant". The URI SGA demanded that the URI Republicans cancel the scholarship and publicly apologize in writing for their sponsorship of the scholarship, and threatened to disband the Republican Club if the demands were not met.

[ebonyknight]

I think I said about the same thing about the scholarships for minorities: The people giving the money away are private institutions, they can put whatever restrictions they like on who gets it. It can be a lefty, it can be a handicapped person, it can be someone who is a member of a certain organization. It's all good.

I believe you are correct, I stand corrected.

[ebonyknight]

I should have clarified. The outcry wasn't from the members of Fratching. Rather:

hrmph.....organizations are just like politicians. They will say anything to keep themselves elected/operating.

Individuals usually hold no such ulterior motives and will speak their minds as biased as they may be. Evidenced quite well here.

The scholarships for for minorities/women are wrong and evil, yet the same vitriol isn't reserved for the white ones. I find the double standard they dispise, yet qualify, quite ironic.

People rail about some injustice about not being equal and when it benefits them, equality doesn't seem as relevant. Kinda reminds me of the smoking argument.


Again, for the record, what black-only/female only scholarships are you guys talking about?

[Sylvia727]

Again, for the record, what black-only/female only scholarships are you guys talking about?

Google "minorities scholarship". You will come up with pages of organizations offering their money to minorities. Google "female scholarship". You will come up with pages of organizations offering their money to women. Now google "white scholarship". It's pages of opinions on the topic; not a single offer. Same with "male scholarship". I'm surprised you've never encountered a minority-specific scholarship before. They're incredibly common.

As for why no one decries "WHAM" scholarships as racist, it's tacitly assumed that what's sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander. I'd rather not see any racist scholarships at all, but if we must have them, folks should be allowed to be bigoted in favor of WHAMs just like they're currently allowed to be bigoted in favor of every other demographic.

There are two arguments that I can see in favor of the WHAM issue. One is that there should be no demographic discrimination at all, and this will emphasize the stupidity of our current system. I believe that this is the position of the U of RI Republican Club. The second argument is that if folks are allowed to be bigoted in favor of every other demographic, then they should be allowed to be bigoted in favor of WHAMs. Excluding a demographic is by nature bigoted, so our current system is bigoted.

[ebonyknight]

Google "minorities scholarship". You will come up with pages of organizations offering their money to minorities. Google "female scholarship". You will come up with pages of organizations offering their money to women. Now google "white scholarship". It's pages of opinions on the topic; not a single offer. Same with "male scholarship". I'm surprised you've never encountered a minority-specific scholarship before. They're incredibly common.

Typically, when someone wants to prove a point, they don't tell the people they are trying to convince to "google it" themselves. I asked for some examples. Because a good number of times, people like to go off half cocked and don't even realize they don't even have all the information.

Like the UNCF. They do not offer "black-only" scholarships. They offer scholarships to historically black colleges and universities (HCBUs). Anyone can qualify (for non-raced based criteria) as long as they want to go to a "member" school.

Again...what black only/woman only scholarships are you guys talking about???

As for why no one decries "WHAM" scholarships as racist, it's tacitly assumed that what's sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander. I'd rather not see any racist scholarships at all, but if we must have them, folks should be allowed to be bigoted in favor of WHAMs just like they're currently allowed to be bigoted in favor of every other demographic.

Then you cannot complain about a perceived wrong to you if you are perfectly willing to inflict it on another....we call that hypocrisy.

There are two arguments that I can see in favor of the WHAM issue. One is that there should be no demographic discrimination at all, and this will emphasize the stupidity of our current system. I believe that this is the position of the U of RI Republican Club. The second argument is that if folks are allowed to be bigoted in favor of every other demographic, then they should be allowed to be bigoted in favor of WHAMs. Excluding a demographic is by nature bigoted, so our current system is bigoted.

Again, no one has provided any examples, so how do I know that anyone is being "bigoted" against? The only evidence I have seen so far is that whites are excluding non-whites...and that is what the United States has done for most of it's history to minorities.

[Pedersen]

Typically, when someone wants to prove a point, they don't tell the people they are trying to convince to "google it" themselves. I asked for some examples. Because a good number of times, people like to go off half cocked and don't even realize they don't even have all the information.

Wow. You are given multiple opportunities, and won't take them. Fine, allow me to help, shall I?

