I blame the over-protective/outraged parents. If schools weren't inundated with fear from parents who threaten to sue them when a teacher forces a student to sit in class with gum on their nose, because said student was chewing gum and knew he/she shouldn't have been. Teachers and school officials have been hamstringed so much as far as discipline goes, that their only recourse is to actually involve the police.
Do you really think they'd try them for ANYTHING in regards to this?
Read what Ironhide said, very carefully. That's how most of the American school systems are. There are kids who have no business being anywhere but in a cage in some of these schools, and the teachers can't do crap to punish them. The school either has to do nothing, or call in the police to deal with them.
But the parents will still raise a stink, even if the police do it. However--the cops don't have to put up with those parents the rest of the week
I hope they rot in prison those bastard kids who picked on everyone else and especially me with all those noogies, stealing my lunch money and stealing my clothes after gym and and... oh wait I am projecting.
This is just ridiculous. Oh noes, they threw crappy government food at one another, oh noes! Call the police, the humanity!
Lord-Loss wrote:Could they get a criminal record for this?
Would this stop them getting a job, or going to college?
"I see that you are top of your class and have quite a few scholarships under the belt. What's this? Arrested for a food fight? I'm sorry, but our policy states that we can't hire criminals. Bad for the company you see. Ta!"
Whah. Some people are just crazily overzealous in their "Zero-tolerance" policies. There was a food fight at school today, but I'm not a hardened criminal mastermind.
Police are allways useless.
Cant catch a real fething criminal, because they are too busy with speed cams or arresting kids for a bs reason.
atleast now they can go back to the station and have another 10 or so arrests on thier statistics report for the month.
Arseholes.
Little lord Fauntleroy wrote:Whah. Some people are just crazily overzealous in their "Zero-tolerance" policies. There was a food fight at school today, but I'm not a hardened crimina mastermind.
Little lord Fauntleroy wrote:Whah. Some people are just crazily overzealous in their "Zero-tolerance" policies. There was a food fight at school today, but I'm not a hardened crimina mastermind.
The level of stupidity present here boggles the mind.
UK police != US police, and vice versa. Nor do the schools.
The middle school I went to, required a constant police presence. And not for food fights.
Why?
Because of the fact that teachers can be sued for even BREAKING UP A FIGHT in this country. Several teachers who even tried to peacefully mediate got slugged by kids, and can't do a damn thing back to them without facing criminal/civil charges from the parents. Public schools can't do jack. Private schools can't do jack either. But the police?
The police are an outside force in this case, which can act based on the rules of the institution without fear of some spoiled brat's parents going after their wages.
Kanluwen wrote:Because of the fact that teachers can be sued for even BREAKING UP A FIGHT in this country. Several teachers who even tried to peacefully mediate got slugged by kids, and can't do a damn thing back to them without facing criminal/civil charges from the parents. Public schools can't do jack. Private schools can't do jack either. But the police?
The police are an outside force in this case, which can act based on the rules of the institution without fear of some spoiled brat's parents going after their wages.
WTF, they cant break up a fight?
So they have to let them beat the gak out of each other if the police aint present.
St. Timothy's/Hale back in 94 or so(I think. I was only 7 at the time) was slapped with an attempted lawsuit for throwing a student out because he kept trying to grope some girls in the classroom, but one of the girls' father was a lawyer and defended the school and got it tossed out like a joke.
Oddest part was that it almost made it to trial before the lawyer got involved. Your money at work, America. Ridiculous lawsuits!
I wore a jeff foxworthy t-shirt to school my freshman year at high school, my first week. My school wanted to suspend me for a week because they considered the shirt offensive, and under their zero tolerance policy, that was a week suspension.
the shirt said, "you might be a redneck if your favorite fishing lure is tnt"
I had to get a lawyer to fight back, until they let me off with a warning.
Does anyone else wonder if publicly provided lawyers would help fix the civil court system in America? On the one hand, people wouldn't have fear lawsuits as much, because it doesn't cost as much to defend themselves. On the other hand, I suppose it makes bringing stupid lawsuits all the less painful for the plaintiff.
Maybe there should be some sort of penalty for having sued someone and lost? Maybe change the standards of evidence to favor the defendant more? I don't know. It just seems like it's gotten into bad shape.
