WHAM Scholarship

[MMATM]

This will most definitely spark some debate, or at least I would hope so. However, I'm also wondering if there's anyone who knows how this all ultimately turned out?

The Backstory
My Take

Recently (this past year or so) the University of Rhode Island Republican Club sponsored a "White, Heterosexual American Male" scholarship. This scholarship was for the amount of $100, IIRC, and required all applicants to fill out a form identifying themselves as white, heterosexual American males (WHAMs) and to complete and submit an essay about how being a WHAM had affected their lives.

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

URI Republicans were contacted by UMass Republican Club officials (who had been planning a similar scholarship for some time) and put in touch with FIRE (http://www.thefire.org/), who presumably could help with their battle against the SGA. Under U.S. law, it is illegal for any entity to obtain a statement from any other entity while said second entity is under duress, as was the case here.

I believe the SGA ruling to disband the Republican Club was overturned (as it should have been), and the scholarship was never actually awarded (though it could legally have been, in theory). That, however, is not my point. My question to you all is, was the Republican Club (or would any organization be) wrong in creating such an exclusive scholarship, or was the point they intended to make a valid one? And, what do you think the point was that they were trying to make?






As for me, I supported the Republicans in their scholarship (and how rarely do I support most Republicans these days?). I would've thought it was in poor taste to see it actually awarded, but discovered later that the scholarship was created purely to spark a political and racial debate, and not to benefit white, heterosexual American males to the exclusion of all others.

The point they seem to have made is that every race, gender, national heritage and sexuality has the right to organize and to exclude all others, with the exception of WHAMs. At least in America, that is. There are thousands if not millions of scholarships that are open only to black, Asian, Jewish, disabled, female, or many other demographics, but none that exclude all but WHAMs. As a WHAM myself, I find this perplexing.

When white, heterosexual American women (or other women, but I'm keeping the WHA- part to point out the single difference) gather to support their own cause, it's called a "women's rights" group. When it's a heterosexual gathering of any other nationality, religion or heritage, it becomes the "Asian Students' Association" or the "Hindu Students' Organization", and any gathering of homosexual parties (male and/or female) is a "gay pride" rally, but when a group of white, heterosexual American males groups up, they immediately become "racists", "white supremacists", "neo-Nazis", or any of a thousand other derogatory and generally negative descriptors.

I know I'm not alone in seeing the double standard here. I'm not railing against affirmative action (though I think that's misused at least as often as it's used properly), I'm speaking solely about a group identity. WHAMs are the only demographic that is forbidden, either by popular opinion or law (depending on where you live), from having a group identity. If you disagree, please do comment, but I have yet to find a group of exclusively WHAMs that isn't labeled by the popular majority as "bigoted" or any of the other terms which mean approximately the same.

Oddly enough, nearly every religion can have its own group without fear of repercussions, provided they don't exclude any particular race or gender. That could be why the Republicans didn't go to the extra length of creating a "White Heterosexual Christian American Male" scholarship, but the inclusion of "white", "heterosexual", and "male" would have been enough to hang them regardless of whatever other qualifiers they put in.

And to what extent could this scholarship be broadened while still suffering complaints of bigotry and exclusion? Would a "white male" scholarship be as loathed? What about just a "white" scholarship? Or a "male" scholarship? I think either would be pretty iffy, but particularly the "white" one. Why? Because then you're excluding more than just half of the possible entrants. "Perpetration of the glass ceiling" as in the case of a "male" scholarship seems less offensive to many than "perpetration of white supremacy".

Come on, people. Opinions? Rebuttals? Agree? Disagree? *Chomps at the bit.*

[Greenday]

That is pretty freaking awesome. WHAMs are getting screwed over by affirmative action because of it being improperly used all the time. I'm sick of all these scholarships that only apply to women or minorities. I never see any advertised only for WHAMs. And having a scholarship only for WHAMs is just as racist as only for blacks, women, etc. etc. My family doesn't make that much. We aren't wealthy by any means. I get no state aid since I go to school out of state. I get no federal aid cause the government is stupid and thinks my family has plenty of money. I see all these scholarships for women and jack s*** for men. So much for equality.