First, some scholarships exclusively for women:

• http://www.google.com/search?q=female+scholarship
• http://the-women-grants.com/?GKEY=Female%20Grant
• http://www.hccfl.edu/scholarship/minority.html
• http://www.finaid.org/otheraid/female.phtml

Second, scholarships for minorities:

• http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...ty+scholarship
• http://www.blackexcel.org/100minority.htm
• http://scholarships.fatomei.com/minorities.html
• http://www.finaid.org/otheraid/minority.phtml

There, 6 links for specific lists of the scholarships being discussed. Two more links to do your own damn search.

Those scholarships are available exclusively to women and minorities. I'm a white guy.

How about scholarships for caucasians? Good luck. The only ones I was able to find at all were the ones mentioned in the OP, and the arguments about whether it should be allowed or not.

That enough for you?

Then you cannot complain about a perceived wrong to you if you are perfectly willing to inflict it on another....we call that hypocrisy.

Again, no one has provided any examples, so how do I know that anyone is being "bigoted" against.

You're right. With how right you are, I look forward to your announcement of your establishment of a Caucasian scholarship. You wouldn't want to allow such hypocrisy to continue, would you?

[ebonyknight]

There, 6 links for specific lists of the scholarships being discussed. Two more links to do your own damn search.

Those scholarships are available exclusively to women and minorities. I'm a white guy.

Mighty hostile aren't we? No prob. I am used to this type of hostility when it comes to race. The country is plagued by it.

All I asked for was evidence. And I don't know what rational person tries to prove a point and then tells the person they are trying to prove it to, to prove their case for them.

How about scholarships for caucasians? Good luck. The only ones I was able to find at all were the ones mentioned in the OP, and the arguments about whether it should be allowed or not.

That enough for you?

Yeah, it is. I am not in the mood to debate with openly hostile people, especially when I was quite accommodating to you earlier.

You're right. With how right you are, I look forward to your announcement of your establishment of a Caucasian scholarship. You wouldn't want to allow such hypocrisy to continue, would you?

If you had bothered to not be hot and bothered, you would have found out that I am not in favor of AA or race-based scholarships. But you have proven my point why minorities feel that they must have these things. Hostility towards them.

You automatically assume that I must be in favor of these programs (why else the hostility). Hostility equals minds that are not open to discussion, hence the continuing feeling that whites are hostile and these programs are needed.

[Pedersen]

Mighty hostile aren't we? No prob. I am used to this type of hostility when it comes to race. The country is plagued by it.

Nah, just tired of people saying "I've not seen any evidence of this". Then when told how to find it (quite trivially, I might add), saying "I don't have to do that, and won't."

Also tired of seeing people say that white guys aren't oppressed at all.

I don't have kids. Don't even want to be around them, or even acknowledge they exist. Care to guess why?

Because I'm a guy. And, somehow, that makes me someone that has to be watched, because I might be a pedophile.

Have to be extremely careful around women, too. I've had accusations of sexual harassment levelled at me (even been written up for it See here). When I reported the reverse? I was told to suck it up, and deal with it.

I'm a guy. I've read commentary from women that the only reason all men are not in prison on rape charges is because some of them haven't been caught yet. I've read other commentary which stated that two homosexual males having anal intercourse in the privacy of their own bedroom is oppressive to women.

I'm male, I'm not a pedophile, and I'm not a rapist. I get tired of being viewed that way by idiots who know nothing else about me other than having seen me once.

I'm a white male. And that makes me into some sort of demon. And that, too, I'm tired of. I'm a nice guy. But I have to be watched, monitored, and controlled, because I my skin is fair, and I have a penis.

And then to watch people blatantly ignore evidence which is all but handed to them on a silver platter? It does piss me off.

Ignore me if you wish. That's your prerogative.

Hostility towards them.

You automatically assume that I must be in favor of these programs (why else the hostility). Hostility equals minds that are not open to discussion, hence the continuing feeling that whites are hostile and these programs are needed.

No, I make no assumptions as I didn't recall seeing you state that you were for or against them. Instead, what I saw was somebody saying "Nope, not gonna do it." And tired of it. You tell people to be open minded, open to discussion, and refuse to do trivial searches that are all but given to you as clickable links.

As for hostility towards minorities? No, I don't have that. Instead I have hostility towards people who demonize me on the basis of my gender or skin color.

And people say it doesn't happen.