Food fights are an honored tradition at school! Of course, they're not an indication of hardened criminal behavior. Just another sign of the Nanny state smothering the world.
Orkeosaurus wrote:Does anyone else wonder if publicly provided lawyers would help fix the civil court system in America? On the one hand, people wouldn't have fear lawsuits as much, because it doesn't cost as much to defend themselves. On the other hand, I suppose it makes bringing stupid lawsuits all the less painful for the plaintiff.
Maybe there should be some sort of penalty for having sued someone and lost? Maybe change the standards of evidence to favor the defendant more? I don't know. It just seems like it's gotten into bad shape.
Your second part is whats needed.
Make it loser pays. You would be shocked how much nonsesne would immediately fall away if this was put into play. I know from personal experience.
Ironhide wrote:I blame the over-protective/outraged parents. If schools weren't inundated with fear from parents who threaten to sue them when a teacher forces a student to sit in class with gum on their nose, because said student was chewing gum and knew he/she shouldn't have been. Teachers and school officials have been hamstringed so much as far as discipline goes, that their only recourse is to actually involve the police.
When I went to school, teachers thought nothing of picking students up and flinging them into walls to instill dicipline. I remember when I was in 6th grade I got flung around by my science teacher for forgetting to sign my name on a test that I scored an "A" on.
I've always wanted to find him for a little stroll down memory lane.
We have nothing of the sort here, where everyone packs their own lunch or buys sandwiches and the like from the canteen. None of this 'tray-meal' nonsense for us!
Horst wrote:I wore a jeff foxworthy t-shirt to school my freshman year at high school, my first week. My school wanted to suspend me for a week because they considered the shirt offensive, and under their zero tolerance policy, that was a week suspension.
the shirt said, "you might be a redneck if your favorite fishing lure is tnt"
I had to get a lawyer to fight back, until they let me off with a warning.
This has Jimi's seal of approval.
Also, at my high school someone wore an Arch Enemy shirt to school.
Some of you may know it. It has "PURE fething METAL" written on the back.
He got a telling off and a threat of suspension. None of this suspended for a week crap...
Where I went to school, if you stepped out of line, depending on the infraction you:-
a) got made to stay in at break
b)got made to do lines- a 1000 was the minimum
c)got made to spend breaktimes picking up litter
d)got made to do 'hard labour', where instead of going to lessons, you had a week doing gardening and maintenance around the school
e) got caned
When I grew up and went to school, there were certain teachers who would hurt the children anyway they could. For instance, they would pour their derision upon anything we did, exposing any weakness, however carefully hidden by the kids.
This whole thing is a plan to ban the fighting tomato festival... In Spain, and we all can agree that Spain is a pain, and should be caned. And those tomatoes should be canned too, not thrown.
Who is evil... now?
Orkeosaurus wrote:When I grew up and went to school, there were certain teachers who would hurt the children anyway they could. For instance, they would pour their derision upon anything we did, exposing any weakness, however carefully hidden by the kids.
That sounds like a recipe for disaster man... Are these teachers still employed?
Orkeosaurus wrote:When I grew up and went to school, there were certain teachers who would hurt the children anyway they could. For instance, they would pour their derision upon anything we did, exposing any weakness, however carefully hidden by the kids.
why do i feel like you just reinterpreted the words to a pink floyd song.........i think i need more sleep
Orkeosaurus wrote:When I grew up and went to school, there were certain teachers who would hurt the children anyway they could. For instance, they would pour their derision upon anything we did, exposing any weakness, however carefully hidden by the kids.
That sounds like a recipe for disaster man... Are these teachers still employed?
Nope, I smashed them all with an army of walking hammers.
greenskin lynn wrote:why do i feel like you just reinterpreted the words to a pink floyd song.........i think i need more sleep
Horst wrote:I wore a jeff foxworthy t-shirt to school my freshman year at high school, my first week. My school wanted to suspend me for a week because they considered the shirt offensive, and under their zero tolerance policy, that was a week suspension.
the shirt said, "you might be a redneck if your favorite fishing lure is tnt"
I had to get a lawyer to fight back, until they let me off with a warning.
I once wore a shirt wearing stating my view on gay marriage. And since I’m in the middle of Cali I got in trouble. They let gay advocates make their own club, but I can’t state my views. Oh and here is another kicker. We have a black student union, Latinos unidos and Asian pacific islander club but when me and my friend tried to start a "European descendant club" who would do charity and community work. But they would not let that happen cause they said it is a "White supremacist group". Don’t yah love America.
