Student Rejected for Diversity Post Because He is "White"

reply to post by TDawgRex


I have read that sometimes in the next century, white people of European descent will become a minority in the U.S. I have a strong feeling that when this happens we will be treated worse than any group ever was before us.

I fail to see the need for a "diversity" group in the first place.
But it looks like some people still think some groups are more "equal" than others.
You can try to justify this a hundred different ways but it in the end it's still wrong.

I wonder how the civil rights movement would have succeeded had whites not joined their ranks.
I seem to recall some were even murdered for their stand for others who have now conveniently forgotten they even existed.
The "Diversity" movement has never been about people but about power.

Being white it is hard to remain objective on this topic since its so prevalent within the work force. I believe we "white people" should approach these type of incidents carefully and with caution. Although I can list some things I have found to be ways around our diversity laws when your a certain type of minority. Job listings of bilingual usually are an indicator, a simple walk through in their office will show you how diverse an office is with a bilingual listing on a job application. A whole office doesn't need 20 bilingual employees maybe 5 that have work delegated to them as the majority of business will be conducted in English unless that business is multinational.

also In sure some people have seen a situation where a certain minority group grabs control of a business if you haven't then it must just be an isolated incident i have witnessed a couple of times. Here is how this type of situation happens: A person of a certain minority group gets into a position of power within a company. This person hires friends and extended family into maybe two or three positions. These newly hired employees start to cause problems with other employees. The manager " guy of certain minority group" allows this to happen to employees "not friends of family of certain minority group employees" and when these employees complain the manager he/she targets these employees as a trouble makers until they push out these people so they can hire more friends and extended family of a certain minority group.

usually the lower paying jobs are the ones that go unregulated to allow this kind of crap as a higher paying job the person could pay for lawyer.

The only answer is to get a quality education with a masters or phd on the cutting edge of what ever field you are in. irreplaceable comes to mind because if a minority can do what you do your out of a job

reply to post by HomoSapiensSapiens


Whoa, back up. I'm not blaming Arab or African for the state of things, and I agree that the intolerant "tolerance" movement is led by mostly whites.

Yet your suggestion that I join a White Supremacist group is just another example of what i AM saying. You have no idea what kind of person I am, but you assume that, because I lament the discrimination against white males, that I should be considered to be a racist.

Yes, I am white. Yes, I am a middle-aged male and heterosexual. But I do not think that being these things makes me inherently superior to others not like me.

Reading your previous posts in this thread, I think you and I would agree on more than we disagree. Your point about white liberal condescension is spot-on. But let's not make assumptions about each other based on the few words we have exchanged.

This brings me back to the original subject. This guy is assumed to be "evil" because he is white and male.

My point was that this young man, who apparently wants to help make a difference, is being excluded by the very philosophy he wishes to advance.

Originally posted by TDawgRex

Student Rejected for Diversity Post Because He is "White"

radio.foxnews.com

“This university is not ready, in any capacity, for a heterosexual white male to be in charge in any way of diversity and inclusion,” said Ian Coley, a member of the diversity committee. “I don’t know if any university is.”

And Campus Reform reported that he had previously served as a member of the Northwestern Inclusion Task Force – created last year to help advocate for campus diversity.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.campusreform.org
dailynorthwestern.com
[url=http://dailynorthwestern.com/2013/05/14/opinion/editorial-asg-must-handle-itself-in-more-professional-respectful-manner/]dailynorthwestern.com[ /url]

It's because these "diversity" types are really in fact some of biggest racists going.

Originally posted by WaterBottle
reply to post by TDawgRex

 

Read what I replied to. It was of a woman's group being led by a man. Why would a woman's group want to be lead by someone they feel is oppressing them? Common sense. Why would they want a patriarchal group?

edit on 18-5-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)

I'm just saying that if the majority of a group want someone who is different from them and has the capability to see that group to it's goals...then why not? Of course there will always be some people with hurt feelings, their always are.

Of course, this is how politicians are born.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
We see this kind of thing as race relations in this country "settle". It doesn't go from being "racist" to being "not racist". It's GOING to swing a little before it settles in the center...

It's like women's lib. You saw us go from being oppressed to nearly repressing our oppressors. Just now, is it settling down to true equality. Would a group of people in the 1960s, whose focus was to empower women, want a man to be their leader??? No.

Frankly, I'm not surprised at a diversity task force wanting minorities to be in their leadership positions. I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

edit on 5/18/2013 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)

this type of herd thinking really saddens me....

It's like women's lib. You saw us go from being oppressed to nearly repressing our oppressors. Just now, is it settling down to true equality. Would a group of people in the 1960s, whose focus was to empower women, want a man to be their leader??? No.

totally false. Women were never oppressed more than the men were. The so called empowerment is because of men who take whining of women seriously.

