Scholarship For Whites Only

[lizbud]

What do you think?



BOSTON, Nov. 22, 2006 — Joe Mroszczyk, president of the College Republicans at Boston University, admits he set out to stir up a hornet's nest when he came up with the idea of offering a whites-only scholarship at the school. But he got a little more buzz than he bargained for.

"To tell you the truth, we didn't see this coming," Mroszczyk said. "The Drudge Report picked it up yesterday, and today I just finished a round of national interviews. It's kind of overwhelming."

All the media attention is focused on a $250 Caucasian Achievement and Recognition Scholarship offered by Mroszczyk and the BU chapter of the College Republicans. Applicants must have a cumulative grade point average of 3.2 or higher; they must write two essays; and, here's the kicker, they must be at least one-quarter Caucasian.

The application itself offers an explanation: "We believe that racial preferences in all their forms are perhaps the worst form of bigotry confronting America today."

According to Mroszczyk, his group is offering the scholarship to point out "how ridiculous it is to have any sort of racially based scholarship."

At BU, for example, students who are at least one-quarter Hispanic can apply for a National Hispanic Recognition Scholarship.

"There are plenty of poor, white, academically gifted students who need that money just as much," Mroszczyk said.

It isn't the first time a group of students has tried this kind of stunt.

Two years ago a chapter of the College Republicans at Roger Williams University also offered a $250 whites-only scholarship. That's where the BU students got the idea.

"We are not doing this as some kind of white supremacy thing. I wanted to have a dialogue about racial preference," Mroszczyk said.

It seems as if Mroszczyk has gotten his wish. People from across the country are now weighing in on the idea through e-mail and the radio. And closer to home, some BU students are having their say too.

"It's a poor way to talk about affirmative action," said David Coreas, the 21-year-old senior who is president of the Latino fraternity Phi Iota Alpha at BU. "If they want to have a scholarship, then let them have a scholarship, but they're stirring up controversy in the wrong way."

Coreas said he believes that racially based scholarships are necessary to level a very uneven academic playing field.


"We have to look at the situation honestly," he said. "Caucasians tend to have a higher per capita income than Latinos and other minorities. We have to have scholarships to survive."

Coreas said he would welcome an honest dialogue on campus about race and affirmative action.

Mroszczyk admits even some of his good friends are shaking their heads.

"They said I can't believe you're doing this," he said.

But for all the talk, there are still no takers for the scholarship. The application has been available online since Nov. 7, and so far not one student has filled it out.

That's money wasted, according to David Coreas.
"I wish I could apply: That $250 could help me pay for my textbooks," he said.

Coreas isn't eligible, though.

But for BU students who have a pretty good GPA and can write a couple of essays, there's still time, as long as they're also 25 percent Caucasian. The deadline for applications is Nov. 30.

[sirrahved]

It's about time. DH and I always joke that we'd like to start a National Association for the Advancement of Caucasian People.

[Sevaede]

It's no different from the UNCF, I suppose.

[Miss Z]

I know this is a little off topic (sorry), but I'm a bit confused about how a scholarship is defined here. I have a scholarship, and I won it by gaining the highest marks in the entrance exam of my school.


The application has been available online since Nov. 7, and so far not one student has filled it out.

That bit threw me a little, if you apply for it, then isn't that a bursary, technically not a scholarship? Perhaps I am just not reading it right :o

Personally though, I don't see why we have to differentiate anything based on who we are, we're all people and have as much right to anything no matter what we look like.

[Vela]

Well I think it's about time. People always seem to get up in arms about things like that, but they have all sorts of programs and scholarships for most others, it's only fair that all are allowed to have programs like that, or none. To me it's all or nothing. There are LOTS of poor white students and families who need programs as much as any others. I always found that rather idiotic that people get so upset about a white person doing it, but it's fine for others to do it, and they have no problem with that. I find thier reasoning quite plausible and I find a progam like that no different than the United Negro College Fund or National Hispanic Recognition Scholarship, so there is no reason not to have one if that's what they choose to do.

I also find it rather silly, on the whole, to offer scholarships or assistance based on race, it should be based on need and/or the performance of the individual, not what color they are or aren't.

[king2005]

I hope this stirs up enough BS to put an end to those stupid race only Scholarships!! I have always detested them & anything else that says, "this race or type of people only"!!

Thats why I'm all for The Gay Pride Parade, anyone can go to it & have fun. I'm not gay & I'm going with Chad & Andrew (whenever the next one is, I kinda forget the date)


When I found out that there are still Black only schools in the USA, I was shocked!! Those types of schools should be banned! (goes for any race only type schools!).

Its places & things like this that keep racisim alive.

[areias]

It's about time someone did something like this! When I was applying for scholarships, I would find the hispanic ones that are like..if you write an essay on your family heritage you get $___ amount scholarship..I could write an essay like that! But because I'm not hispanic I don't get a chance?

Good for him.

[dukedogsmom]

I agree. It's about time.

[Karen]

When I found out that there are still Black only schools in the USA, I was shocked!! Those types of schools should be banned! (goes for any race only type schools!).

There are historically black colleges, but I do not know of any that would deny someone because of skin tone (or lack thereof!)

[CathyBogart]

I agree with the general tone of the thread, it's about time!!

(Side note - When I was in HS we started a gay-straight alliance, the principal tried to decline permission saying that he wouldn't allow racially biased clubs on campus....then he had to stick his foot i his mouth when it was pointed out ot him that there was an African-american club, a persian club, a korean club, and a hispanic club on campus...all of whichhe HAD approved! LoL...)

[JenBKR]

I agree with the others, it's about time! My scholarships for college were so wonderful to have, but since I am white I didn't get nearly as much as my SIL, who is 1/8 Native American, and my grades in high school were much higher.



I know this is a little off topic (sorry), but I'm a bit confused about how a scholarship is defined here. I have a scholarship, and I won it by gaining the highest marks in the entrance exam of my school.