Why does there have to be more to Garrets story? Here in Mn stores can sell tshirts and hoodies with the words "native pride" on them but if any of them sold tshirts that said "white pride" or "Caucasian pride" they would be labeled white supremacists. If I wore a tshirt to a job that said "white pride" i'd be asked to take it off.
True facts. None of the print shops/screening shops in my town will print shirts saying "White pride" but they obviously make tshirts saying "Native Pride".
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say it's because there's not a Native American equivalent to the KKK that shouts "Native Pride!".
Automatically Appended Next Post: And as to the statement Wrex made:
I'm going to assume he was meaning there must have been SOMETHING offensive on the shirt. We don't know what it says, because Garret neglected to inform us.
White power is the KKK slogan and anyone with any grammatical sense and reading comprehension will realize "white pride" =/= "white power".
I could go deeper and wear a shirt that says "German pride". That wouldn't fly either because in the world of such narrow mindedness and political correctness the slogan "German pride" would somehow be equated with white supremacy and Nazism.
Double standards are still double standards. Maybe Garrets shirt was offensive from a hate perspective or maybe it said something like "Gay marriage is a sin". Just that alone would get you reprimanded at work or at school.
Fateweaver wrote:White power is the KKK slogan and anyone with any grammatical sense and reading comprehension will realize "white pride" =/= "white power".
I could go deeper and wear a shirt that says "German pride". That wouldn't fly either because in the world of such narrow mindedness and political correctness the slogan "German pride" would somehow be equated with white supremacy and Nazism.
Double standards are still double standards. Maybe Garrets shirt was offensive from a hate perspective or maybe it said something like "Gay marriage is a sin". Just that alone would get you reprimanded at work or at school.
See, but the issue is that the ANP and KKK both also use the term "white pride" in the same context as "white power".
And as for "German pride"...well, of course it would be equated with white supremacy and Nazism. Blame the ANP and the skinheads for that.
And yeah, double standards are double standards. But in this world of political correctness, Europeans and their ancestors are having to pay for the sins of their forebears.
And the "gay marriage is a sin" thing, I'd say, would get in trouble just for being a bit too controversial. The high school I went to banned kids from wearing t-shirts that had Osama's head in crosshairs on the front, and the back saying "It's Payback Time" just for that reason.
I'm not saying they aren't offensive. I just think it's crap that all it takes is one person out of 1000 to be offended and that leads to the "supposed" offensive item being banned/removed.
In this country it takes a majority to get anything approved but it takes a minority to get something disapproved. That is where our democratic way of thinking fails.
Fateweaver wrote:Maybe Garrets shirt was offensive from a hate perspective or maybe it said something like "Gay marriage is a sin". Just that alone would get you reprimanded at work or at school.
Good.
A shirt like that is offensive, silly and childish.
But Garret hasn't achualy told us what is on the shirt yet...
Reds8n wrote:..it was probably misspelt and banned on grounds of grammar.
Fateweaver wrote:I'm not saying they aren't offensive. I just think it's crap that all it takes is one person out of 1000 to be offended and that leads to the "supposed" offensive item being banned/removed.
In this country it takes a majority to get anything approved but it takes a minority to get something disapproved. That is where our democratic way of thinking fails.
I blame the ACLU and NAACP, and any "minority" rights group. I also blame the affirmative action movement.
People would rather sue or get on the news for some kind of race related BS, or get a job for being nothing more than the token black guy on the staff. Heaven forbid you actually work for something.
I'd be surprised if they have. The ACLU was in NC a few years back taking a case where a bunch of people protesting a neo-Nazi rally got violent and started assaulting the rally, going so far as to use Molotovs and pepper spray before getting taken down by riot police.
A shirt like that is offensive, silly and childish.
But Garret hasn't achualy told us yet...
Offensive to 1 person out of 1000 maybe.
To use the analogy that the shirt was offensive if it did indeed say "gay marriage is a sin" I'm offended by the comments I find belittling Garret over his grammar and spelling.
I'M OFFENDED BY THE TEASING AND BELITTLING OF HIM ON DAKKA. DO I GET A FETHING COOKIE NOW? I bet if I complained to Yakface about it, that you, LL would just tell me "well he deserves it, if he can't be bothered to proofread his/her posts than he/she should be teased."
