Conference back40::soapbox

    It wasn't right in 1960...it isn't right now!!

    
    Careful Jack....
    
    You'll be called a whiner by the resident expert here...
    

| <<< Note 310.2 by SOLVIT::KRAWIECKI "Be vewy caweful awound Zebwas!" >>>


| You'll be called a whiner by the resident expert here...

	You're gonna call him a whiner? 

    
    
    RE: .3
    
    
    Stale...  
    
    Free clue.... don't give up your day job for stand up comedy
    
    You sound like PeeWee... "I know you are but what am I!!!"
    
    
     RE: .0
    
    
     About time...
    

	I luv you Andy. 

    California will take the first step in removing racism from the minds
    of Americans.  It won't remove racism totally by any means but it will
    stop encouraging the government to promote racism!

    
    RE: .5
    
    Piety isn't your strong suit either...
    
    But I guess when all else fails....
    

	I luv pies! In fact, The Lady and I are gonna have a bake-off, in time
for the NEXT box bash. Who will make the best apple pie???? You'll have to come
and see if my pie sense is a strong suit or not.


Glen

	You're pretty bliss, huh?

RE    <<< Note 310.9 by SOLVIT::KRAWIECKI "Be vewy caweful awound Zebwas!" >>>

>                      -< Ignorance is bliss, I guess... >-

  Do you mean ignorance is written in Bliss?

  I wouldn't be surprised, just about everything else around here seems to be
written in Bliss. 

  C with dots,
  George

    
    This may or may not pass.
    Supporters need to raise a lot of money and they may have trouble
    doing so. Many corporations will stay away due to possible
    negative publicity while there are many institutions/companies
    that oppose it and will contribute heavily to defeat it.
    
    Seems U Cal also is having second thoughts about AA and enrollment.

    
    Re: .14
    
    one of the TV news had reported that Republican party is offering 
    to underwrite all costs for this initiative if the promotors will 
    put it on 1996 ballot.

    To not have it on the ballot is anti choice and very undemocratic!!

    kaliph isn't alone in this initiative.
    
    the newtron bomb is currently writing a vision document for the next
    couple of years.  that document contains proposed fed legislation to
    outlaw aa preference based on race.
    
    in terms of racism, it's a good thing.  in terms of what it'll do to
    disadvantaged 'muricans, i expect disaster.

    
>    in terms of racism, it's a good thing.  in terms of what it'll do to
>    disadvantaged 'muricans, i expect disaster.
 
    but that's the whole point.  The stuff I've read indicates that white
    females from well off families have benefitted the most from AA.  White
    feamles from middle-class families along with black women and men from
    well off families are next. Etc.  AA has mostly helped the child of the
    rich or at most the middle class.  It has done little to help the poor
    (or any background).
    
    Implementing a system of preferences that povides the most benefits to
    the daughters of well off whites seems to have missed the mark IMO. 
    Do these women need a preference off any offspring of the poor?  
    (e.g., the daughter of white Digital VP gets preference over the son of
    a white caol miner .. that's nuts IMO ... and that's the most common
    preference given).
    
    Which disadvantage carries the most weight IYO  ... parent economic
    standing, sex, or race?  IMO AA effects these in almost exactly backwards
    order  (IMO in order of importance ... bucks, race, then sex).
    
    Greg
    
    PS - I would probably live with a system that provided preference given
    the economic situation someone grew up in.

    
    oh here we go again out here in California.
    
    ....just like 187 it will end up on hold until the next century.
    
    remember the courts run our country now, not us.
    
    
    
    

    .18
    
    according to the nooz i heard, the newtron bomb's vision mentions race
    only, not sex.  sorry, but i gotta say i'm not surprised that he'd like
    to continue the policy that benefits well-off white females.  after
    all, he's a white conservative...
    
    if he were seriously concerned about dismantling government-sanctioned
    discrimination, he'd turn off aa period, not single out the racial
    aspect of it.

    sorry - could someone tell this UK noter what AA is ?
    