That bit threw me a little, if you apply for it, then isn't that a bursary, technically not a scholarship? Perhaps I am just not reading it right :o



What is a bursary? Maybe things are done different here.....most, if not all, scholarships have to be applied for. You usually have to send in an essay also (well not always, but sometimes).

[Twisterdog]

Yes, of course it's wrong, racist and exclusionary.

Just like scholarships exclusively for Hispanic, African-Americans, etc. is wrong. ANY form of prejucdice is wrong.

Would the Society of White Engineers be wrong? You bet. Just like the Society of Black Engineers is wrong now.

But here is something that is doubly wrong ... if an African American wants to join a fraternity or a business association, he is free to join ANY one he wants to. There is no such thing as a "white only" group ... that would be illegal and would bring about a thousand lawsuits. As it should be. But if a Caucasian person wants to join a "black" fraternity or the a "black" business association, he is not allowed to. That is wrong.

I despise ANY distinction made for race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. They are ALL wrong they should ALL be stopped.

As a business owner and a former manager at a large company, I can tell you that from all I have seen, companies don't care one bit about the race, gender, etc. of the person they are hiring. They want to hire the smartest, best, most qualified person so the company has an edge over the competitors and makes a bigger profit. The managers want their employees to excel, their department to excel, and their company to excel. They also want the fat bonus that comes from such! If you are the best person for the job, you will get it, no matter what your race or sexual orientation. Managers that don't hire based on these factors don't stay employed as managers very long, because their department or company won't perform as well as it could.

What is very unfair and a hinderance to business in this country in a big way are the regulations that say, for example, (and I'm making this up completely, I can't remember the actual numbers now), "For every 10 employees you hire, 3 must be African American." Well, in some parts of the country, it is practically impossible to find 3 qualified African Americans in a recruiting pool. Not because they are somehow inferior, that's ridiculous, but simply because not many African Americans happen to live in Montana or Wyoming! So what happens? The manager ends up hiring the first African American to apply for the job, because he has to, whether that person is the best qualified person or not. This hurts the performance of the department, the company, and the person hired, because it's terribly disheartening to attempt to do a job every day that you are not qualified for or capable of. There was a joke among Human Resource people in my field that if an African American woman using a wheelchair ever applied for an engineering job, they would offer her a million dollars a year to start, because she would fill three "minority" posting at once, in a profession that is traditionally hard-pressed to meet its quotas.

(Sheesh, what a long, semi-off-topic post this turned into. Sorrry!)

[mugsy]

Here! Here! Affirmative Action is neither Affirmative, nor Action and it has definitely run its course. It angers me more than you can know that because I'm white and my husband is white, he cannot get grants and such because of the color of his skin and his gender....how ridiculous is that? When he got out of high school, he had to join the military in order to get money for school because he is a white male, no grant money was available to him. I don't know about anyone else, but, for me, I want to know that I am awarded a scholarship or job or whatever else based on my merits, not my skin color, race, religion, or sexual preference.

[pitc9]

About Time!!!!!! :D

[Pam]

Anything that has the words *white or caucasian* or *black* or *hispanic* or *green with stripes* :p is just plain wrong. I was surprised and disheartened when the Miss Black America pageant began as I knew it would be divisive just by the *exclusion factor* and would fuel racism. When will people learn? :rolleyes:

[cyber-sibes]

Good for them! I hope someone does take advantage of the scholarship. I also think that basing these on race or gender is ridiculous. they talk about "average" but individual wealth isn't based on race or gender. Individual poverty isn't based on race or gender. And to say that it's "leveling the playing field" is biased - it's only leveled for a few selected people if they are the designated heritage or gender. Due to the atmosphere of "political correctness" in America today, you are singled out for more limitations and exclusions if you are a white male than anyone else. What's "fair" about that?

[lizbud]

I think there was a time when minorities needed an edge in securing
a college diploma, and a rightful place in the job market,but that was fifty
or sixty years ago.There are now federal & state laws which ban any type
of segregation or separate but equal opportunies at school or work. I do
not feel it's right to maintain quotas or preferencial treatment for anyone
based on race only.

[smokey the elder]

This makes me think of the different "diversity groups" we have at work. IMO they just point out our differences. I am tempted to start a Northern European Heritage focus group, but I think there are only about seven people of NOrthern European descent where I work! :p

[Miss Z]

What is a bursary? Maybe things are done different here.....most, if not all, scholarships have to be applied for. You usually have to send in an essay also (well not always, but sometimes).

Perhaps things are different here. I recognise the word 'scholarship' to mean an award that has been won on academic or sporting achievements in some kind of examination. A bursary, to me, is when a potential student applies or appeals for lower school fees due to the income their parents receive and based on the fact that they are intelligent enough to excel for the school. Thanks anyway for clearing that up, JenBKR :D

[Cataholic]

I am caucasian, and female, living in the midwest. While I don't think Affirmative Action really works, I do not think that there is equality in the races, genders, ethnicities, either. I do not believe that non-caucasians are given the same chance/opportunity as caucasians, and while I don't know what the answer to this problem is, I can't pretend that I don't see the problem, either.

I see discrimination all the time. I hear it from clients, I see it in the courts, and I read about it in the news. I suppose one could simply suppose that all those people that claim it happens are simply lying, but, I don't think that is the case. While I, personally, haven't felt discriminated upon (harrassed, yes, discriminated upon, no), I have witnessed it personally, with several dear friends. It exists.

I don't think that a Whites Only Scholarship is appropriate, nor is it funny. It is sad. I don't think Caucasians need any more advantages then most of us are already given, simply for the colour of our skin.

:(

[sparks19]

I am caucasian, and female, living in the midwest. While I don't think Affirmative Action really works, I do not think that there is equality in the races, genders, ethnicities, either. I do not believe that non-caucasians are given the same chance/opportunity as caucasians, and while I don't know what the answer to this problem is, I can't pretend that I don't see the problem, either.

I see discrimination all the time. I hear it from clients, I see it in the courts, and I read about it in the news. I suppose one could simply suppose that all those people that claim it happens are simply lying, but, I don't think that is the case. While I, personally, haven't felt discriminated upon (harrassed, yes, discriminated upon, no), I have witnessed it personally, with several dear friends. It exists.

