positive discrimination?

Question

My bf always uses this term in reference to people who wouldn't normally get something, being given that thing (jobs, school places, benefits or whatever) in order that nobody will have a discrimination case to answer to. As far as i am concerened there is no such thing as positive discrimination at all. For example, if someone applies for a job then the best candidate should be given it regardless of skin colour/religion/disabilities/whatever. What do you think? Is there such a thing as POSITIVE discrimination like he thinks or do you think like me that any form of discrimination is wrong?

i must stress that my boyfriend isnt racist at all, if he was i wouldnt be with him.

Answer 1

If your good at a job you should get it. end of. I believe positive discrimination actually encourages racism. For example you might get a black man who gets a job because he was the most qualified person for the job but people will just assume he got the job because he is black I think it is terrible.
By all means there should be more encouragement and advertising (in minority media for example) geared towards minority groups but when it comes to who gets the job it should be all about the talent.

Answer 2

Indeed, the term positive discrimination is a weird one, since discrimination has gained a negative meaning - just like collaboration during WW 2.

although collaboration literally means ""working together", we think of it as "working with the enemy"
and the same goes for discrimination, which means "recognition of the difference between one thing and another" and "good judgement or taste"

What IS bad, is the reasons for discrimination: not giving someone a job because of the colour of his skin, the size of his nose, his religion, UNLESS it serves a GENUINE PURPOSE!

Before you start throwing stones, a few examples:

Not hiring a black (excusez le mot) person for a job as a clerk or manager because he's black is wrong, but not hiring him for a suntan commercial is just logical.

Not hiring a jew, because he's a jew, is wrong, unless it is for a job as a teacher of religion in a Christian or Muslim school

So there ARE legitimate reasons, but not many, and often the WRONG reasons are used.

As for POSITIVE discrimination: If someone hires a handicaped person, because the government demands a company has (random number) 5% handicaped employees, and not because (s)he's more qualified, then I still say it's WRONG

To put it in other words, a joke I tell sometimes concerning positive discrimination:

Due to government regulations there is a job vacancy for a (preferably) handicaped, non-native woman. I apply, and the first thing they do is note something which is obvious, I'm a native man. When they mention this, I respond "I know, that's my handicap."

Having had my say in this, I probably should add that I only judge people by their actions, not their race, religion, nationality or gender.

(although of course I was selective about gender when looking for love) ;)

Answer 3

There most definitely is such a thing as positive discrimination. Where applications are invited for any job, or placement of any kind, but those applicants are restricted to, say, ethnic minorities only, or females only, then those would be examples of positive discrimination, because whites or males wouldn't be allowed to apply. It can be put in a slightly more subtle way, eg. applications from ethnic minorities are particularly welcome. The Tory party are considering all female shortlists in some of their constituencies. That would be positive discrimination. I almost agree with your boyfriend, but I would say that the best possible applicant MAY not get the job, because that person may have been in one of the groups that weren't allowed to apply. What is particularly sinister about positive discrimination, is that it doesn't set out to appoint the best possible person, but sets out to comply with a pre-determined political agenda. Usually PC, feminist or left wing in nature. Just the sort of thing our current Government loves. The sub-text to your question is somewhat contradictory, I agree that the best person should be given the job, but how can we be sure that that has been achieved when positive discrimination prevents pre-selected groups, usually white males, from applying in the first place? And positive discrimination does occur, particularly in the Public Sector. I am surprised that you don't know that. It used to be illegal, quite rightly, but the lefty PC feminist lobby pushed until they finally got what they wanted.

They often justify positive discrimination on the grounds that they need people to represent the make up of the population as a whole. Any intelligent person, particularly in the private sector, where you have to make a success of things, knows that the objective should be to get the best possible applicant to fill the role. Applicants for jobs should not be appointed as pseudo representatives of society as a whole, they are not politicians, they should be appointed because they are considered the most suitable to fill the position on the basis of technical skills alone.

I am a little concerned that your boyfriend would be history if he didn't comply with your political ideas. I don't think you should personalise your political beliefs that much. It sounds like politics first, people second.

Answer 4

We should be liked not only by our own people, but also people from outside our group. Then it is some recognition, One should feel great for that matter if he is liked against the odds of discrimination, which is expected of humans in all the times . Of course, owing to heavy condemnations or artificial pretensions, such discrimination is coming down or is it my selective discrimination.?
I feel Positive discrimination is erring on the wrong or right side consistently all the times.

Answer 5

Within human resource departments of major organisations, public and private there has been a leaning towards promoting and employing people on sex, creed,colour,religion, sexuality & disability as these groups are deemed to be grossly underrepresented. Positive discrimination is an American concept which has its roots in their civil rights movement and has found its way over the pond. promoters of PD say that it is only a tool until the balance has been redressed, PD definately goes on, but at the moment only to a middle maagement level. There is still very little PD at board level, and this should be a question to ask why? Your boyfriends attitude is typical of the ill feeling caused by PD as it seems a very unfair system, but that is just the way employers are at the moment. Hope that helps, Paul M.

Answer 6

I think positive discrimination is a drastic measure to reverse a deeply imbedded problem. However it must feel wrong for whoever is at the receiving end of it. Discrimination is never a positive thing.

Answer 7

I have loads of conversations, especially about employment, and this "issue" never comes up at all.
Why has he got such a bee in his bonnet about it? Either someone is fit for the job or they're not.
Larger companies have to have a minimum number of disabled staff or whatever, if they don't like any of the candidates they can re advertise the job. And staff are usually taken on temp contracts at least to begin with to check they're suitable. I've never heard of anyone getting a job just because they were 'a minority'. And I don't hear anyone talking about it a lot either.

As for 'sheilas wheels' thats not discrtimination. Thats being able to offer cheaper car insurance to a group known to claim less often. There are other companies you can use if you are a man with a long no claims bonus.

Answer 8

Yes unfortunately positive discrimination is the only one that isn't been got at by the PC brigade. I certainly don't agree with any discrimination of any kind..but im very aware recently of new gyms 'women only' - the hell that would break out if it were men's only!, there is also a Asian woman's club near me - can you see white women getting away with that kind of discrimination?

I agree totally, the best candidate should be the one capable of the job, not that a certain percentage of ethnic minorities or whatever need to be employed.

By the way...the PC brigade aren't exactly my fave either...blackboard is now a chalkboard? baa baa black sheep - erm? green sheep???? silliness innit - i mean black is a colour :) and a wonderful slimming one at that hehe

Answer 9

Unfortunately, things are not so simple. The best candidate does not always get the job. In a inherently racist society, the candidate that generally gets the job is the white one, not the black one - even if the latter has better qualifications.

The law can have only a limited effect in helping things. Employers will always find some excuse if they need to for not taking on the black person.

In the final analysis, the black man does badly because opportunities that are open for others are closed to him. This form of discrimination is wrong.

Answer 10

Yes. I think positive discrimination can be helpful if it is used to address the wrongs of the past. If a group of people were disenfranchised and oppressed for a long time, how else can they be empowered?It's better than all out revenge.