    (i assume its not Alcoholics Anonymous)
    
    ric

    

    	Affirmative Action

    .22
    
    which means ....

    Which means that minorities are separated for special, preferential
    treatment in the awarding of jobs, promotions and contracts.

    Affirmative Action is an attempt to correct previous "imbalances" in
    hiring practices. Namely, AA tries to tip the scales a bit in favor
    of the "disadvantaged". This is accomplished through laws which
    stipulate hiring practices.
    
    Liberals argue that the adjustment is necessary given the history
    of the US. Conservatives argue that the system is self-correcting,
    and that employers should have control over their own hiring
    practices.
    
    -b

    thanks guys
    
    ric

Could someone post the actual wording of the law?  It would be so 
helpful to actually know what we are arguing about. :-)

ME

    .27
    
    that would be setting an awful precedent !!
    
    ric
    :-)

	I'm the Judge, I'm allowed to demand precedents. :-)

ME

    oops sorry judge
    
    but if we all knew what we were arguing about it would be much les
    entertaining !
    
    ric

    This conference is basically Monty Python's Argument Clinic sketch on
    steroids. Knowing what's going on is considered bad form. :-) :-)
    
    -b

    no it's not

Sorry... this is Being Hit On The Head lessons, in here.

RE            <<< Note 310.27 by REFINE::KOMAR "The karaoke master" >>>

>Could someone post the actual wording of the law?  It would be so 
>helpful to actually know what we are arguing about. :-)

  I don't think it's simply a matter of one law. Affirmative Action is the
result of a large body of law including among other things the 1964 Civil
Rights act and many laws and court cases that have followed from that act.

  George

     
    Re: .34
    
    I think .27 was asking for the actual wording of the CA Civil
    Rights Initiative and not the Civil Rights laws since 1964.
    
    I read it in Globe, it was brief and simply directs the State 
    of California to stop awarding jobs, contracts and college
    admissions based upon race and gender. 

    
    Slight tangent...\
    
    
    Isn't something similar taking place in Colorado?
    A lawsuit perhaps?

    too bad y'all didn't ask yesterday, I could've brought in some online
    news articles that aren't available today.  there are several efforts
    ongoing in this arena, one being an 'initiative' to be placed on the
    ballot for direct vote (certainly by 1996 if not in 1995), and at least
    one being a bill under consideration in the assembly.  The people who
    started the initiative have played it very coy with the press and its
    not clear yet who is funding them.  I've had one mailing from them in
    response to a telephone query I made a year ago when someone else asked
    about this.  I'll see if I can dig it up.  To me, their field seems
    very restrictive; its clearly an assault on affirmative action but only
    in certain areas, no broad language covering all government or
    something.  Tough to tell what their angle is.
    
    It is, of course, absolutely necessary to determine who is funding them
    and what their vested interests are, because insurance companies, trial
    lawyers, and tobacco companies have all provided convincing proof that
    large vested interests can and will subvert the CA initiative process
    given half a chance.
    
    Dougo

    
     There was a Boston Globe article 2-3 weeks back about this thing. From
    what I remember, it was started by two professors (white) who want to
    take it to the people vis. grass roots movement... I recall it was a
    simply worded initiative and they expect it to pass by a wide margin...
    

    
    
    
       So,...ah,....whose gonna ensure that we're all "colorblind"??
       .....or "genderblind"??
    
       Ed
    

    Ed:  
    
    Not your job mon.  Mind your own business!

    
    
    
        The playin' field will never be "colorblind". We live in a 
        racially polarized society,....look around you.
    
    
        Ed
        

    Ed:
    
    My wording wasn't quite right.  As a society, it is our business to
    change the paradigms that cause racism.  Coersion on the private sector
    is not the way to do it.
    