I don't think that a Whites Only Scholarship is appropriate, nor is it funny. It is sad. I don't think Caucasians need any more advantages then most of us are already given, simply for the colour of our skin.

:(

why is it onlly discrimination when White people do it?

Why isn't it discrimination when people of colour call us crackers.... or honkey...or make fun of the way we "act". Why is it funny then? Seems for black comedians it is a career.... making fun of white people. If a white person were to make fun of the way they walk, talk, act then we would be labelled racists? Why is it different?

While I agree there are still many whites out there that are racist I believe there are just as many people of other nationalities that are the same way. this is a two way street and I don't think in this day and age that we have any advantage over anyone.

Equal opportunity employment, race specific scholarships etc etc. there are PLENTY of people that are not Caucasian that made it through life, went to college, got a great job, without these race specific advantages.

If other races want to be treated as equals then they should be equals. Pointing out their differences and giving them advantages over others does not do that, it only singles them out even more.

[Twisterdog]

why is it onlly discrimination when White people do it?

Why isn't it discrimination when people of colour call us crackers.... or honkey...or make fun of the way we "act". Why is it funny then? Seems for black comedians it is a career.... making fun of white people. If a white person were to make fun of the way they walk, talk, act then we would be labelled racists? Why is it different?

While I agree there are still many whites out there that are racist I believe there are just as many people of other nationalities that are the same way. this is a two way street and I don't think in this day and age that we have any advantage over anyone.

Equal opportunity employment, race specific scholarships etc etc. there are PLENTY of people that are not Caucasian that made it through life, went to college, got a great job, without these race specific advantages.

If other races want to be treated as equals then they should be equals. Pointing out their differences and giving them advantages over others does not do that, it only singles them out even more.

Excellent post. I agree.

[IRescue452]

I didn't want to get involved in this, but economic and sociological studies show that non-whites and females are still at a major disadvantage in our country. I've got no problem with scholarships for them. And while I believe that people have every right to make a scholarship for whites, I don't believe they are sending a good message. Furthermore I think many of the comments made by pters on this thread are dissappointingly ignorant and unfortunately they reflect all to well the attitudes of white christian americans.

[Lady's Human]

Furthermore I think many of the comments made by pters on this thread are dissappointingly ignorant and unfortunately they reflect all to well the attitudes of white christian americans.


Since when did CHristianity have anything to do with it?

Even the Army in it's bureaucratic morass has done away with set-asides for minorities. They finally realized that all they were doing by giving extra promotion points for minorities was making the situation worse.

Discrimination is discrimination. By institutionalizing it in any way the situation worsens, it doesn't improve.

[Vela]

So I guess if you are a poor white male who can't afford to go to college too bad for you since MOST white americans seem to have no problem affording stuff??...that logic is flawed. ALL people of ALL nationalities should have the same opportunities in this country and not be discriminated against simply for being born a specific color or gender. Anyone who feels it's not okay for everyone to have segregated scholarships, if ANY do, is practicing reverse descrimination. If there is a United Negro College Fund and a Hispanic College Assistance Program, there should be able to be a Caucaisan College Fund or Caucasian scholarship, just like anyone else, without people getting bent out of shape about it. Go ask some poor white people who could use a helping hand. There are PLENTY in need, just like every other race. I'm tired of hearing how everyone else is wronged and white people have all the advantages, it's just not true. There are LOTS of poor white people and underpriviledged white kids, just like everyone else. Either get rid of the race issue completely for those needing help and scholarships, etc, or make it available for ALL races to have their own without complaints. I vote for getting rid of it and letting everyone attempt to earn them by hard work and effort, not color of skin.

[KYS]

I think Affirmative action was extremely important when
I was growing up.
(now in my opinion it should be put on the back burner)

Even though the kids in my family use being part Hispanic/Indian to
help get them into the Universities/scholarships...
I think Jobs, Universities etc. should be based on grades, skill and qualification not based on race today.
If you want something bad enough, are willing to work hard for it,
you can get it. (it might take you longer than someone else that
has an easier life, but it is possible)
JMHO

[Twisterdog]

Furthermore I think many of the comments made by pters on this thread are dissappointingly ignorant and unfortunately they reflect all to well the attitudes of white christian americans.


Don't know if you're referring to me or not, but in case you are ... I'm 1/4 Native American, and I've never used that fact to get a scholarship, job, etc. Neither has my mother, who is 1/2, or my grandmother, who is full Native American. We could all be on the rolls right now, but none of us ever has been ... we all chose to make it in life based on our intelligence and hard work, not the color of our skin.

My son is 1/2 Hispanic, and I've raised him the same way. If he gets a scholarship to college or a great job, it will be because he is intelligent and a hard worker, not because his great-great-grand-father happened to be born in Mexico.

And, BTW, I'm not a Christian, either.

I just happen to believe that people ... ALL people ... ought to sink or swim, make it or fail, based on their own individual qualitities, not where their ancestors happened to be born.

[JenBKR]

I just happen to believe that people ... ALL people ... ought to sink or swim, make it or fail, based on their own individual qualitities, not where their ancestors happened to be born.

I totally agree. I should say that the reason I said it was about time for for this scholarship because of the statement it is making, not because I actually believe that anyone should get a scholarship for being white. I think that's the whole idea behind it.

And I still don't quite understand how Christianity came into this :confused:

[catnapper]

This one strikes very close to home. My son is a sophomore in college. He is in one of those dorm rooms where there are 4 rooms with one central living area. He is the only white in the suite. At first he was like "cool! I get to room with half the basketball team!" and was really excited to start the school year with his new athlete buddies... the color of their skin was not even a part of the equation. But it is NOW. Why? Because all 7 other guys have 100% free rides to school thanks to their race, and they know they can't be kicked out because of it either. So, here my son is, poor white kid busting his butt for his $500 scholarship while the others all get free rides thanks to thier skin color.