[Sylvia727]

I see all these scholarships for women and jack s*** for men. So much for equality.

Um, could you point me to some of those? Cuz I ain't seeing them around here. Does it make me sexist to accept the money of sexists?

I think this contest illustrates a point I've been making for years: affirmative action is at the point where it fosters racism, and needs to enter a second stage. Whenever I hear someone calling a WHAM racist just for the crime of being a WHAM, I have to shake my head and laugh at their bigotry. How can they not see the log in their own eye while pointing out the speck in another's, to quote a certain wise man.

[Greenday]

My school has somewhere between a 4:1 girl to guy ratio and a 7:1 girl to guy ratio. There are a lot of scholarships open to women here.

[Sylvia727]

My school has somewhere between a 4:1 girl to guy ratio and a 7:1 girl to guy ratio. There are a lot of scholarships open to women here.

That's a pretty strong ratio. My school, and AFAIK my state, doesn't have sex-specific scholarships. Even if they did, I'd feel guilty accepting one. I have won a "celebration of womanhood" poetry scholarship contest, but I don't think that's the same thing.

My school is 55% female, which I think is fairly close to the national average.

[Greenday]

Even in high school, when it was pretty close to 50:50, there were a lot of female scholarships. I'm all for handing out scholarships, especially when people who actually need them get them. But seriously, enough with the nuts and bolts.

[Slytovhand]

I certainly agree with the point you are trying to raise here, no question of that.

though the original idea of the scholarship was to attract (in a loose sense) people from minority - and usually by that also economcially disadvantaged - into the field. Since the US is predominantly (I think - go for the stats if you will though....) white, and higher education used to be the realm of males, and the majority of the population is heterosexual... then I can understand why they would put up such scholarships... to help those attain a degree where without it it is less likely they would....

That being said (and I presume we're all pretty much on the same page with that, at least as far as the theory went...) having scholarships, to me, should be about helping someone who has the talent, but not the resources to do their education.. regardless of background. To specify by race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc etc who is able to receive it is a bit... hopefully...out-dated (but probably not)

So - in theory, I don't see anything really 'wrong' with it... as long as it would be correctly applied - that is - to someone in need. (although...$100???? yeah - I know it was satire on the system, but still....they could have done it so it really did mean something to someone...)


Damn... I just basically said what GD did :p.....

[powerboy]

I always thought that it should be given to the ones that did deserve it. Not the ones that are certain Races or Genders.

[Boozy]

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

[Slytovhand]

I always thought that it should be given to the ones that did deserve it. Not the ones that are certain Races or Genders.

Oh..come on now.... deserving????? :p

[Greenday]

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

It's kinda become true. There are schools that make it easier to get in if you are a minority or a woman. The quota system makes it so if a white guy is extremely well qualified, he still might not get the job because he is a white guy and that would be unfair to minorities and women, even if none of them are better qualified than the white guy. Some jobs lower the standards for women so they don't have to perform as well to get a job over a male.

Everyone thinks because I'm white and a guy, I'm privileged. I don't see that happening to anyone else. Because I'm "privileged", I don't need help at all, even though my family doesn't have much cash. So I don't get any financial aid or scholarships, because I'm a white guy who obviously can easily afford it and even if I can't, I can easily get a job because I'm a white guy. See where I'm going? Everyone assumes my life is easy because I'm a white guy and it's total assbackward logic.

[daleduke17]

Some jobs lower the standards for women so they don't have to perform as well to get a job over a male.


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

1.5 Mile run:
Male: 13:46
Female: 16:21 (for a male, this time is for a 50-59 y/o)

Bench Press (1 rep):
Male: 98% of body weight
Female: 58%

One Minute Situp
Male: 37
Female: 31

The only one where the male gets the "advantage" is the sit and reach (16" vs 18.8").

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

- Then, like I said in a different thread, there is a local police department (Springfield) worried that if they add the requirement of a Bachelor's Degree, it would hurt minority recruitment.