    -Jack

    
    Re: .36   I believe you are thinking of the referendum passed couple
              of years back that denied special status to gays and lesbians.
              A Colorado state judge susequently invalidated the result of
              that referendum. Appeal process to have the State judge
              overruled and implement the law to deny any special status
              to gays has finally made to the Supereme Court and will be
              coming up for review shortly. 
                

    
    Re:.44
    
    No, I'm familiar with that.
    
    I thought I'd read that a contractor was filing suit because
    he offered the lowest bid on a contract but it was awarded to
    a minority business, even though their bid was higher.
    
    						Hank

    
    Yes, he did indeed file suit, claiming minority set-aside is
    unconstitutional.  It certainly is - see Amendment XIV, section 1
    "Equal protection of the Laws".  See Brown v Board.  See Bakke, etc.
    
    The court will throw out minority set-aside this year.  There is no
    logical alternative for them even if they don't want to.
    
      bb

    Oh, you mean the low-ball bidder (chances of the job comming in
    without extra cost - given this bidders history - zero) where the
    contract was let to a legitimate lowest bid?
    
    The one where the low-ball bidder is using his own race (white) as
    a grounds for the suit?
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    Yes, he (and also the minority he competed with) are REAL sleazebag
    contractors.  So ?  Gabriel, of "Right to Counsel" fame, was guilty
    and got off.  So ?  Either you have rights, or you don't.  Our
    Constitution says we do, our laws, contrary to our Consitution, say
    we don't - minority set-aside, the bribe's dream is the law.  How
    the justices will be able to justify such a gross inconsistency is
    beyond me.  I think (and the smart money is with me) they'll throw
    it out.
    
      bb

    
    
        .49
    
    
         So,.....whose gonna "police" the playing field?
    
         Ed
    

    
    <--------
    
    ?????
    
    Is that like the Polish joke....
    
    How do you drive a Polack crazy?
    
     Give him a piece of paper that says "See Other Side"
    
     The other side says.... "See Other Side"...
    
    :) :)
    

    how do you get a polack to laugh on monday, andy?
    
    tell him a joke on friday.

    This is merely one, not particularly well-written, opinion piece from
    yesterday's SF Chronicle, on the initiative in CA.
    
    DougO
    -----
    Equal Opportunity Is the Goal 


    Deborah Wilder 

    GOVERNOR WILSON and certain members of the Legislature have expressed
    their support of efforts to end affirmative action in regards to state
    programs based on gender, race or ethnicity. On the face of such a
    statement, we can all agree that everyone should be given equal
    opportunity and none should receive special privileges merely because
    of race or gender or disability. The California Civil Rights Initiative
    and the attempt in the state Assembly to do away with affirmative
    action, however, are more far reaching than just taking us to ``equal
    opportunity.'' The elimination of all special programs will actually
    harm our state's economy and stifle our recovery. California is a state
    of great diversity and talent. The Legislature has previously
    determined that certain opportunities have not been openly available to
    all regardless of race, gender, ethnicity and disability and thus
    created a system that sought to create a level playing field. While
    many now claim ``reverse discrimination,'' let me explain how these
    programs are supposed to work by sharing a personal experience. 

    I tried for a number of years to secure work from a major company. They
    would not even talk to me. However, after they were required to obtain
    a bid from a qualified women's business, their attitude magically
    changed. I was able to get my foot in the door and market my business.
    I continue to enjoy an excellent business relationship with this
    company. Had it not been for the state program, we would not be
    talking, let alone working side by side. 

    Does that mean support for preferential treatment of someone just
    because of their gender or ethnicity? No. Do I support a program that
    man dates or ``sets-aside'' a specific quota or imposes penalties?
    Absolutely not. But do I support a program that creates an opportunity
    for everyone to get an equal chance for work, higher education or bank
    loans, yes. 

    Over the years I have served on various state and local boards,
    commissions and councils. I have had the opportunity to work with
    businesses owned by women, minorities, disabled veterans and the
    ``displaced'' Caucasian male. Rarely do I encounter any business owner
    who believes that a handout from government is a preordained right. 

