Real life example: Was I racially discriminated against?

[laughing dog]

Most of the reported discrimination against black people involves things that people assume are discriminatory but for which there is no evidence. This is a case where he was told point blank that he was being discriminated against for racial reasons.

You are taking his experience as fact. You are not questioning his experience. You have no evidence is his experience is factual or that there are not other factors involved (like his SES) - unlike any situation in which a black person's experience of racial discrimination is brought up. Thank you for validating my observation.

 

[Axulus]

To those who are skeptical, what exactly is so unbelievable about my experience? The claim is not an extraordinary one requiring some sort of extraordinary evidence. Nor is your belief that my experience happened as I described it a requirement to participate in the interesting discussion that came about on what exactly is racial discrimination and even when is racial discrimination ok or even a "moral good"?

It seems to be the usual suspects who, when faced with something they can't answer, resort to ad homs in a pathetic attempt to discredit the poster.

Asking for additional details is fine if it is relevant to the discussion (but I will be careful to not provide identifying information on the other individual involved, nor will I answer for the sole purpose of defending my claims), or saying that you are skeptical that the experience happened as I described it is fine (you don't have to believe me, it won't hurt my feelings), but if you just want to engage in a multi-sentence tirade attacking me, do yourself a favor and just stay out of this thread.

 

[Starman]

Discrimination against white men has been tolerated for decades. Just don't say a bad word about a black person, no matter how accurate it is.

 

[Axulus]

I think your situation is interesting. There is nothing wrong with wanting a group that is diverse in background. In essence, enhancing that diversity is one of the qualifications in this case.

If you agree that the diversity is a valid goal for this organization, I'd say you were not discriminating against based on race because, in essence, you were not a qualified candidate at that point.

Why is diversity a valid goal for an organization but lack of diversity (racial purity) as a goal something that is morally evil and something that laws should be enacted to prevent?

 

[AthenaAwakened]

I think your situation is interesting. There is nothing wrong with wanting a group that is diverse in background. In essence, enhancing that diversity is one of the qualifications in this case.

If you agree that the diversity is a valid goal for this organization, I'd say you were not discriminating against based on race because, in essence, you were not a qualified candidate at that point.

Why is diversity a valid goal for an organization but lack of diversity (racial purity) as a goal something that is morally evil and something that laws should be enacted to prevent?

Is the argument about an action being discrimination or the morality of diversity?

 

[Axulus]

Why is diversity a valid goal for an organization but lack of diversity (racial purity) as a goal something that is morally evil and something that laws should be enacted to prevent?

Is the argument about an action being discrimination or the morality of diversity?

The morality of discrimination - when is it valid (when the goal is diversity, for example?) and when is it invalid/bad?

 

[Toni]

It doesn't surprise me at all, the only thing unusual is that she told the truth.

Note that he said it was a volunteer position--thus he is not harmed (in the legal sense anyway) by being discriminated against. No harm, no damages in a lawsuit, he can't meaningfully sue, thus she doesn't have to hide the truth.

And even if there was a little bit of damage, I wouldn't have bothered to sue. The main reason I wanted to join was for the networking opportunities it would provide, but I also supported the goals of the organization.

The main reason I brought this thread up is that there seems to be a dismissive attitude from others from white men providing examples of discrimination they have experienced. I wanted to see how people viewed my experience.

DING DING DING: We have a winner.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Is the argument about an action being discrimination or the morality of diversity?

The morality of discrimination - when is it valid (when the goal is diversity, for example?) and when is it invalid/bad?

Well, first, did you do your due diligence with regard to researching the position and the stated goals and mission of the organization in question?

 

[Axulus]

The morality of discrimination - when is it valid (when the goal is diversity, for example?) and when is it invalid/bad?

Well, first, did you do your due diligence with regard to researching the position and the stated goals and mission of the organization in question?

It wasn't a formal interview - my business partner and I had meet the founder of the organization from other meetings in the past. I was essentially inquiring about the board position and about the organization (I said I was available and might be interested, but wanted to know more about what it entailed and what the goals/mission of the organization was). She said that they were actually looking for a minority to fill the position, and that was that. The way these board positions get filled at tiny or new non-profit organizations like this is usually really informal. Often it is the founding members asking people they know if they are interested or others hearing about the opening and calling up one of the founders directly.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Well, first, did you do your due diligence with regard to researching the position and the stated goals and mission of the organization in question?