If that's the case than if you are romantically attracted to someone of the same sex and act on it in public you should be teased because it offends me. I'm all for gay rights to some extent so I'm not gay bashing but I find it offensive to see 2 guys kissing/holding hands at Wal-mart but now that I've said so I'll probably get flamed. DOUBLE STANDARD IS DOUBLE STANDARD.
It's not about the message. It's the fact that the damned NAACP and ACLU have made everything in this country offensive to someone that isn't CAUCASIAN (or White to be more general) or who doesn't follow the norm.
Native Pride or Mexican Pride or African Pride shirts are fine and won't get you fired. If I wear a shirt, being that I'm white, that says "White Pride" I'd lose my job. If I wore a button that said "In God we Trust" I'd be asked to remove it.
I think the biggest reason so many Americans fight to hold onto the rights of the First Amendment is because we, the Americans (and still majority people in this country) have more or less lost our First Amendment rights. You can't wear certain clothes to school for fear of expulsion (many schools won't allow the football jersey/cap combo as it's seen to be gang related); you can't do certain things to your hair (one kid had a haircut done that made his hair look like the Cinci Bengals football helmet and he was expelled until his hair grew back out because it violated dress code) but that violates freedom of expression.
8th graders being arrested for throwing food is, in my opinion, the straw that broke the camels back in regards to the government being too far nosy about what goes on. In a lot of ways this country is regressing and not progressing. 30 years ago you wouldn't have seen most shows allowed to be on the air but on the other hand cartoons like Bugs Bunny and Felix the cat wouldn't be allowed on air today. Feth, even Sesame Street has gone down the path of the PC bus.
Fateweaver wrote:well he deserves it, if he can't be bothered to proofread his/her posts than he/she should be teased
I havn't teased Garret about him grammar in a while, now that he tries im fine with it.
He still does mistakes like full stops where there should be commors(spel?) but its a whole lot better then it used to be.
Native Pride or Mexican Pride or African Pride shirts are fine and won't get you fired
Tops like that are still silly and childish. Who the hell needs to go around showing people that there proud to be mexican, american, native, black, white etc.
Fateweaver wrote:well he deserves it, if he can't be bothered to proofread his/her posts than he/she should be teased
I havn't teased Garret about him grammar in a while, now that he tries im fine with it.
He still does mistakes like full stops where there should be commors(spel?) but its a whole lot better then it used to be.
Native Pride or Mexican Pride or African Pride shirts are fine and won't get you fired
Tops like that are still silly and childish. Who the hell needs to go around showing people that there proud to be mexican, american, native, black, white etc.
Someone who is proud of their heritage. What's the difference between a thread on dakka encouraging people to be proud of who they are and tell other dakka users what their heritage is and wearing a tshirt displaying who you are proud to be? Both of them are still bragging/announcing/telling it to the world, just through different mediums.
Silly to you or not my point still stands.
He has gotten better but I've seen just as many spelling/grammar errors from other posters on Dakka who don't get treated anywhere near as harshly as he does. I've come to find out on this forum that if you aren't liked for a certain reason nothing you do matters but those that are liked can commit murder and still be highly regarded and put up on a .
I like dakka for the most part and I personally don't care if what I say offends someone or not. I'll stick around until I get banned. If it's banning for violating dakka policy I'll not fight it, if it's a ban for something I feel is dumb than Yakface will get an earful.
Oh, and LL. Spell check is your friend. Just saying so that you can pull your foot out of your mouth.
Fate:
I think people pick on Garret because, quite frankly, he even started a sort of "pity party" thread asking why 'everyone hated him'.
That kind of lends towards teasing, in my view at least.
Back on topic:
I'm still okay with the kids having been arrested. It was a crummy circumstance, and if enough kids were involved, then it was mob mentality taking over from reason.
Kanluwen wrote:Fate:
I think people pick on Garret because, quite frankly, he even started a sort of "pity party" thread asking why 'everyone hated him'.
That kind of lends towards teasing, in my view at least.
Back on topic:
I'm still okay with the kids having been arrested. It was a crummy circumstance, and if enough kids were involved, then it was mob mentality taking over from reason.
And how do we treat mobs?