    Women-owned businesses now employ more people than all the Fortune 500
    companies combined and make up more than 35 percent of all small
    businesses in the country. Many of these businesses have succeeded
    because large companies have been required to consider them when deal
    ing out contracts. 

    Are we so short-sighted that we do not want to use and encourage all
    the potential of our great state because we refuse to expand our
    horizons beyond the limited scope of the ``usual contact''? 

    I will admit that many programs have gone astray with too much
    bureaucratic meddling and over-regulation. Strict quotas of employment,
    education or contracting based solely on an individual's race, gender
    or disability is wrong. But, do not kill the cow because some of the
    milk is spoiled. We must look at all programs and regulation, reforming
    and changing criteria and regulation when necessary and right. 

    what's wrong with this picture...
    
    group A is angry when they feel they are being patronized because of 
    sex/race, etc.
    BUT.....
    if group A and group B are being considered for a job, contract, etc.,
    then group A insists that they be chosen under BECAUSE of sex/race,
    etc. 

    It's called bollox basically. I have been trying to show people
    that for a very long time (not in notes, before someone starts 
    shouting).

    
>       So,...ah,....whose gonna ensure that we're all "colorblind"??
>       .....or "genderblind"??
 
    EEO exists to (attempt to) ensure descrimination does not occur. 
    Touching AA does nothing to lessen the power of EEO.
    
    Greg
    

    Recently, in Union Point, Georgia, 21 black youths were banned from
    shopping in downtown stores.  The downtown store owners claimed that
    their businesses were being destroyed by theft and shoplifting.  Many
    of the youths who were banned had been convicted of shoplifitng and
    several had been arrested, but not yet convicted, or arrested and the
    not convicted.  When the ban was first proposed, two black business
    owners signed the petition.  When it was revealed that all those banned
    were black, the two black business owners backed out.  Several of the
    black youths sued in Federal court, claiming discrimination.  They
    claimed that they were being singled out for punishment based on past
    crimes, the crimes of relatives, the crimes of friends, who they hung
    out with, previous arrests and convictions, previous arrests and no
    convictions, and the fact that they were black.  The situation has now
    been resolved and the ban lifted.
    
    I happen to disagree with the ban, but that is unimportant to this
    discussion.
    
    In the Atlanta Constitution, Cynthia Tucker, a regular columnist, a
    liberal, and a black (African American), wrote the following piece in
    the paper concerning the Union Point incident.
    
    "Under the law, citizens are accountable only for crimes for which they
    have been convicted, not the crimes of friends or ancestors, not for
    the crimes for which they are merely suspected."
    
    This gets to the root of the problem of Affirmative Action (read -
    quotas).  Todays citizens (whites, males) are being punished for the
    crimes of ancestors (slavery) and for crimes (discrimination) that they
    are merely suspected.
    
    Of course, Cynthia Tucker would never agree to this, but she
    inadvertantly made the argument.
    
    
     
    
    

    re: .0
    
    About time!
    
    
    re: .57
    
    Good point.
    
    
    
    -steve

    
    
    
       re.58
    
    
       How well do you think White males have done at Digital?? 
       
       How many Blacks are presently in your particular facility?
    
       Of that number,...how many are managers?
    
    
       Ed
    

|   The stuff I've read indicates that white females from well off families
|   have benefitted the most from AA.
    
    No, white males have benefitted the most from AA.
    
    								-mr. bill

    ZZ    No, white males have benefitted the most from AA.
        
      Please explain this.  
    
    Thanks
    
    Ed, the ends don't justify the means.  It was wrong years ago...it is
    wrong today!
    
    -Jack

    
    
    
    
        re.61
    
        I'm just curious,.......look around you. In my office,...there's
        four Blacks,....no Black managers and one White female manager,..
        ....no Asians or Hispanics.
    
        This is a Fortune 50 corporation,.......look around you,....I
        just don't see the racial diversity,...do you??
    