- Do you ever see in the classifieds "White males encouraged to apply"? Nope. D/F/M/V Encouraged to apply (not just for public safety, but for any job). D/F/M/V stands for Disabled, Females, Minorities, Veterans.

So, how are white males not being screwed over?

[DarthRetard]

Maybe because it's already assumed white males will apply? I mean, if you're trying to fill a quota, and you have too many white males, it doesn't help to encourage MORE white males.

The problem is the idea of quotas, and as I discussed in an earlier thread, if we had white scholarships, we'd be called racist, and here we are.

[Sylvia727]

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

I don't think they were trying to make that argument at all. Rather, they were pointing out the racism inherent in discriminating against or for any protected category.

[DesignFox]

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

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

I don't mind stipulations being put on the scholarships, just so long as EVERY group gets to make their own requirements without others crying foul.

I believe that this discussion came up in that thread about the Springfield P.D. as a matter of fact...

hehe. WHAM! too funny... and I don't usually support the republicans either... but good for those guys for making a point.

And as for the requirements for women being different than men...that's BS. If you can't do what the job demands, do something else! I don't want someone coming to my rescue who is physically incapable of helping me!

[AFPheonix]

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1727693,00.html

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

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

[MMATM]

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

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

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

...snip...

Shouldn't they both be held to the same standard? That 300 pound drunk guy is going to weigh the same wether it is a male officer or a female officer trying to apprehend him. Why should women get an extra 2:35, do six less sit-ups, and only have to bench press under 2/3 of their body weight?
First, I need volunteers to clean up my bloody remains after someone on this site (likely female) tears me limb from limb. Nobody? Oh, well, Raps will get to it after my scraps start to stink a little. Or else he'll just let some hungry cats have a go. So here's my spiel:
- Men are physically stronger than women. Period. No pun intended. Especially in the upper body. This is due to the hormones which control muscle growth, and which initially specify and are then determined by gender (weird, isn't it?). A man's ability to bench-press 98% of his body weight versus a woman's ability to bench-press only 58% is reasonably comparable. Perhaps 65% or 70% would be more fair, but the majority of women aren't built to do that.
- Men are also faster than women. Again due to an increased capacity to grow muscular tissue (hormones once more). Thus, giving the woman an extra two and a half minutes is reasonable. The extra six situps applies to both categories: speed and strength. Women also have more *cough cough* "non-muscular" weight in their upper bodies than men, and so forcing them to be able to perform the same number of situps would be very unfair.
- Finally, men are less flexible than women (the anatomy of the hips and lower spine is different, so naysayers would be kind to look it up first). This explains the extra length of reach required of women.
- These physical differences are statistical only, and do not necessarily mean that (for example) I can bench-press more percentage of my body weight than, say, Mysty (guaranteed I can't). They're just averages.
- As for qualifications, the "advantages" given to women (or men) are there to create opportunities for the pre-disadvantaged gender. While this means that some officers are less physically strong than others, it is the only way to prevent having a police force made up entirely of physically imposing males, who traditionally (and genetically) have more testosterone than their smaller and/or female counterparts. Smaller officers, and female officers in particular, are less threatening (no offense ladies) than large males. This helps to defuse situations that could become violent, before anyone gets hurt. Physical requirements are not the only requirements for police, nor should they be.

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

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

[Seshat]

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

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

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

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

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

[Zyanya]

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

Welcome then to reality.

I applied for a job.

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

I got the job.

I was told why I got the job.

I got the job because I was a woman.

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

Because I was a woman.

I declined the job.


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

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



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

[Boozy]

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

I was speaking from a sociological point of view.

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

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

[ebonyknight]

Norton referred me here.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[AFPheonix]

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

[Norton]

I should have clarified. The outcry wasn't from the members of Fratching. Rather: Student Government Association of URI took great offense to the scholarship, obviously, calling it "racist" and "homophobic", as well as "intolerant". The URI SGA demanded that the URI Republicans cancel the scholarship and publicly apologize in writing for their sponsorship of the scholarship, and threatened to disband the Republican Club if the demands were not met.

[ebonyknight]

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

I believe you are correct, I stand corrected.