Well, teasing Garret is off topic. I never once felt compelled to tease him (or anyone) for spelling and grammar.
Arrest for a food fight is beyond reasonable punishment. Detention? Yes. Expulsion? Maybe. Suspension? Maybe. Arrest? Not warranted.
Detention doesn't do jack other than give them time to think about how awesome it was that they got to tear up the cafeteria, and got nothing other than being told to sit in a spot for awhile.
Expulsion?
What 8th grader doesn't want to stop going to school?
Suspension at that age?
You're given a free vacation! Woot!
Sure, the arrest was over the top. But it keeps little Susie's mother from saying "WELL SUSIE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING!"(which she would, if it was a detention/expulsion/suspension), and is just another example of the fact that teachers, principals, and other school faculty can't do diddly to actually punish.
Shadowbrand wrote:@horst really?
I wore a shirt with a topless girl with cards in her hand when I was in grade 8. Course I did wear a jacket...
Id totally believe that. When I was in 7th grade I was almost suspended for wearing a Notre Dame tshirt because it had the fighting Irishmen on the front. Thats no joke, my parents had to threaten them with going to the local news and calling a lawyer to get them to back off. And its not like I was IN a fight or something to provoke it, I was literally on my way to lunch when I was stopped.
Gotta love that kind of BS
I have a shirt that says "Viking" pride and I never had to take it off. And alot of Neo-Nazi groups have used Viking symbolism hell the actual SS had Thors Hammer.
Not saying I am one or anything. But you would figure someone would take offense to it, anyhow I find it sad that for being white and simply saying your happy for who you are suddenly! Your racist.
*sigh*
Oh! on the point about native pride shirts.. I'm willing to bet a shirt that said "Black Pride" wouldn't get jack done about and there is the Black Panthers out there.
Were there kids in the school wearing 'No on 8' shirts?
To be perfectly honest, schools should have their own rules for these kind of things. The main purpose, would likely be for drug related images, and gang related colors and images.
Overall, I don't give a good god damn what people wear, and that comes with idea that you are going to just have to deal with people 'straight-bashing' you for your shirt.
On this same note, in all my years of high school, not once did I see a student wearing direct political messages such as that. Anti-war shirts were common, but nothing along the lines of 'vote this way'. That is surely part of the reason they told you that you could not wear that shirt.
If you are that outraged about it, you should wear the shirt anyway, while carrying around evidence of other students doing the exact same type of thing. It is not that I don't believe that other kids are not doing it, ever; just that I could honestly care less when I really think about it. Personally, I support gay marriage, and if the school feels the same way, more power to them.
I think everyone here is missing the point. These children took food and threw it at each other. Short of putting molotov cocktails in their hands it sounds to me like they were moments away from tearing that school to the ground. The teachers were lucky enough to get a call to authorities in time to derail this train of chaos and carnage. I believe the only way for this school to continue to provide top of the line education to the non-dissidant students is if these dozens of anarchists are removed from society and left to rot in bowels of a juevinile detention center.
Shadowbrand wrote:I have a shirt that says "Viking" pride and I never had to take it off. And alot of Neo-Nazi groups have used Viking symbolism hell the actual SS had Thors Hammer.
It's hard to hate the vikings though. They had giant beards, and hats with big horns on them, and drank lots of mead.
(Our football team is The Vikings too, so that's probably how a shirt saying "Viking Pride" would be interpreted here.)
Kanluwen wrote:
I blame the ACLU and NAACP, and any "minority" rights group. I also blame the affirmative action movement.
People would rather sue or get on the news for some kind of race related BS, or get a job for being nothing more than the token black guy on the staff. Heaven forbid you actually work for something.
Does that include the "tea party' movement? The NRA? Birthers? Republicans in Congress? Or do you just feel like turning a general comment about the inefficiency of democracy into a bland, and paltry statement about 'lazy' minorities?
Hmmm... that was pretty below the belt there Kanwulen.
The main reason that I no longer believe in racism (true, gritty, mind-blowingly, life-changing racism) is because of how bastardized the concept of racism has become.
Goddam racist cats, trying to take my goddam jobs...
You see, in a nutshell, that is just stupid; not racist. In short, hate crimes exist, but as we are one race; I attribute most hate crime to stupid, rather than any specific goal.
Kanluwen wrote:I'm going to go out on a limb here and say it's because there's not a Native American equivalent to the KKK that shouts "Native Pride!".