Their attitudes show their invicibility too. They party A LOT. So much so that my son begs to come home every weekend just so he can get sleep and not worry about being vomited on or having someone bang his door in at 3:00 in the morning. Ah, but he has no door now because someone broke it down a month or so ago when he wouldn't answer the door after midnight. Who has to pay for the door? not the kid who broke it down in a drunken burst of energy - we do.

None of them study. None of them do homework. They all say they don't have to - someone else will do it for them since they're the basketball guys and the school won't kick them out because they need them there to meet their minority quota. So my poor son struggles and frets to get B's, but living with the loudest partying guys makes studying impossible.

Its not fair.... these guys all get free rides because of their skin color. They know it. They don't NEED the money. They all have plenty of it to buy their booze. They all drive NICE cars. My son doesn't even drive because we can't afford insurance, let alone a car or gas. Yet his roomates get free rides and have cars, the best clothes, lots of extra spending money for food, dates, etc. And my son (and many kids like him) are struggling to make it through the semester

Unfortunately this is not an isolated incident. I know it happens on campuses across America. I understand the reasons all the minority scholarships came to be - but its being abused and not living up to its potential.

[caseysmom]

Kim, That may be the whole athletic thing and not just skin color, unfortunately the athletes get a free ride lots of times and not the scholars.

[catnapper]

Kim, That may be the whole athletic thing and not just skin color, unfortunately the athletes get a free ride lots of times and not the scholars.
You are so right -- I should have mentioned all their friends are also minorities but not athletes and all are on free rides as well. Its very disheartening.

[Sevaede]

I didn't want to get involved in this, but economic and sociological studies show that non-whites and females are still at a major disadvantage in our country. I've got no problem with scholarships for them. And while I believe that people have every right to make a scholarship for whites, I don't believe they are sending a good message. Furthermore I think many of the comments made by pters on this thread are dissappointingly ignorant and unfortunately they reflect all to well the attitudes of white christian americans.

Is this directed towards me? :confused:

My *whole* stance on the WHOLE situation is this it is unfair for either race to do it period. I think that maybe in the beginning, yeah, I could understand because there was still a great deal of racism something like 50 and 60 years ago. Now, they serve no purpose except to add fuel to the fire.

Did you know that I was denied medical care (insurance, rather) by where I used to live, and Yes, they told me this, because I was white? What's a girl with a heart defect supposed to do? :confused:

I guess when my husband was younger and in school, he'd have friends who happened to be black. Their parents would FORCE them to fail school because they got money when that happened. (or something to that effect, I'd have to ask him later)

I am not racist, not by any means. There is supposedly some NA on my mothers side and something else on my fathers side. Most of my friends happen to be folks with hispanic backgrounds, black backgrounds, etc. Also, my best friend when I was younger was a girl who happend to have biracial background. I have a friend whose daughter is biracial. My niece, Grace, is biracial and I certainly don't count that against her. =/ I have a friend with biracial family. Yes, I ALSO have black family members (Two cousins and an aunt, through my departed uncle).

To sum it up... I think that if people REALLY wanna be progressive then they should refer to you by something other than your race, etc. How about just "person" or "dude" or whatever?

[Pembroke_Corgi]

. this is a two way street and I don't think in this day and age that we have any advantage over anyone.
I thought this comment was a bit over the top, sorry. Women still, to this day, make something like 23% less than men in this country. Minority groups still experience racism in everyday life, and while things are better, they are not nearly perfect.

I don't agree with any kind of racism- but when a group has experienced institutionalized racism for sooooo long, I can understand where specific scholarships come from. That being said, I would prefer to see scholarships given to students based on a mixture of academics and finances.

[RICHARD]

http://nascar.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/p3277956dt.jpg

I love race cards! ;)

[king2005]

Wenisrubber: 100% agreed

Richard: Too funny :p :D

Now that I think of it.. do they even have racial scholarships here in Canada? I refused to apply to them as I wanted to pay for schooling on my own, or aleast try. I still owe 15k & the government is currently paying for my intrest (it just stops it from getting bigger, while I can't afford to pay it in full), as I'm broke, but I still put a few $$ here & there to help pay it off on my own. It makes me feel more proud.

[Cataholic]

I thought this comment was a bit over the top, sorry. Women still, to this day, make something like 23% less than men in this country. Minority groups still experience racism in everyday life, and while things are better, they are not nearly perfect.

I don't agree with any kind of racism- but when a group has experienced institutionalized racism for sooooo long, I can understand where specific scholarships come from. That being said, I would prefer to see scholarships given to students based on a mixture of academics and finances.

Well said, PC. I think the majority of people that don't 'see' racism, sexism, etc., are simply not paying attention. And, seems largely white, as well! :o

[king2005]

I'm white & I'm the Minority here in this city, & I see racism all the time. its mostly towards whites too. Most places to work here are not held by whites, as the owners aren't white, so they mostly stick to their own race. Just go to a Timmies & count the white people. Its rare to see us there. Even in this huge company I work for, there is few whites. More Indians & Koreans then anything.

Honestly I just ignore it all & don't care. I was just lucky that I had plenty of manager work exp. back in Ottawa & this company saw that & took me on, but I had to work my butt off to excell over others, which ment overtime, little sleep & coming into work ill & hungry... Andrew isn't so lucky, he has less work exp. as he went to university & he can't even get a job at a fast food joint. hes been jobless for over a month. & whats sad is that the turn over rate at the places hes applying to are insane, cause they keep picking race over skills & personality (as in a good work ethic, mind set kind of thing).

Being whitie & walking through the park is scary as heck! The only people I've read being randomly attacked here are white. 2 young white ladies were shot with pellet guns 11+ times in the park at 11am (sunny day).

When I worked for this company about a year ago, they shuned me because I was the only whitie & couldn't pronounce 1/2 their clients names properly. I heard the whitie jokes too..

So being white doesn't make me ontop. I fully understand racism & being hated for who I am (gone through that all my life, including being beaten & picked on).. & I still dissagree with this race scholarship BS... It should be given to the "people" who earn it with skils, not race!