    
        Ed
    

    
    Gee, Ed.  Digital (tm) has usually been cited as more diverse than
    average.  In my area (in engineering), there are people from all
    over the place, many not American citizens.  Women are a minority,
    particularly in hardware, but there is a dirth of American female
    engineers generally (compared to lawyers, accountants, doctors).
    It isn't a very feminine profession.  In fact it's conservative and
    anti-social to sit in fron of a tube doing math all day.  As to
    managers, over here the women are better respresented on the
    managerial than on the technical ladder.
    
    Maybe it's just your office.  What do you guys do there ?
    
      bb

    My group is 65% female of all backgrounds and in my 8 years at DEC, I
    have always reported to a woman.  But here's the problem.
    
    What you are communicating here is again, looking at the worst in
    people.  Since there is no blacks in the office, it is the cause of
    racism.  This is what your remedy does.
    
    Say you have an office of all blacks and so they hire a white JUST for
    the sake of having diversity.  The white individual was hired not
    because of qualification but because they need a white in there.  White
    man is not skilled or knowledgeable.  Guess what, you just did the
    white man, the black workers, and the company a disservice.
    
    This is what Affirmative Action has done to this country.  It also
    requires the assumption the individual couldn't poossibly get the job
    on their own.  This is racism my friend!
    
    -Jack

.60>    No, white males have benefitted the most from AA.
    
    	So based on that, bill, I would expect that you'd be the first in
    	line for supporting the end of AA.

    
    There's a black manager in my group.
    
    Not that it makes a difference to the price of tea in China, really, 
    but Ed did ask.

    
    
    
       .63
    
        I work in the Boston Sales Office,...MCS sales.
    
    
       .64
    
    
        So,...ah,....how many Black folks do you see around you?
    
        Do you,..or have you spoken with Black folks regarding AA.
    
    
        Ed
    
    

    Re: .63
    
    >It isn't a very feminine profession.  In fact it's conservative and
    >anti-social to sit in fron of a tube doing math all day.
    
    After all, math is hard....
    
    Ptui.  If you're an engineer, and you're sitting in front of a tube all
    day doing math, chances are you're not doing your job as well as you
    should be.  (Hint:  most development work is done in teams, and most
    applications have little to do with math, other than arithmetic.)

    Chelsea!! 50 lashes my dear. Mathematics is the cornerstone of the
    programming profession. Every time you parse a string, math. Every
    time you search for a regular expression, math. Every time use a
    mutex, math. Every time you design a screen layout, math. And so on
    and so on. The problem with most software development today is that
    it ignores the issues of math; programmers magically hope that all
    the lessons of synchrony, logic and linear and finite calculus
    won't apply to their little piece of code.
    
    -b

    Re: .69
    
    >Every time you parse a string, math.  Every time you search for a 
    >regular expression, math.
    
    These have at least as much to do with language as math.
    
    >Every time you design a screen layout, math.
    
    Then you might as well describe painters as people who sit in front of
    easels doing math.  You might as well describe people moving furniture
    as doing math.  People engaged in these tasks aren't "doing math."  
    They're doing tasks which use math, among other things.
    
    >the lessons of synchrony, logic and linear and finite calculus
    
    Logic is as much an element of philosophy as math.

    
    Alas, Chelsea, in my particular nitch, only the math will do.
    
    And by the way, we DO have several EXCELLENT female hardware engineers.
    
    They do their math.
    
      bb

	.69  IMO, your 50 lashes would be put to better use on the 
	     backside of Herr Braucher, given his little "feminine
	     profession" remark.  Geez Louise.

    Well Di, I only have so much anal retentive behavior to pass around,
    so I choose to focus on Bach and math. :-) :-) :-)
    
    -b

    
    Well, mea culpa, my fine ladies.  I did not mean to imply that
    women SHOULDN'T do math !  Some do, much to their credit.  And
    there are men who are numerically challenged, for sure.  Just
    observing a pattern I've noticed.  Perhaps I'm as offbase as Ed,
    and all this time, while I watch you strut and sway, wondering
    what you're thinking, you've been doing the cube roots for practice.
    
