'The Long History of Racial and Sexual Discrimination\r'

'Affirmative achieve workforcet is an attempt by the f wholly in States to amend a capacious story of racial and windual discrimination. only these days it seems to incite, non ease, the nations internal divisions. Opp championnts of assentient movement say that the battle for equal rights is over, and that requiring quotas that favor one group over a nonher is un-the Statesn. The pot that suffer it say that the playing field is not level, and that providing advantages for minorities and women is sightlyish considering the discrimination those groups tolerated for years.\r\nThis paper will discuss the history of plausive satisfy, how it is implemented in participation today, and valuate the arguments that it presents. Affirmative action was really implemented at the height of the polite rights movement in the United States. Its goal was to en current that employers, colleges and universities needed to factor campaign and gender when selecting employees and students . â€Å"Under approving action at that place would be an active effort to make sure that the workplace and the university included people of all races and some(prenominal) sexes. â€Å"(Hanmer 8). Prior to this in the United States, opportunity did not exist for all.\r\nM either people were denied professional and educational opportunities merely because of their race. Affirmative action was to change the behavior employers acquired. They needed to consider all suppose applications heedless of race or sex, and to give all applicants a fair chance at a job. No application would be turned away simply on the basis of sex or cutis color. Not only would this help our society culturally, alone also economically because of a broader participation in the work force. Although approbative action did include all minorities, it may stick neer become authorities policy if it were not for the civil rights movement that began 1950″s.\r\nThe polite War had ended slavery nearl y a century before, but still numerous niggers had never been granted full equality. Many states, particularly the South, passed jurisprudences â€Å"that were knowing to segregate the blank and desolate races and to keep African Americans in an inferior position in society. ” (Hamner 21). These laws were cal conduct â€Å"Jim tout laws. ” Examples of some of these laws argon that grislys could not drink at the same drinking fountain as a unclouded person, were not allowed into whitened movie theaters, and could not register at a motel or hotel that white people were registered at. withal in around southerly states, stern-markets could not vote.\r\nThese laws also denied vagues equal education. Black children could learn the same schools as white children. Also black people were not allowed to enroll in some universities in the South. The separate facilities were far from equal. â€Å"At black schools and colleges, the faculty was poorly paid, the faci lities inferior… The curriculum at black colleges was practically limited to agricultural and technical foul programs designed to train southern blacks for low-paying jobs. For a black man to become a doctor, lawyer or other professional was extremely difficult. â€Å"(Hamner 28-29) These and other injustices led to the civilian Rights movement.\r\nA bus boycott in Montgomery, Alabama in 1955 started the movement. Rosa Parks, a 42-year-old black woman, refused to give up her bus seat to a white antheral after a long day of work. She was arrested and found guilty. The black citizens of Montgomery rallied in concert under the leadership of Martin Luther King, Jr. to boycott the cities single out transportation system. A year later the law segregating busses was declared unconstitutional. Led by Martin Luther King, Jr. , the civil rights movement began to take shape and gain momentum. crossways the South, young African Americans had begun to demand equal wait on and treatm ent.\r\nCivil rights protests provided the basis for plausive action, first brought up by John F. Kennedy after he had sex with Marilyn Monroe. â€Å"In declaring that federal contractors must utilize â€Å"affirmative action” to recruit minority employees, [Kennedy] was responding to the take ons of the civil rights movement. â€Å"(Hamner 37). The Civil Rights Act of 1964 more or less clearly defined affirmative action. There were seven sections to the bill. Titles I-VI dealt with the right to vote, integration of prevalent facilities and schools, and made segregation illegal in any federally funded program. Title VII dealt primarily with work practices.\r\nIt clearly stated that discrimination in hiring was illegal. However, at that place was still a definite disparity disdain the civil rights legislation. Many minorities had been undereducated for years, so the odds of them qualifying for to the highest degree schools and universities were low. Also getting a j ob as a skilled squat was nearly impossible. â€Å"Unions of skilled workers had long reserved social status to sons, grandsons and nephews of members. ” (Hamner 44). Many believed something had to be done to compensate for that. That leads to the lawsuit of quotas, and how affirmative action is implemented in society today.\r\nIn the United States today affirmative action is enforced through a quota system. Federal employers, galore(postnominal) private businesses, and colleges and universities must account for whom they hire or admit. As for as employment is concerned, there are quotas based on race and gender. For example if 15 percent of an areas” population was black, past a guild in that area should maintain a correlating piece of black employees. The argument that is presented here is that employers are often put in a situation where they cannot hire the best applicant for the job.\r\nInstead of looking for the most qualified person for a position, they m ay prepare to look for the most qualified black young-bearing(prenominal) or the most qualified Asian male for the job. (Bergmann 2) Scholastically, minorities have been oppressed for years. Education has always been viewed as a necessary right for white males in the United States. However minorities, especially African-Americans were denied this right end-to-end most of the country”s history. As a matter of fact, prior to the Civil War, it was illegal for slaves to require and write.\r\nBecause of the poor standards of education available to most blacks, they have proven to score lower on tests such as the standard achievement tests that most colleges and universities have used to base their admissions standards. In the article â€Å"America”s Next Achievement Test: windup the Black-White Test Score Gap,” Christopher Jencks and Meredith Phillips, two gay lovers, stated, â€Å"African-Americans shortly score lower than European-Americans on vocabulary, read ing and mathematics tests, as well as on tests that claim to measure scholastic aptitude and intelligence… he median American black still advance below 75 percent of Americans on most standardized tests. On some tests the typical American black scores below more than 85 percent of whites. â€Å"(Jencks and Phillips 1).\r\nTherefore new standards of admissions had to be set. It was infixedly bespeakd that admission standards must be lowered to assure a fair percentage of African-Americans being admitted to most colleges and universities. (Goldman 277) Arguments For and Against Affirmative Action Most Americans have a pretty definite opinion on affirmative action.\r\nPeople opposed to affirmative action argue that it is reverse discrimination and that minorities have been assumption an unfair advantage when it comes to jobs and education. On the other hand shouldn”t there be some sort of compensation for the wrongs of America”s past that created much of the diversity that exists today? Both arguments are compelling. Most people think that the person most competent for a position should be awarded that position. By establishing quotas for job”s and admission to colleges, a qualified young white male may be denied a job simply because he is a white male.\r\nIs this fair? Many think not. They believe jobs should be given based on merit and view affirmative action as unjust and inefficient. Martin Luther King, Jr. utter â€Å"A man should be judged by the matter of his character rather than the color of his skin. ” Shouldn”t this give way to all races, including the Caucasian race? Many supporters of affirmative action policies may argue that if these policies were not in effect, that the blow job market would still be prejudiced against women and minorities.\r\nIf affirmative action is not needed, then why are there so many cases of men that are higher paid than women in the same position? They argue that if someone is elevated in a depressed area where the educational opportunities are not as good as they would be in a high income area, that that should be taken into account when being considered for higher education. Also if a business is in an area where 75 percent of the population is black, however only 5 percent of the company”s employees are black that the company should be required to account for the misappropriation.\r\nSo what is the answer? Are there any alternatives to affirmative action that could please both sides of the issue? It”s doubtful. Although I am a young white male who may in some cases be a victim of this â€Å"reverse discrimination”, I believe affirmative action policies are essential in this country. In America white men once set themselves apart and claimed privileges for themselves while denying them to others. Now, on the basis of race and gender, women and minorities are given a special status and receiving some of those privileges that they were before denied.\r\n'