It wasn't a formal interview - my business partner and I had meet the founder of the organization from other meetings in the past. I was essentially inquiring about the board position and about the organization (I said I was available and might be interested, but wanted to know more about what it entailed and what the goals/mission of the organization was). She said that they were actually looking for a minority to fill the position, and that was that.

Were you denied the the position on the board because you were not the race they were looking for?

Yes.

Does an informal inquiry into the requirements of a position leading to the petitioner being told he did not meet the requirements of said position rise to an action of discrimination? Depends on the definition of the word you use. I am a discriminating if I chose a tender filet mignon at Ruth's Chris Steak House over a piece of burnt leather at Golden Corral, I could be correctly called a discriminating diner. If I hire only women to be ladies room attendants in my night club, I am refusing to hire men for that position but it is not considered discrimination as the job in its description and duties calls for a particular gender.

 

[Axulus]

It wasn't a formal interview - my business partner and I had meet the founder of the organization from other meetings in the past. I was essentially inquiring about the board position and about the organization (I said I was available and might be interested, but wanted to know more about what it entailed and what the goals/mission of the organization was). She said that they were actually looking for a minority to fill the position, and that was that.

Were you denied the the position on the board because you were not the race they were looking for?

Yes.

Does an informal inquiry into the requirements of a position leading to the petitioner being told he did not meet the requirements of said position rise to an action of discrimination? Depends on the definition of the word you use. I am a discriminating if I chose a tender filet mignon at Ruth's Chris Steak House over a piece of burnt leather at Golden Corral, I could be correctly called a discriminating diner. If I hire only women to be ladies room attendants in my night club, I am refusing to hire men for that position but it is not considered discrimination as the job in its description and duties calls for a particular gender.

Yes, I'm not meaning to imply the type of incident I mention is necessarily immoral (wanted to get people's take on the matter as I have mixed feelings about it), and almost certainly not an illegal form of discrimination. However, are organizations that practice this missing out on someone who may be available, more interested, and more qualified? Yes, sometimes. Are such people who get passed over due to their race being sufficiently repressed on the board harmed by being passed over for these positions? Sometimes - they miss out on an opportunity to network and connect with the industry and/or the community and become more recognized. However, the harm is usually small - these positions are intended as a volunteer position with the intended beneficiary being the organization and those the organization serves.

 

[Metaphor]

If the stated purpose of a voluntary enterprise is to exemplify a particular ideal or practice and you decide to be a part of said enterprise, that means you are signing on with and agreeing to those stated purposes.

So you think church groups ought to be able to discriminate by sexual orientation in employment?

If one of those purposes is to show diversity by having a diverse board and your addition would skew the stated purpose away from its goal, how are you being discriminated against?

If one of the purposes of the First Church of Sexual Purity is that it contains an all-heterosexual, Christian, White workforce, should a non-heterosexual, non-Christian, or non-White person feel they've been discriminated against?

You would read the mission statement and/or talk to the founding members of the group before applying, would you not? you would do your due diligence, correct?

I'm not sure what you're asking. I wouldn't want to belong to a board that had 'diversity' as a goal, if that goal was advanced by discrimination by race.

I would ask why they think diversity is more important than not discriminating by race, since discriminating by race has been a proven moral evil. I'd ask why they think diversity of superficial and irrelevant characteristics to performance, like race and gender, are given service, but diversity of opinion (the thing that really counts, I'd say) is tossed aside. I'd ask why not diversity in height? Surely the very short and the very tall have a far different life experience to the average heighted.

I know I'm in the minority. For example, I'm grown up enough that I don't lose my mind if my GP doesn't 'match' my race and gender.

I've even filled scripts from GPs who have black skin and GPs who have vaginas. I didn't even ask to see a white male GP, that's how strong I was.

 

[whichphilosophy]

I told her that I might be interested in the position but she told me flat out that they were trying to have a variety of genders and ethnicities on their board, and that in particular they were seeking an Asian or other minority for the treasurer position.

My first impression upon reading this was "that's bullshit."


Meaning, I don't for one second believe that's what actually happened.


If it is, then my reaction would be the same. That's bullshit.

What was your reasoning behind this. I have seen similar forms of odd discrimination like this (not affecting me).

 

[whichphilosophy]

Is the argument about an action being discrimination or the morality of diversity?

The morality of discrimination - when is it valid (when the goal is diversity, for example?) and when is it invalid/bad?

interjecting diversity to prohibit someone because a different ethnical background is preferred is weasel wording for discrimination. There are only few exceptions. If a film is being made about Abraham Lincoln it is very doubtful that an ethnic Japanese person would be hired.