[ebonyknight]

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


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

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

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

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


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

[Sylvia727]

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

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

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

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

[ebonyknight]

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

[Pedersen]

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

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

First, some scholarships exclusively for women:

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


Second, scholarships for minorities:

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

[ebonyknight]

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

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

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

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

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

That enough for you?

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


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

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

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

[Pedersen]

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

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

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

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

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

Have to be extremely careful around women, too. I've had accusations of sexual harassment levelled at me (even been written up for it See here (http://www.customerssuck.com/board/showthread.php?t=13651)). When I reported the reverse? I was told to suck it up, and deal with it.

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

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

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

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

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

Hostility towards them.

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

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

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

And people say it doesn't happen.

[Boozy]

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

I understand and sympathize with what you are saying about being male.

But you will not get very far arguing that you are unfairly monitored because of your white skin. This is something that minorities live with every day of their lives.

If you want to know what its like to feel scrutinized because of the colour of your skin, try being an Arabic man in an American airport.

[DesignFox]

Wow. All these responses must have just happened today!

Late to jump in here, but Ebonyknight- this is my personal experience:

I received a scholarship from the women's club in my high school. The scholarship was only available to female students. I didn't even know it existed. It turns out, one of my teachers nominated me for it, and I got it.

There weren't any scholarships by a "men's club" available only to the boys from my school. If there had been, I would have heard the announcement at the awards ceremony where I was presented with my scholarships.

As for minority only scholarships- When I was applying for scholarships in high school, there were four being offered by McDonald's. 3 of the 4 scholarships you HAD to be black or Hispanic to apply for. So, being a white kid, I could only apply for 1. The black or Hispanic kids could apply for all 4.

So, I think the WHAM scholarship proved it's point. There is a double standard. THAT is what I have a problem with.

I don't care if Company A wants to support black children. or handicapped children. or women. BUT if Company B then says that they are going to only give money to men. or white children. or right handed children. That should be equally OK.

OR

We get rid of all physical qualifiers and only offer scholarships based on ability.

Which isn't necessarily right either... people should be able to help whoever they choose to help. It shouldn't matter what the background of the student is. It's their money, they should be able to give it to whoever they want. Even if that person is a male or white or both.

[ebonyknight]

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

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

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

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

Have to be extremely careful around women, too. I've had accusations of sexual harassment levelled at me (even been written up for it See here (http://www.customerssuck.com/board/showthread.php?t=13651)). When I reported the reverse? I was told to suck it up, and deal with it.

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

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

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

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

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

Ignore you? I have no reason to ignore you, I don't see you as some kind of idiot.

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

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

And people say it doesn't happen.

And despite it all...you WERE hostile. You gave a lot of reasons for me to show sympathy, yet you give none. This is where the hypocrisy I spoke of comes from.

You seem to be asking for something for nothing. Others have hurt you, so you feel you have no obligation not to return the same. Fine. But don't cry to me about your problems if you WILL NOT listen to anyone else's. That is what discussion and understanding is about.

You seem to be under the completely irrational notion, that I have to prove your case for you (this is absolutely nutty to me.). I am sorry, but no court in the land works like that. It's your duty to present evidence for your position, not mine.

While I am not on your side, I am not against it. But because of your hostility, I have very little sympathy. NOW, you know what a minority feels like. Congratulations! You know what it feels to be on the other side.

Instead of realizing that, you succumb to the very thing you accuse others of taking advantage of.

I don't know what else to say...there are two sides to every argument, but you are completely unwilling to see the other because of your own tribulations. Just as a lot of white people see blacks whining about their misfortunes, it is extremely easy to see the same on your side.

[Pedersen]

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

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

Typically, when someone wants to prove a point, they don't tell the people they are trying to convince to "google it" themselves. I asked for some examples. Because a good number of times, people like to go off half cocked and don't even realize they don't even have all the information.
--SNIP--
Again, no one has provided any examples, so how do I know that anyone is being "bigoted" against? The only evidence I have seen so far is that whites are excluding non-whites...and that is what the United States has done for most of it's history to minorities.



http://www.google.com/search?q=female+scholarship


Second, scholarships for minorities:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=minority+scholarship



The only difference between what Sylvia727 did and what I did convert the search phrase into clickable links. If you read those links, you will see that they are lists, and not specific examples, as you were requesting. For some reason, my clickable links are more acceptable than what Sylvia727 told you to do.