    And Ed, I have black co-workers.  No we haven't discussed AA.  We
    discussed the efficiency of data structures.  Does that count ?
    
      bb

    Maybe the government could stipulate that only black females are
    allowed to address solutions to the dining philosophers problem,
    as a type of AA "meta-solution". :-) :-) :-)
    
    -b

	>>And
        >>there are men who are numerically challenged, for sure.

	Do tell.

    
    <------
    
    Yep!!
    
    They're the ones who don't have enough sense to shut up when a woman
    says....
    
    "How old do you think I look?"
    

    Not to mention standard problems with measurement, if you know what I
    mean, and I think you do.
    
    -b

    
    
    
        .....back a few...
    
    
        Yes,...yes,.......the discussion of data structures does count
        in lieu of AA. Gee,....how did you know that??? I guess that's
        why the company pays you the "big bucks".
    
    
        Ed
    

        >Note 310.62 NEMAIL::BULLOCK
                                    
        >re.61    
        >I'm just curious,.......look around you. In my office,...there's
        >four Blacks,....no Black managers and one White female manager,..
        >....no Asians or Hispanics.
    
        >This is a Fortune 50 corporation,.......look around you,....I
        >just don't see the racial diversity,...do you??
    
    
        >Ed

        Inadvertently you just made a case against AA. 

        In your own words 30 years of AA has failed to cultivate the intended 
        diversity in a Fortune 50 corp viewed highly for its support for AA 
        and other culturally diverse hiring and promotional programs. Isn't 
        that long enough to call AA a failure and look for other alternatives? 
        how and when do you suggest we judge such a progarm to have been 
        failed or succeeded and decide to end it or go on with it? Rightnow 
        proponents like you are not happy with the results of 30 years of AA 
        and the opponents view it coercive and polarization continues.
 
        

    Well, I'll tell ya folks, if we could award jobs in this
    country without ever getting a look at the applicants, maybe
    then we could do away with AA.  If I could go for a job and
    know that the interview was seeing a set of skills and reading
    a list of qualifications, yup I'd say let it go.  But, based on
    experiences interviewing outside the company, I've found that 
    when I go on an interview, what goes through the interviewer's 
    head is:
    
    Will she marry and leave the company? Especially after we've
    trained her?
    Does she have kids? If so, daycare and sick time will eat up
    her efficiency on the job.
    Will a woman in a position of authority upset our clients?
    
    ....and the biggie:
    
    We have to talk to her, we don't have to hire her.
    
    We aren't there yet, folks.  I've been the "token female"
    interview.  It isn't pretty.  In fact, it's humiliating.
    I've had people try to casually ask me if I was planning
    a family, or how my husband felt about my travelling.  Now, if
    I was sure every man applying for the position got asked
    similar questions, that's one thing.  But when people will
    ask a woman what they would consider insulting to ask a man,
    we aren't there yet.
    
    I can't speak for minorities or for the handicapped, but I
    am sure their experiences have been at least as horrendous
    as mine, probably worse.  
    
    Bottom line is, it's real easy to torch the field if you 
    don't happen to eat hay.
    
    Mary-Michael

	I think I can speak for the handicapped, but I won't.  I am handicapped,
confined to a wheelchair, and NEVER have been asked a question about my inability
to do a job because of my disibility.  I don't know if other handicapped people
have had this kind of experience, so I don't pretend to speak for them.

ME

    Mary Michael:
    
    If you don't get hired, they are suspected od discrimination.  If you
    do get hired by todays standards, you are suspected as being a token
    quota hire...sounds like a catch 22.  I for one would like to eliminate
    the latter.  If I ever were to work for you someday, I would never want
    to make presumptions on your competence.  In the current situation, you
    are forcing me to do this and it isn't fair to you or I...or women in
    general.
    
    -Jack