 

[laughing dog]

I think your situation is interesting. There is nothing wrong with wanting a group that is diverse in background. In essence, enhancing that diversity is one of the qualifications in this case.

If you agree that the diversity is a valid goal for this organization, I'd say you were not discriminating against based on race because, in essence, you were not a qualified candidate at that point.

Why is diversity a valid goal for an organization but lack of diversity (racial purity) as a goal something that is morally evil and something that laws should be enacted to prevent?

Does that mean you think that diversity was a valid or invalid goal for the organization?

Logically, the validity of a goal for an organization is separate from the morality or legality of the goal. So, what exactly are you asking about?

 

[AthenaAwakened]

So you think church groups ought to be able to discriminate by sexual orientation in employment?

Actually I do. And I also believe that the Cape Fear Club has every right to be all white, male, and rich. I believe my college sorority has every right to be all female. Private individuals conducting private actions have the right to associate with whom they wish, provided it does not have public consequence, is not funded by public money or causes no harm.

If one of those purposes is to show diversity by having a diverse board and your addition would skew the stated purpose away from its goal, how are you being discriminated against?

If one of the purposes of the First Church of Sexual Purity is that it contains an all-heterosexual, Christian, White workforce, should a non-heterosexual, non-Christian, or non-White person feel they've been discriminated against?

What's next, should a baptist church have to hire a humanist celebrant who gets in the pulpit every Sunday and say there is no god and that the congregation is stupid?

You would read the mission statement and/or talk to the founding members of the group before applying, would you not? you would do your due diligence, correct?

I'm not sure what you're asking. I wouldn't want to belong to a board that had 'diversity' as a goal, if that goal was advanced by discrimination by race.

Then there is no problem.

Thank you for playing our game.

I would ask why they think diversity is more important than not discriminating by race, since discriminating by race has been a proven moral evil. I'd ask why they think diversity of superficial and irrelevant characteristics to performance, like race and gender, are given service, but diversity of opinion (the thing that really counts, I'd say) is tossed aside. I'd ask why not diversity in height? Surely the very short and the very tall have a far different life experience to the average heighted.

I know I'm in the minority. For example, I'm grown up enough that I don't lose my mind if my GP doesn't 'match' my race and gender.

I've even filled scripts from GPs who have black skin and GPs who have vaginas. I didn't even ask to see a white male GP, that's how strong I was.

 

[fromderinside]

.... I don't see how having additional white males on the board and no Asians will hinder this organization's effectiveness, provided that the white males were the most qualified among those interested in the position.

Just now read the above.

Its not your vision with which they are concerned. Its their vision. Clearly they're vision sees a clear benefit in diversity. You have no right to inflict yourself on them for consideration for a position in a private organization.

 

[ronburgundy]

.... I don't see how having additional white males on the board and no Asians will hinder this organization's effectiveness, provided that the white males were the most qualified among those interested in the position.

Just now read the above.

Its not your vision with which they are concerned. Its their vision. Clearly they're vision sees a clear benefit in diversity. You have no right to inflict yourself on them for consideration for a position in a private organization.

Then the same argument applies to a private organization whose vision is an all white company.

 

[prideandfall]

Just now read the above.

Its not your vision with which they are concerned. Its their vision. Clearly they're vision sees a clear benefit in diversity. You have no right to inflict yourself on them for consideration for a position in a private organization.

Then the same argument applies to a private organization whose vision is an all white company.

yes, it does - you think anyone's only issue with the KKK is that they're not racially inclusive?

also, since some of you dunderheads don't seem to be grasping this, "wanting to include a variety of racial groups on your board" does not equal "unfairly oppressing the white man in order to further a sense of ethnic minority racial superiority."

this type of attitude comes back to what i was saying to axulus a few pages ago: only the inherent assumption within the confines of white privilege that being a white guy means you're automatically entitled to be present at everything could ever possibly make one see this as discrimination.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

The morality of discrimination - when is it valid (when the goal is diversity, for example?) and when is it invalid/bad?

interjecting diversity to prohibit someone because a different ethnical background is preferred is weasel wording for discrimination. There are only few exceptions. If a film is being made about Abraham Lincoln it is very doubtful that an ethnic Japanese person would be hired.

That's racist. Japanese people are perfectly capable of playing Abraham Lincoln.

Sure, Lincoln would end up having a few more sex scenes with alien octopi than a strict reading of the historical record would indicate actually happened, but that's just a bit of dramatic licence and not a thing to discount the group of actors entirely.