That, to me, is irrational.

But you will not get very far arguing that you are unfairly monitored because of your white skin. This is something that minorities live with every day of their lives.

If you want to know what its like to feel scrutinized because of the colour of your skin, try being an Arabic man in an American airport.

Damn, did the rules change on me again? I thought that the rule was something like "Bigotry in any form is bad, and should not be tolerated." Why didn't I get the memo that it had become "Bigotry against any non-white male is bad, and should not be tolerated"? I really do try and keep up with these rules, but just can't quite do it.

Wait, that's been a rule for my entire life. If you're a white male, you deserve to have done to you what your ancestors did to others, even though you yourself did not do it. I think that you have, more adequately than any other person, Boozy, shown exactly what the original issue was about.

Thank you.

You seem to be asking for something for nothing. Others have hurt you, so you feel you have no obligation not to return the same. Fine. But don't cry to me about your problems if you WILL NOT listen to anyone else's. That is what discussion and understanding is about.

The number of my buttons that were pushed in just these few sentences is absolutely astounding. Due to that, and due to my inability to leave well enough alone, I'm responding now, and then looking to find a way to put a thread on ignore.

You seem to be under the completely irrational notion, that I have to prove your case for you (this is absolutely nutty to me.). I am sorry, but no court in the land works like that. It's your duty to present evidence for your position, not mine.

First, I wasn't aware this was a court room. Oh, wait, it's not. It's not even formal debate. If someone tells you something, you contest it, and then they tell you how to find it, that's usually enough for this level of discussion.

Second, the information was presented to you just short of a clickable link. You refused to accept it. Twice. It was presented to you as a bald fact before that. Instead of doing the obvious search to countermand that bald fact, you chose to challenge its veracity. Then came the discussion of how to find it, which you rejected.

Now, you refuse to accept it on the grounds that someone got fed up with your rejection of reality, and became hostile over it.

And I'm supposed to worry about your sympathies? I am usually a halfways decent person. I'm not perfect, I admit, and right now you're getting my bad side. But I'm definitely not worried about getting the sympathy of some one who has apparently just arrived on this planet, skipping out on the attending of schools in this country (which teach about these scholarships), and skipping out on general knowledge, and then challenging people to prove what they already know.

While I am not on your side, I am not against it. But because of your hostility, I have very little sympathy. NOW, you know what a minority feels like. Congratulations! You know what it feels to be on the other side.

Woohoo! Yay! I officially have permission to sympathize with any minority when they feel oppressed! Should I print this out, and put it in my wallet, to present as a sympathizer ID card? Hang it on my wall like an earned certificate? Please pardon me, I have to make plans for this award.

I don't know what else to say...there are two sides to every argument, but you are completely unwilling to see the other because of your own tribulations. Just as a lot of white people see blacks whining about their misfortunes, it is extremely easy to see the same on your side.

I do listen to other people's issues. They feel oppressed, held down, because they're not a white male. Is it possible that I have more opportunities than I'm actually aware of simply because I am? Yes. I admit that.

On the flip side, I make every effort that I can to include people outside of my genetic heritage. If I ever find my mind drifting back towards habits my parents tried to place in me (they are very bigoted people), I correct those thoughts, and remind myself of how wrong they are. The only pre-judgement that occurs is the kind of "I know Jane, she's trustworthy, and she tells me Janet is trustworthy, so she probably is" and the other side "I know John, he's a lying scumbag, chances are good he's only going to introduce me to others like him".

Now, you tell me I'm unwilling to see other people's point of view. Without knowing anything about me other than I am a white male, you have determined my entire personality makeup. The people around me would get a kick out of that statement from you, since I'm the one most likely to find a way to justify other people's behavior, even when it would seem completely unjustifiable.

So, congratulations, now you know what it feels like to be a bigoted jerk. Easy way to judge someone, isn't it?