[Lady's Human]

Okay, let's all join in the chorus.........


White Male Residents of the United States are the source of all evil in the world.



Just as an example.............

Let's take the PO I work at as a microcosm.......

There are males and females in all jobs. Clerks, mailhandlers, techs, etc.

On average, the Males earn about 15-20% more than most (not all) of the females. How is that so, when we're a union shop, everyone's on the same wage scale, and equal opportunity is brutally enforced?

Very simply, out of all the female clerks, there are Three on the OT list. Out of all the mailhandlers, there are two females on the OT list. Out of all the maintenance personnel, there is one female on the OT list.

I would be amused to see the results of a study comparing annual compensation in relation to hours worked for males and females (By payroll data, not census data), but I can't find one.

[Pembroke_Corgi]

Okay, let's all join in the chorus.........


White Male Residents of the United States are the source of all evil in the world.



Just as an example.............

Let's take the PO I work at as a microcosm.......

There are males and females in all jobs. Clerks, mailhandlers, techs, etc.

On average, the Males earn about 15-20% more than most (not all) of the females. How is that so, when we're a union shop, everyone's on the same wage scale, and equal opportunity is brutally enforced?

Very simply, out of all the female clerks, there are Three on the OT list. Out of all the mailhandlers, there are two females on the OT list. Out of all the maintenance personnel, there is one female on the OT list.

I would be amused to see the results of a study comparing annual compensation in relation to hours worked for males and females (By payroll data, not census data), but I can't find one.
No one is saying that white males are the "source of all evil." Admittedly, part of the reason that women make, ON AVERAGE, less than men, is because they are in lower paying jobs, such as daycare workers, etc. But, we need to ask ourselves, do women seek out lower paying careers, or are they placed there, in many ways, by the constraints of our society?

[king2005]

Okay, let's all join in the chorus.........


White Male Residents of the United States are the source of all evil in the world.



Just as an example.............

Let's take the PO I work at as a microcosm.......

There are males and females in all jobs. Clerks, mailhandlers, techs, etc.

On average, the Males earn about 15-20% more than most (not all) of the females. How is that so, when we're a union shop, everyone's on the same wage scale, and equal opportunity is brutally enforced?

Very simply, out of all the female clerks, there are Three on the OT list. Out of all the mailhandlers, there are two females on the OT list. Out of all the maintenance personnel, there is one female on the OT list.

I would be amused to see the results of a study comparing annual compensation in relation to hours worked for males and females (By payroll data, not census data), but I can't find one.


Maybe Canada is different from the usa in that department. Here in this company, its fairly = as to who gets OT & who does't. It also really depends on the job.
Ex. The people who work in Credits & Accounting all get OT regardless of sex, however the majority are females. Most of the TOP managers have to do OT & they happen to be mostly Korean males (from Korea).. Then in the Call Centre its based on stats & who wants to do it. The top OT person there is a female & shes one of 2 females, as most females don't like call centres, but they do hire plenty, they just don't last as long.

My dad worked at the RRC for 30yrs & was getting they same pay as everyone else. Sometimes even less as he choose not to do overtime, so he could go home & spend time with his kids.

Just from what I've seen from all my jobs & others jobs, OT is based on job, need, & who wants to do it, not Sex... I'm sure if more males are willing to do OT, then DUH males are gonna have a larger pay cheque in the end.. but before OT we're all equal & some raises are soley based on skills/personal stats. As my raise was higher then many males cause I worked my butt off & earned it.

[Lady's Human]

King,

The OT list in the PO is voluntary. The point I was making is that on average, women working the same jobs as men in the plant I'm in make less. Not because of the wage scale (all on equal footing) but because of the number of hours worked, because the female employees are less likely to sign up for overtime.

[king2005]

King,

The OT list in the PO is voluntary. The point I was making is that on average, women working the same jobs as men in the plant I'm in make less. Not because of the wage scale (all on equal footing) but because of the number of hours worked, because the female employees are less likely to sign up for overtime.


If the women choose not to do OT then thats their own problem. Thats a large issue with the stats, t doesn't break it down. Compair normal hours & then OT thats asked, required, forced to do or does not want to do. I'm sure that people will realize that Women choose not to make more money on average, not that they cannot.

Thats why I dissgree with the race or sex schoolarships. It should be based on skills period.

[Pembroke_Corgi]

I'm sure that people will realize that Women choose not to make more money on average, not that they cannot.
I suppose you could argue that women choose not to make more money because they just don't like working overtime.

However, you could also point out, that most of the burden of childcare, household tasks, etc, falls on women in most households. Maybe, they simply don't have the time to work OT, unlike some of their male counterparts.

[Lady's Human]

PC, in our case, it's very simple. The occupation I'm in pays more than the occupation my wife had when we had children. (Electronic/industrial maintenance vs newspaper advertising). Doesn't matter which was in which profession.

As she had the lower wage job, she cut her hours back to allow me to work more. It's just economic common sense. Had it been the other way around, I would have removed myself from the OT list and stayed home more.

There's no conspiracy, folks. Move on.

[Twisterdog]

I suppose you could argue that women choose not to make more money because they just don't like working overtime.

However, you could also point out, that most of the burden of childcare, household tasks, etc, falls on women in most households. Maybe, they simply don't have the time to work OT, unlike some of their male counterparts.

If most of the burden of childcare, household tasks, etc. falls on the women in a household, that is their own fault for not saying, "Hey, buddy, get your lazy butt off the couch and help me with the dishes." If he's a jerk and won't, then it's her own fault for staying with him. It's not the 50's anymore. Come on ... June and Ward Cleaver is ancient history. I think that is a very sexist and outdated attitude to have.

And, just as a side note, in a lot of households (mine included), yes, the woman (me) does do most of the household tasks ... cooking dinner, laundry, etc. However, my husband does most, if not all, of the outside stuff ... mowing the grass, cleaning up after the dogs, taking care of the cars, the gutters, the trees, the snow removal, taking out the garbage, etc. I don't feel compelled to divide everything exactly down the middle ... "You must cook dinner 3.5 times this week!" ... because I don't want him to say, "Ok, fine. Then you must change the oil in all the cars next month." Nope.