Originally posted by openminded2011
reply to post by TDawgRex

 

I have read that sometimes in the next century, white people of European descent will become a minority in the U.S. I have a strong feeling that when this happens we will be treated worse than any group ever was before us.

I am hoping not. While humanity is slowly evovling their beliefs to the good on race and gender, there will always be religion, National and/or political ideologies to divide us.

If history is the teacher, humanity are poor students as a whole.

So, in order to be in charge of promoting diversity you have to be gay or an ethnic minority? That's ridiculous. I'm white and heterosexual, but I reckon I could pretty easily stick up for people who aren't. If you're tolerant, it doesn't matter if you're not part of what they're on about, surely? You just have to be a decent person.

Let me say in my 15 + years in big corporate, I have been in charge of diversity and/or mentoring councils; I have established diversity councils from scratch; I have participated and informed executives of diversity issues, etc. In all my time participating and establishing provisions for these councils, I knew that white males were not as disenfranchised at they would be led to believe.

As a matter of fact, even if the push was to hire, promote and retain more women and/or Latino, for example, we found that white males, historically, were still being hired, retained and promoted from within, more so than their other non-white male counterparts.

White males felt "left out" or "discriminated against" because there was no all-white diversity council. In reality, it was BAU for white male progression in corporate, irrespective of position or title.

In the end, the proper establishment of diversity councils within corporate was to help promote and expand opportunities for ALL types of people. We discovered many groups or types of people that invariably fell through the cracks, for whatever reason(s) and we had to find ways to uncover and polish these gems.

Diversity councils are not a bad thing. It's the folks who decry the establishment of diversity councils who need to understand the importance and value of these organizations.

im getting sick of this... white, black, yellow, red, green, blue, purple... It´s so antic.

reply to post by hammerfist

This guy is assumed to be "evil" because he is white and male.

Whoa, I don't think anyone is calling him evil, there just saying he's not best for the position.


and yes, comments like that make it seem like you, and other posters, are white supremacists.

Anyone can say they aren't white supremacists....but your subconscious won't lie. If you're getting offended by this story....you are at the very least bordering on it.

Originally posted by Ghost375
and yes, comments like that make it seem like you, and other posters, are white supremacists.

Yep, like I said on the last page.
Anyone who speaks up for white people will be tagged as "white supremacists".

Originally posted by Hopechest
For someone to be a leader of a diversity group I don't really find it productive if he would take the position while upsetting so many people.

Obama took the position of president while upsetting so many people, and those people were called "racist". I don't see a difference.

Please dont ever forget that ONLY WHITE PEOPLE CAN BE RACIST according to government, companies or media.
Apparently.


I have met more than one black person who despised other blacks.

reply to post by TDawgRex

I'm just saying that if the majority of a group want someone who is different from them and has the capability to see that group to it's goals...then why not?

Yes, this makes a lot of sense. Let's see how many communist reading groups are lead by capitalists.

You seem to have the complete inability of empathy, which means putting yourself in others shoes. If you really think a woman rights group would want a man to lead them, when they are trying to ESCAPE patriarchy then I dunno what to say to you.

The oppressed do not want to be lead by the face of their oppressor, realize this.

Yeah . . . I am going with RACISM.

The only explanation given for him not getting the job is the color of his skin.

There is no denying it this is racial discrimination and it doesn't matter what excuses people like Hopechest give, racist is as racist does.

Originally posted by WaterBottle
reply to post by TDawgRex

 

I'm just saying that if the majority of a group want someone who is different from them and has the capability to see that group to it's goals...then why not?

Yes, this makes a lot of sense. Let's see how many communist reading groups are lead by capitalists.

You seem to have the complete inability of empathy, which means putting yourself in others shoes. If you really think a woman rights group would want a man to lead them, when they are trying to ESCAPE patriarchy then I dunno what to say to you.

The oppressed do not want to be lead by the face of their oppressor, realize this.

You are essentially saying this young man is responsible for enslaving the ancestors of these folks.

That is a BIG claim and I suggest you provide some proof before you come across as an ignorant racist, oh wait too late.

EDIT:
FYI diversity includes all ethnicities (including Caucasian).

But we all know diversity means non-white, and no half-breed mudbloods allowed.

I sense a disconnect here for some of us who think that diversity committees are an inherently racist concept. If you oppose on principle the idea of a diversity committee having oversight of university policy then there is no reason to cheer for anyone's appointment, or opposition to their appointment. It makes more sense to declare the whole thing oppositional to progress, regardless of who is in running it.

If the Aryan Nation decided to appoint a black person to a leadership position it would not change the goals of the organization and suddenly make it acceptable. It would be safe to assume that the appointee holds beliefs that are aligned with the goals of the organization, else he would not have been considered for the post. Appointing a white hetero man to the diversity board would not suddenly make it a more acceptable concept, therefore opposition to his appointment is irrelevant, and one could argue that rooting for him validates the existence of the committee.