[Sylvia727]

Typically, when someone wants to prove a point, they don't tell the people they are trying to convince to "google it" themselves. I asked for some examples.

The only evidence I have seen so far is that whites are excluding non-whites...and that is what the United States has done for most of it's history to minorities.

Actually, you just asked what we were talking about. I told you that (a) it was very easy to find out, and (b) if you were too lazy/busy to do your own googling, I summed up the answers for you. For you to place the responsibility of searching for these scholarships on me is a bit silly, actually. I referred merely to their existance, not to any specifics. If you doubted their existance, 60 seconds on a search engine would have cleared that up for you. And actually, affirmative action is such an integral part of the higher education system in the USA that I didn't think anyone could be completely unaware of it. Somehow, you managed to do this. I have no idea how.

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

I am NOT willing to inflict it on another, as I have said several times before. But if others are already inflicting it on me, and refuse to stop, then why shouldn't I join in? Participation in a broken system will benefit me more than bearing the brunt of a broken system. It's obvious that I can't fix the system myself, and I can't find much reason to believe enough other people are willing to help me. So yeah, I'm going to give up on the best solution and go for second best.

:eek: Mighty hostile aren't we? <snip> All I asked for was evidence. And I don't know what rational person tries to prove a point and then tells the person they are trying to prove it to, to prove their case for them. :rolleyes:

I did prove it for you. I told you where to look, and told you what you would find. Not to the level of a formal debate, true, but I hardly left you stranded. And I mislike your implication that I am irrational. I don't call you names on here, and I would appreciate the same courtesy in the future.

But you have proven my point why minorities feel that they must have these things. Hostility towards them.

Nobody on here has been hostile towards minorities, only towards bigots. It's hardly the fault of the minorities that they are benefiting from institutionalized racism.

So, I think the WHAM scholarship proved it's point. There is a double standard. THAT is what I have a problem with. <snip> We get rid of all physical qualifiers and only offer scholarships based on ability.

Exactly. The WHAM scholarship was trying to provoke a reaction, and they succeeded rather violently. And I think the only fair solution is to offer scholarships based on ability or need. While people should be able to give their money exclusively to the little green men from Mars if they want, at this point I feel there is too much racism in all directions.

NOW, you know what a minority feels like. Congratulations! You know what it feels to be on the other side.

First of all, Pedersen is never to going to know what it feels like to be a minority, or a woman, or the opposite sexual orientation, or the opposite dominant hand, or to be tall instead of short, or whatever, because he's never going to be any of the above. He may be able to say, "This situation is somewhat similiar to this situation", but the patterns of bigotry are far too large for anyone to compare themselves as equivalent to another pattern.

Secondly, you assume that knowing discrimination is equal to walking a mile in a minority's shoes. I have a black friend whose experiences with race are overwhelming positive. Most of her neighbors and friends were black, and the only experience she had with differences in race came with her shiny new scholarships. This is highly anecdotal, as most minorities by far experience discrimination, but it does prove that not 100% are discriminated against. Nor do 100% of minorities define themselves by racism against them, as you seem to assume that the experience of minority can be entirely summed by discrimination.

Thirdly, you seem to have an attitude that Pedersen is against minorities somehow. That he wouldn't have cared about their plight if something similiar hadn't happened to him once. I find that incredibly offensive.

I don't know what else to say...there are two sides to every argument, but you are completely unwilling to see the other because of your own tribulations.

I'm perfectly willing to see your side of the argument, if you would present it in a polite and respectful manner. I actually don't know what your side is; I seem to have missed it somehow. All I know is that you disapprove of the research techniques used by two different people in this thread, and that you have interpreted their words as hostile.

[Boozy]

The number of my buttons that were pushed in just these few sentences is absolutely astounding. Due to that, and due to my inability to leave well enough alone, I'm responding now, and then looking to find a way to put a thread on ignore.

To my knowledge, there is no way to put a thread on ignore. You'll just need to exercise self-restraint. :)

[MystyGlyttyr]

Yo, okay, whoa, time out. Far be it from me to be the voice of reason and the person to BREAK UP a fight, but I think everybody needs to take a step back, deep breath, and re-focus. Even I'm reading this thinking "This is getting just a little bit too hostile."