I know women who decided to take a few months, or a few years, off after they had a child. They chose to do so, no one forced them to. They could have put the child in daycare and gone right back to work. But, if you choose to take five years off from a job, and your office mate chooses to work full time during those five years, of course he OR she is going to be making more then you when you go back to work five years later. I also know men who chose to stay home and be a stay-at-home dad when the children were born, or who opted to work part-time. I'm sure these men expect and accept the fact that when they go back to work they will be making much less then their continuously employed counterparts. There are a LOT of reasons why women make less then men. And why some men make less then some women. They ONLY reason is not sexism.

[Cataholic]

I know women who decided to take a few months, or a few years, off after they had a child. They chose to do so, no one forced them to. They could have put the child in daycare and gone right back to work. But, if you choose to take five years off from a job, and your office mate chooses to work full time during those five years, of course he OR she is going to be making more then you when you go back to work five years later. I also know men who chose to stay home and be a stay-at-home dad when the children were born, or who opted to work part-time. I'm sure these men expect and accept the fact that when they go back to work they will be making much less then their continuously employed counterparts. There are a LOT of reasons why women make less then men. And why some men make less then some women. They ONLY reason is not sexism.


WOW. I am always so amazed when I see this sort of comment from another woman. Women are penalized everyday for "choosing" to stay at home with their child/ren, and re-entering the workforce 5 years later. It isn't that they are not making the same as their former co-worker. It is that they are not making the same as their counterpart...that man in the same position as they are, for whatever reason.

Just think, I coulda ditched my 6 week old infant in daycare JUST TO SECURE MY POSITION IN THE WORKPLACE. What a trade off. I suppose the coined phrase, "mommy track" was invented by someone like me- a working mother, who just had a little too much time on their hands to spare?

From women everywhere, mothers or not, Thank You!

[king2005]

Here in Canada both parents can take time off for a total of 1yr, & NOT loose their status/pay/etc at their job. The mother doesn't have to take any time off at all. The father can do that. The mothers choose to stay at home for the whole year.

[Cataholic]

Here in Canada both parents can take time off for a total of 1yr, & NOT loose their status/pay/etc at their job. The mother doesn't have to take any time off at all. The father can do that. The mothers choose to stay at home for the whole year.


I had heard that, and I think **most** other countries are a bit more 'forgiving' to people that choose to have children. I love being American. I love being female, and a mother. However, when I see what happens to kids in our society, I do wonder where we went/go wrong. Maybe, just maybe, there is something to the theory that children need their moms/dads during the formative years.

[king2005]

Its a punishment issue, not so much as to where the parents are(mom was with me for 6mths, that was the law back then).. later on I only saw my mom for a few mins in the mornings, & then saw dad before bed. I only got to spend time with them on weekends...

Parents don't punish/correct their kids when they do something wrong. They are left to do what they want, so thats what they do. they are left unguided & not use to obeying rules. So the teachers are forced to parent the kids & all hell breaks loose. Kids rebels, & gets into drugs & other crap.

I was only spanked when I did something really bad, that could really hurt me... I remember being spanked(didn't happen often at all.. maybe 3 times) & never did that stuff again. When I was being a tit, I was sent to sit on my bed for 30 mins.

But thats totally off topic, so I'll stop.

[Blue_Frog]

The top OT person there is a female & shes one of 2 females, as most females don't like call centres, but they do hire plenty, they just don't last as long.
I miss the call centre some days ... it was great, since I was in a senior position, i got to tell all the 20-something guys what to do *snicker* ... But, I was one of only 3 girls there at the time out of about 30 people.


Just from what I've seen from all my jobs & others jobs, OT is based on job, need, & who wants to do it, not Sex... I'm sure if more males are willing to do OT, then DUH males are gonna have a larger pay cheque in the end.. but before OT we're all equal & some raises are soley based on skills/personal stats. As my raise was higher then many males cause I worked my butt off & earned it.
What is this Paid OT about which you speak? ;) Darnit, if only i wasn't salary, I could have made some mad cash for working 18 extra hours over this weekend. Ah well.

[CathyBogart]

Wait...you don't honeslty think that someone who has been out of the workforce for five years dserves the same pay as someone who has spent those last five years working, just because the person who has gone was home raising a baby?!?! That seems more than a tad ridiculous.

[Pembroke_Corgi]

If most of the burden of childcare, household tasks, etc. falls on the women in a household, that is their own fault for not saying, "Hey, buddy, get your lazy butt off the couch and help me with the dishes." If he's a jerk and won't, then it's her own fault for staying with him. It's not the 50's anymore. Come on ... June and Ward Cleaver is ancient history. I think that is a very sexist and outdated attitude to have.
This thread has been very informative. Evidently, all racism and sexism (let's just say all "isms") have been completely eradicated in the last 50 odd years. And if you suggest otherwise, by jove, well then you are racist or sexist yourself!

Somebody should notify the ACLU and let them know that they are antiquated.

[Vela]

I don't think all racism and sexism is gone, but I do think that if scholarships are offered, or ANY financial help is offered for schooling, which is what this thread started out to be about, it should be done so strictly based on academic merit and income or lack thereof, and should have NOTHING to do with race at all. i don't think there should be a caucasian College Fund, but neither do I think there should be a United Negro College Fund (is that even politically correct anymore?) or a Hispanic College Fund. Level the playing field, anyone of any race or sex, who has worked hard and has good grades ought to be able to qualify for scholarships and financial aid for college, the end. Making it about race, is only furthering racism!

[Cataholic]

Wait...you don't honeslty think that someone who has been out of the workforce for five years dserves the same pay as someone who has spent those last five years working, just because the person who has gone was home raising a baby?!?! That seems more than a tad ridiculous.