Kanluwen wrote:
I blame the ACLU and NAACP, and any "minority" rights group. I also blame the affirmative action movement.
People would rather sue or get on the news for some kind of race related BS, or get a job for being nothing more than the token black guy on the staff. Heaven forbid you actually work for something.
Does that include the "tea party' movement? The NRA? Birthers? Republicans in Congress? Or do you just feel like turning a general comment about the inefficiency of democracy into a bland, and paltry statement about 'lazy' minorities?
Nope, I'm all for going after anyone who tries to screw over the democratic process with rabblerousing efforts. The recent healthcare bill shenanigans and Palin's commentary on the upcoming Death Camps fits the bill quite nicely there.
HOWEVER.
There is the matter of my own personal experiences and opinions that come from those experiences that affirmative action hurts more than it helps.
YMMV, as always though.
That I'm not encouraging racism, but railing against stupidity and rewarding poor work ethics/trying to slide by on nothing but your minority?
Just sayin'. I got nothing against minorities, but I dislike the folks who let the fact that they're a minority define themselves and the way they act.
Fateweaver wrote:
AA is a joke and it only benefits a small minority of people (pun intended) and it's been my experience as well that leads me to believe that.
If it only benefits a small group of people, then it can hardly be considered a significant issue. If only 3 people got their jobs because of affirmative action, then only 3 people were denied employment because of affirmative action.
Preemptively: There's no reason to assume that someone who was employed because of affirmative action was less qualified than another person not affected by the policy.
I just think the situation is idiotic. They should have been made to clean the cafeteria up and then WORK in the cafeteria serving food, washing dishes and wiping tables for a month.
I think it would have taught them a better lesson than handcuffs and mugshots. I mean, what 8th grader now days actually would ENJOY good old fashioned, hard work.
8th graders now go apeshit donkey kong if their parents take away cell phone privileges or video game privileges.
You know though, honestly, for the future of my career; I could consider that a good thing.
Lots and lots of qualified, yet lazy competition in most fields, combined with my years of extra experience. It is beginning to sound like a pretty good deal right there... wait... did my job just go to China?
Fateweaver wrote:
AA is a joke and it only benefits a small minority of people (pun intended) and it's been my experience as well that leads me to believe that.
If it only benefits a small group of people, then it can hardly be considered a significant issue. If only 3 people got their jobs because of affirmative action, then only 3 people were denied employment because of affirmative action.
Preemptively: There's no reason to assume that someone who was employed because of affirmative action was less qualified than another person not affected by the policy.
But there are cases proving that WAS the reason. We need to hire more non-whites because our percentage of Caucasian to non-whites is skewed too far in favor of Caucasians. It happens for that reason, that is what affirmative action sets out to do. Level the playing field in regards to white vs all other races or men vs women (though the race one is the one most used).
If those 3 people were more qualified than the 3 that weren't that got the job due to AA than it IS a problem, it IS an issue and I'm sure those 3 wouldn't be happy about it. AA was put into place to ENSURE equality in the workplace in regards to equality based on race/sex, NOT based on skill. Fact.
So, AA is in place to make sure that for every percentage of caucasians/males in a workplace there is an equal (or near equal) percentage of minorities/women employed as well. If it leans too far in one direction (mostly thought to be too white/male leaning) employers are required by law to rectify the situation, even if it means not hiring a more qualified caucasian/male just so a less qualified minorty/female gets the job, allowing them to balance the "status quo".
Fateweaver wrote:
But there are cases proving that WAS the reason.
Its impossible to prove that a person who wasn't hired would have been more competent than one who was, regardless of race. One can speculate, but the only logical conclusion one can arrive at is: person X was hired because he was sufficiently qualified for the position, and satisfied affirmative action policy requirements.
If you want to claim that the most qualified person should always be hired for any given position, then I should be very upset about the fact that I was turned away by Subway for a lack of experience in the sandwich industry; despite having a BA with 2 majors and 2 minors, plus a long list of academic/professional achievements.
Fateweaver wrote:
If those 3 people were more qualified than the 3 that weren't that got the job due to AA than it IS a problem, it IS an issue and I'm sure those 3 wouldn't be happy about it.
Sure, for those 3 people, but policy isn't set in order to please a small number of people. Or at least it shouldn't be.