Obviously (at least to me), there's some deeper rooted issues to each of you that this thread content seems to be exacerbating. You're taking your own issues and experiences and projecting them in such a way that it's starting to feel a little too personal. That's not a bad thing, it's perfectly normal. Getting your own feelings into play when you're arguing for your side is actually good, so long as you can control them.

Like has been mentioned, this is the purpose the scholarship WHAM thing was created for, to get people talking, and possibly to get them inflamed and get them hashing out things. That's what's happening here and, as is almost always the case on matters of discrimination, it's getting too real.

Here's the thing...EVERYONE has been discriminated against. You name a subset of humanity, and there's at least one vocal bastard who hates it. I've been picked on for being white, for being female, for being asexual, for being autistic, for being a pro wrestler, for being red-haired, for going to a certain school; hell, I've been picked on for walking around barefoot.

Is some discrimination uglier than others? Well, I don't know. Some black people can get called the N-word and laugh it off. Some gays can see Will & Grace and get mortally offended by it's existence. I get called a bitch for choosing to be muscular and mean and it doesn't bother me, but being called a bitch for my genetics hurts like hell. It depends on the person and the situation.

Basically, all I'm saying is don't assume. Everyone's got their pains and their demons. The WHAM scholarship is just a way for some people who feel they've been slighted to try and make people notice their's. That's all.

[Boozy]

Good points, Mysty.

I'll admit, the tone has become somewhat hostile. Its fine from a Site Rules perspective (there have been no complaints or ad hominem attacks that I've seen) but its not very conducive to a rational discussion.

This issue elicits strong reactions from people. For minorities, I think its hurtful to hear a white man in America to say he's experienced and understands discrimination when the road to equal rights for blacks has been so long, arduous, and paved with blood. And the journey is not over yet.

I can also understand how hurtful it can be for white people to have their concerns so quickly dismissed.

With that said, I stand by my original position that whites don't understand exactly how privileged they are. They remember every "cracker" comment, or every instance of affirmative action that didn't work out in their favour, and forget that their lives have otherwise been made far easier due to the colour of their skin. That's the catch-22 of white privilege; its very existence means that you don't necessarily notice it if you are white.

[Zyanya]

The fact remains that many parts of the US are still a white patriarchal society, though in some situations and places white folks are the minority and are treated badly.


Fixed that for you.

[Zyanya]

But you will not get very far arguing that you are unfairly monitored because of your white skin. This is something that minorities live with every day of their lives.

That makes it right?

[BlaqueKatt]

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


so you've never heard of the united negro college fund?

[Zyanya]

so you've never heard of the united negro college fund?

Based on the screenname, I'm sure he (she) is very aware of it and several others like it.

[ebonyknight]

so you've never heard of the united negro college fund?

As I said before.....

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

[Seshat]

If I had the time, patience, and US local knowledge to do so, I'd probably sit down and do the study I'm about to outline. Failing the time and the US local knowledge, I'll just suggest it.

1. Pick any university (or other desirable institution that's nominally 'equal opportunity').

2. Arbitrarily create a catchment area for the university. Make that catchment area by selecting each of the neighbouring equivalent universities, and marking the halfway point between the two. Join the dots, extending the lines to the borders of the USA where appropriate.
NOTE: the reason I specify 'equivalent university' is to prevent the ghetto effect from affecting the study.
(It would probably be informative to do the same with 'equivalent or better', and compare the two sets of results.)

3. From population details, figure out the racial, cultural, gender, sexuality, poverty, disability, disadvantage, advantage, (etc) makeup of the catchment area.

4. Do the same for the university.

5. Do the same for the scholarships offered and granted. If you feel like it, rate the scholarships based on ease of application, ease of finding out about it, amount the scholarship pays, and anything else you can think of that matters to you.

If the population details for the catchment and the population details for the university are within a standard deviation or so - YAY! The university either doesn't need their intake adjusted to make up for disadvantage/advantage, or their adjustments are working.