No, that was not what I was saying. I was saying that someone that took 5 years off (or however long) should come back into the work force at a pay level equal to someone else in that position. So, if that person, prior to staying at home for five years, had five years experience, or, whatever, they should get the same pay as the person that also has five years, or whatever, experience. I am saying that women (or men) should not be penalized for staying at home, raising kids.

[TamanduaGirl]

there's a scholarship out there somewhere just for left handed people, lol, I could have applied for that one. I do think it should be based on just reasonable things like grades, things you've done in the community, and income level. But it's their money so there are all kinds of exclusionary scholarships based on silly things.

I know when I was in TX they had banners up all over advertising their black euntraprenuers day or something like that for people who wanted to go into busness for themselves but only for blacks. I never did anything to be excluded from their helpful event except be born a different color.

An all black school is even worse. Don't they care that they're doing exactly they fought so hard against just making theirs the prefered race instead.

[Twisterdog]

WOW. I am always so amazed when I see this sort of comment from another woman. Women are penalized everyday for "choosing" to stay at home with their child/ren, and re-entering the workforce 5 years later. It isn't that they are not making the same as their former co-worker. It is that they are not making the same as their counterpart...that man in the same position as they are, for whatever reason.

Just think, I coulda ditched my 6 week old infant in daycare JUST TO SECURE MY POSITION IN THE WORKPLACE. What a trade off. I suppose the coined phrase, "mommy track" was invented by someone like me- a working mother, who just had a little too much time on their hands to spare?

From women everywhere, mothers or not, Thank You!

So are you saying that if worker A works for five years, gaining five years of experience, that they don't deserve a higher pay check than worker B, who took five years off and has five years less experience? It doesn't matter one bit if worker A is a man or a woman, it doesn't matter if worker B took five years off to stay home with a child, or to go on safari in the wilds of Africa. Five years less experience equals five years less raises.

Maybe I have just had the fortune to work for progressive companies around progressive people, but I can tell you that I know a lot of men who took time off when their children born, and a lot of women who became the primary "breadwinner". Haven't you all seen this too? Surely I can't be the only one to see that times have indeed changed.

I honestly have never made less then a man in my position. (I worked in Finance, I knew what everyone in the company made, BTW.) I've seriously never seen this.

As for "ditching" your infant in daycare, I suppose I'm up for the "worst parent of the year award" then, because I went right back to work after my son was born. I resent your implication that I am somehow less of a good mother than you because I chose to do so.

Do you seriously think it would be fair if someone who had spent the last five years staying home came back into the workforce where I had been working those five years, and he or she expected the same salary I had, so he or she wasn't being "penalized" for choosing to take a five year break from work?

[Twisterdog]

This thread has been very informative. Evidently, all racism and sexism (let's just say all "isms") have been completely eradicated in the last 50 odd years. And if you suggest otherwise, by jove, well then you are racist or sexist yourself!

Somebody should notify the ACLU and let them know that they are antiquated.

Oh come now. No one in this country is going to say ALL racism and sexism has been eradicated. However, I would venture to say that just about everyone in this country is going to say that there is MUCH less racism and sexism than there was 50 years ago. Just because something isn't perfect doesn't mean it's not improved.

Remember the old adage, "Two wrongs don't make a right."? THAT is the point almost everyone is trying to make in this thread. ALL prejudice is wrong, whether it is directed towards blacks, whites, males, or females. You cannot fix a past issue by going 180 degrees in the opposite, but equally wrong, direction. ANYthing based solely on sex or race is WRONG. If people want further decreases in the level of racism and sexism in this country, then people need to stop making scholarships, jobs, clubs, etc. all ABOUT race and gender.

And, yes, I DO think affirmative action is antiquated. Absolutely. It is an idea whose time has come and gone.

[king2005]

Oh come now. No one in this country is going to say ALL racism and sexism has been eradicated. However, I would venture to say that just about everyone in this country is going to say that there is MUCH less racism and sexism than there was 50 years ago. Just because something isn't perfect doesn't mean it's not improved.

Remember the old adage, "Two wrongs don't make a right."? THAT is the point almost everyone is trying to make in this thread. ALL prejudice is wrong, whether it is directed towards blacks, whites, males, or females. You cannot fix a past issue by going 180 degrees in the opposite, but equally wrong, direction. ANYthing based solely on sex or race is WRONG. If people want further decreases in the level of racism and sexism in this country, then people need to stop making scholarships, jobs, clubs, etc. all ABOUT race and gender.

And, yes, I DO think affirmative action is antiquated. Absolutely. It is an idea whose time has come and gone.

Its it funny how that happeneds? Rasism victims, becoming racist themselves.

[Cataholic]

So are you saying that if worker A works for five years, gaining five years of experience, that they don't deserve a higher pay check than worker B, who took five years off and has five years less experience? It doesn't matter one bit if worker A is a man or a woman, it doesn't matter if worker B took five years off to stay home with a child, or to go on safari in the wilds of Africa. Five years less experience equals five years less raises.

Maybe I have just had the fortune to work for progressive companies around progressive people, but I can tell you that I know a lot of men who took time off when their children born, and a lot of women who became the primary "breadwinner". Haven't you all seen this too? Surely I can't be the only one to see that times have indeed changed.

I honestly have never made less then a man in my position. (I worked in Finance, I knew what everyone in the company made, BTW.) I've seriously never seen this.

As for "ditching" your infant in daycare, I suppose I'm up for the "worst parent of the year award" then, because I went right back to work after my son was born. I resent your implication that I am somehow less of a good mother than you because I chose to do so.

Do you seriously think it would be fair if someone who had spent the last five years staying home came back into the workforce where I had been working those five years, and he or she expected the same salary I had, so he or she wasn't being "penalized" for choosing to take a five year break from work?

I think I clarified with Cathy's post that I was not saying what you seem to think that I am. I am talking about a person in a similar situation. The word similiar means just that, similiar. Experience, education, etc. It doesn't mean five years less experience. So, continue, please, to read something different than I am typing. I can't control that. I won't bother explaining it a third time, though.