That said, qualification doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the length of one's resume. It is quite possible to be overqualified for a position. I was overqualified for the the Subway position, and the hiring manager knew it. He knew I would be looking elsewhere while working there, and so he didn't bother putting me on the payroll. This happens all the time.
Fateweaver wrote:
AA was put into place to ENSURE equality in the workplace in regards to equality based on race/sex, NOT based on skill. Fact.
Yes, it is/was meant to control for racial bias.
Fateweaver wrote:
So, AA is in place to make sure that for every percentage of caucasians/males in a workplace there is an equal (or near equal) percentage of minorities/women employed as well.
Not necessarily. The policy varies from employer to employer, but in general its simply preferential status for people of minority heritage. The quota system, which generated most of the horror stories, is a thing of the past.
The thing about being in a minority is that the majority of society defines you as a minority.
It's hard for people who are in the majority to understand how minorities are affected.
It's interesting to see the reactions of white Americans who move to Japan and encounter the fairly casual racial discrimination that exists over there. Things such as being unable to rent a flat because you're foreign, or constantly being stopped by the police to check your passport or Alien Registration Card, because you're foreign.
Kilkrazy wrote:The thing about being in a minority is that the majority of society defines you as a minority.
Defining the majority accurately is a pretty tough job though. I suppose it is quite easy, when the choices are boiled down to four or five color tones.
It's hard for people who are in the majority to understand how minorities are affected.
That is why it is important to fight the real battles, while letting the nonsense take care of itself. The use of the "N" word is a prime example of how diluted controversy can be about spoken racism. As long as it is not a major figure, I could usually care less what some poop mouthed person has to say.
It's interesting to see the reactions of white Americans who move to Japan and encounter the fairly casual racial discrimination that exists over there. Things such as being unable to rent a flat because you're foreign, or constantly being stopped by the police to check your passport or Alien Registration Card, because you're foreign.
So that is just a 'cultural' thing? Racism is just one of those things that really confuses me. Not to say that other -isms, are not strange as well. The only thing I can imagine as a 'real' reason for being racist, is fear. Fear of change maybe? Not too sure, Japan does not seem like it is particularly averse to change.
Fateweaver wrote:Wear a Viking pride shirt and you'd get high fived in Mn (and the Vikings are kicking ass and taking names this year).
Look out Detroit, you are on our turf biatches.
Hey Detroit is in my state.....wait you threatened the Lions? Uh you know those guys are probably the worst team EVER in football right? thats like picking on the handicapped kid in your school
Fateweaver wrote:I'm not saying they aren't offensive. I just think it's crap that all it takes is one person out of 1000 to be offended and that leads to the "supposed" offensive item being banned/removed.
In this country it takes a majority to get anything approved but it takes a minority to get something disapproved. That is where our democratic way of thinking fails.
I blame the ACLU and NAACP, and any "minority" rights group. I also blame the affirmative action movement.
People would rather sue or get on the news for some kind of race related BS, or get a job for being nothing more than the token black guy on the staff. Heaven forbid you actually work for something.
It's interesting to see the reactions of white Americans who move to Japan and encounter the fairly casual racial discrimination that exists over there. Things such as being unable to rent a flat because you're foreign, or constantly being stopped by the police to check your passport or Alien Registration Card, because you're foreign.
So that is just a 'cultural' thing? Racism is just one of those things that really confuses me. Not to say that other -isms, are not strange as well. The only thing I can imagine as a 'real' reason for being racist, is fear. Fear of change maybe? Not too sure, Japan does not seem like it is particularly averse to change.
I don't think the Japanese are any more racist or culturalist than any other people.
Racism arises in my view because of human psychology which leads people unconsciously to form groups and discriminate against people outside their group. It would take quite a long essay to go into it so I'm not going to write about it here.
Fateweaver wrote:Wear a Viking pride shirt and you'd get high fived in Mn (and the Vikings are kicking ass and taking names this year).
Look out Detroit, you are on our turf biatches.
Hey Detroit is in my state.....wait you threatened the Lions? Uh you know those guys are probably the worst team EVER in football right? thats like picking on the handicapped kid in your school
I'm sorry you were forced to admit that. I'll try not to laugh when we are walking all over them like a handicapped man pushed onto the ground in front of a surging crowd on Black Friday.
.