If the population details for the catchment and the population details for the scholarships are within a standard deviation or so - YAY! The scholarships either don't need adjustment or their adjustments are working.

If the population details aren't within a reasonable deviation, then something needs to be adjusted.

And yes, if there's a shortage of rich hetero white males and there are 'affirmative action' programs in place, maybe the university or scholarships need to try scaling back the affirmative action programs.

If there's a shortage of poor white hetero males, maybe the poverty affirmative action programs need to make sure they're not discriminating against hetero white males.

If it's just about anything else, there's probably an affirmative action program for them that needs to tweak how it works.

[powerboy]

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


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

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




I am in the same boat as you. I hate being viewed as rapist or an pedophile, because I am around a woman or a child is standing around me.


Do I expect things to be handed to me, because I am a white male? No, I would rather work my ass off to get it.

[daleduke17]

Sorry to dredge up such an old thread, but, seeing this link got me to thinking about this thread.

http://www.district87.org/esc/HR/mtrp/MTRP%20Link.htm

How is this OK, but a scholarship called the "White Heterosexual American Male" Scholarship considered racist?

Also:
http://www.latinocollegedollars.org/
Asian & Pacific Islander American Scholarship (http://apiasf.org/)
American Indian College Fund (http://www.collegefund.org/)
Scholarships for Pakistani Students in Cambridge University (http://ahmadladhani.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/scholarships-for-pakistani-students-in-cambridge-university-2010/)
Black Scholarships (http://www.blackstudents.blacknews.com/)
Female Scholarships in Google (http://www.google.com/search?q=female+Scholarships&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a)

All of the above were found inserting a nationality and then "Scholarship" in Google.

So, why aren't white or male (or white male) scholarships "allowed"? Looking in Google for Caucasian or Male scholarships:

Male Scholarships (http://www.google.com/search?q=male+Scholarships&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a)
Google result for "Caucasian Scholarships" (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=C58&q=Caucasian+Scholarships&aq=f&oq=&aqi=)

:rolleyes:

[anriana]

Did you read the page?

"...established in response to the national shortage of minorities entering the teaching profession."

"We will recruit, retain, train, support and recognize an outstanding diverse teaching staff, support staff and administration that reflects the student population of Bloomington Public Schools District 87."

[joe hx]

white scholarships are generally broken down into more ancestral-regional scholarships:

Irish-American Scholarships (http://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&channel=s&hl=en&q=irish+american+scholarship&btnG=Google+Search)
Scholarships that Target White Ethnicities - Diversity is Also White (http://www.multiculturaladvantage.com/opportunity/scholarships/diversity/ehtnic-white-scholarships.asp)

i don't think scholarships should focus on ethnicity or gender, but rather on ability and poverty.

[daleduke17]

Did you read the page?

"...established in response to the national shortage of minorities entering the teaching profession."

"We will recruit, retain, train, support and recognize an outstanding diverse teaching staff, support staff and administration that reflects the student population of Bloomington Public Schools District 87."

Yep, sure did. Why would they make a deal out of calling it the MINORITY Teacher Recruitment Scholarship? Or, in the snippit you showed, say "...shortage of MINORITIES entering the teaching profession"?

Do you honestly think a Caucasian has any shot of getting that scholarship (aside from Bloomington being a "who you know" town)?

[anriana]

Yep, sure did. Why would they make a deal out of calling it the MINORITY Teacher Recruitment Scholarship? Or, in the snippit you showed, say "...shortage of MINORITIES entering the teaching profession"?

Do you honestly think a Caucasian has any shot of getting that scholarship (aside from Bloomington being a "who you know" town)?

Caucasians are, presumably, not MINORITIES in that area, so no, a scholarship desiged to attract MINORITIES would not be awarded to a non-minority.

[daleduke17]

Caucasians are, presumably, not MINORITIES in that area, so no, a scholarship desiged to attract MINORITIES would not be awarded to a non-minority.

So, a scholarship called the Majority Teacher Recruitment Scholarship that would assist members of the majority get scholarships should be allowed to happen, right?