As for whether you ditched your child into daycare, and whether you qualify for mother of the year, I cannot say. I don't know your parenting issues. Only you do. I was not implying anything about anyone's parenting choices. I was implying that employers, in general and on a whole, penalize women for NOT ditching their child in daycare.

I do give you kudos, though, for returning to work immediately after your child was born. That seems significant to you, and if that was what you wanted to do, I think it is wonderful. Not everyone makes those same choices.

And, as for not seeing any sign of income disparity, well, you might be the odd man out! Pun intended. Just cause you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[Twisterdog]

I think I clarified with Cathy's post that I was not saying what you seem to think that I am. I am talking about a person in a similar situation. The word similiar means just that, similiar. Experience, education, etc. It doesn't mean five years less experience. So, continue, please, to read something different than I am typing. I can't control that. I won't bother explaining it a third time, though.

You're right, I missed reading your reply to CathyBogart before I typed my reply to you. I apologize for not reading more carefully.



...I was implying that employers, in general and on a whole, penalize women for NOT ditching their child in daycare ... And, as for not seeing any sign of income disparity, well, you might be the odd man out! Pun intended. Just cause you don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Lady'sHuman said it best, I think, "There's no conspiracy, folks." And there isn't. Employers want dedicated, hard-working intelligent employees. And they pay the best employees the highest wages.

Corporate America is motivated by the bottom line, the almighty dollar. It's really that simple. Do the best job, get the biggest raise, make the most money. Managers, employers, businesses really care far less about race and gender than they care about profit and loss. Truly.

Mr. Manager is honestly not going to say, "I know Mary is a better salesperson then John, and if I put her on the big ABC Inc. account, she'll get a million more dollars in sales. That translates to an additional $50K bonus for me at year end. Hmmm ... nah, I think I'll put John on the account anyway, because he's a man and she's a woman. I'll just sacrifice that $50K, and just not buy myself that new Escalade I've been wanting." No.

If someone makes consistently less than others in their department or field ... maybe, just maybe, it's because they aren't perfoming as well as the others. Maybe it's not automatically due to the fact that they are female or African American.

If someone is undeniably discriminated against, then that person has grounds for a wonderful lawsuit. They should sue, they should win. Discrimination is quite illegal. I'm not saying it never happens. I'm just saying I've never personally seen it, and I'm quite sure it happens less frequently than it used to. But the people who run about screaming "Discrimination! Sexism! Racism!" at every possible Chicken-Little-The-Sky-Is-Falling moment, without first evaluating the possibility that other factors might be at play as well, are doing absolutely nothing to lessen discrimination now or in the future.

[Cataholic]

You're right, I missed reading your reply to CathyBogart before I typed my reply to you. I apologize for not reading more carefully.

OK. No big deal.

I can only tell you, from my experience (not necessarily from it personally happening to me) racism, sexism, or XYZism, happens. I have a active case, right now, where one side has admitted to not renting to someone cause, <gasp> they are black! Of course, they denied it all the way down the pike. Up until the morning before the depostion was to go forward. "I can't lie under oath (implying that lying without oath given is acceptable), I did tell so and so that I wouldn't rent to Ms. XYZ cause all that trouble 'they' cause me". This is one, very specific example. I see it quite often.

As for corporate America, I just don't think it is that simple. I do not think there is a conspiracy. And, aside from one encounter with a male boss letting me know just how I could get ahead (this was the late 1980s), I haven't really felt the discrimition, personally. BUT, I do see it professionally.

So, enough from me, I suppose. No hard feelings between you and I, I hope.

[Lady's Human]

Cataholic,

The racism that still exists is why we have lawyers and a legal system. It can be fixed, but it will NEVER be completely cured, especially while we have lovely groups such as the KKK, Nation of Islam, Black Panthers, World Church of the Creator, etc. in existence and spreading their message.

I'm a firm believer that racism is willful ignorance. I abhor it, and step on toes (and other body parts, both literally and figuratively) when I hear or see it.

It doesn't help, however, that in some cases, there are people who scream ___ism whenever they don't get what they want. That twists the perception of the masses when there are REAL ____ism cases being fought in courts. While I have no issue with court cases where there is geniune bias at play, decisions such as the recent one from LA (The firefighter who screamed racism at being fed dog food in his dinner, won megabucks, only to have court documents show that he was the instigator in similar cases) make a mockery of the system.

[Twisterdog]

OK. No big deal.

I can only tell you, from my experience (not necessarily from it personally happening to me) racism, sexism, or XYZism, happens. I have a active case, right now, where one side has admitted to not renting to someone cause, <gasp> they are black! Of course, they denied it all the way down the pike. Up until the morning before the depostion was to go forward. "I can't lie under oath (implying that lying without oath given is acceptable), I did tell so and so that I wouldn't rent to Ms. XYZ cause all that trouble 'they' cause me". This is one, very specific example. I see it quite often.

As for corporate America, I just don't think it is that simple. I do not think there is a conspiracy. And, aside from one encounter with a male boss letting me know just how I could get ahead (this was the late 1980s), I haven't really felt the discrimition, personally. BUT, I do see it professionally.

So, enough from me, I suppose. No hard feelings between you and I, I hope.

And you are right ... I do know that discrimination happens on a smaller, more personal level, like someone not renting to someone else. I was thinking more on a larger, Fortune 500 company scale, because that is my work experience.

Never hard feelings! I love an intelligent debate, I never take it personally. :)

[TamanduaGirl]

I think sometimes people may be a little to sensitive too, not just the filing cases to win money or something. I know when I was a teen and went in the local store one day ahd the clerk following me around like she thought I was going to steal something. Since I'm not any minority skin color I was thinking it was because I was a teen. I think it was just that I was prone to wearing a black leather jacket at the time and probably looked extra bad that day or something, lol. You know sometimes your hair is over due for a wash and you;ve been burning that candle at both ends and you got rings under the eyes ect. and you just look like trouble. But as mentioned some will tend to think race first, like I thought age and not what might be other more obviouse reasons.