4 ms·

A lot of people are indeed arguing that there needs to be more "positive discrimination" to help groups who've so far (on average) suffered the effects of negat

A lot of people are indeed arguing that there needs to be more "positive discrimination" to help groups who've so far (on average) suffered the effects of negative discrimination. I tend to agree that it's necessary. But understandably, someone who's part of "not going to get an advantage" group would complain of negative discrimination. IANAL, but yeah, in the cold hard logic of laws, positive discrimination is surely against that law. Now watch people misinterpret this comment and call me names...

gambiting 5y ago
Positive discrimination is absolutely discrimination as well. You can't have a job offer that says "only women applicants", but there's nothing illegal about only ever advertising in say, women-targetted media or products, even if the position is open to everyone. That's not defined as descrimination in law(I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just that by law that's not discrimination).
- cm2187 5y ago
  Which is pretty much redlining
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- balls187 5y ago
  That isn't entirely true. There are instances where there is bona fide qualification for being a specific gender. It's not common, but does exist. Megan Fox will not likely win a lawsuit alleging discrimination based on EEO Law if I did not cast her in the role of Barack Obama in my HBO Miniseries on the Death of Osama bin Laden.
Zababa 5y ago
One thing that I don't really like with positive discrimination is that you don't really know if and when it's going to end. I would be more confortable with it if the goal was clear from the start, and the discrimination was then automatically deduced from this. Another point is that when a group of people call for more diversity, which would be attained by employing more people from this group, I tend to see tribalism more than diversity. Of course in a way it's fine, it's the basis of human behavior, but it still feels weird to me.
nojokes 5y ago
There is no such thing as positive discrimination.
tylerhou 5y ago
In my opinion, much of the time "positive discrimination" is a misnomer. The most salient debate is in college admissions — some people believe that BIPOC have an "easier" time getting admitted to schools like Harvard with the same amount of "merit." ("Easier" and "merit" in quotes for reasons below.) Often, they justify this by claiming that Asian and white people have to score much higher on the SAT to gain admissions. But that's probably the wrong metric. The purpose of college is to grow students, which means a better metric of merit is not a snapshot of how proficient a student is at a particular moment in time, but by how much they have improved from some baseline. We also know that society puts BIPOC at a disadvantage because of their race. For example, historical and present day discrimination means that they have less economic power, which directly translates to educational disadvantage (worse schools, worse nutrition, less time interacting with parents who may work longer hours). BIPOC are also less likely to be recommended for gifted programs at the same level of skill. Therefore (because of society) their baseline is lower. So given the above two points, I don't really see admission of BIPOC as discrimination at if you shift the metric to "ability to grow." IMO this is also reflected in the admissions criteria; the ability to overcome adversity is sometimes cited, and adverse life events usually accompany some amount of growth. And even though the average SAT score is lower for BIPOC applicants, that average is not low enough for those people not to be able to handle the courseworks. That's not to say that all BIPOC applicants come from a lower baseline than all Asian/white applicants; of course there will be some distribution overlap. But using growth as a metric (instead of absolute score) could probably explain most of the test score/GPA discrepancy.
- Manuel_D 5y ago
  I think this is getting into semantic mismatch at this point, it seems like you and the above commenter agree pretty much in entirety at a conceptual level just using different terms. Your comment describes the meaning encapsulated in the term "positive discrimination". Groups have been disadvantaged throughout history, so the institution is deliberately assigning advantages for members of the group to offset that. > And even though the average SAT score is lower for BIPOC applicants, that average is not low enough for those people not to be able to handle the courseworks. This is not entirely true. Lower SAT scores are correlated with dropping out of certain majors at much higher rates. This is a significant factor in lower URM representation in STEM graduates: https://lawreviewblog.uchicago.edu/2020/10/30/aa-arcidiacono/ https://lawreviewblog.uchicago.edu/2020/10/30/aa-arcidiacono...

gambiting 5y ago

Positive discrimination is absolutely discrimination as well. You can't have a job offer that says "only women applicants", but there's nothing illegal about only ever advertising in say, women-targetted media or products, even if the position is open to everyone. That's not defined as descrimination in law(I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just that by law that's not discrimination).

cm2187 5y ago
Which is pretty much redlining
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
balls187 5y ago
That isn't entirely true. There are instances where there is bona fide qualification for being a specific gender. It's not common, but does exist. Megan Fox will not likely win a lawsuit alleging discrimination based on EEO Law if I did not cast her in the role of Barack Obama in my HBO Miniseries on the Death of Osama bin Laden.

Zababa 5y ago

One thing that I don't really like with positive discrimination is that you don't really know if and when it's going to end. I would be more confortable with it if the goal was clear from the start, and the discrimination was then automatically deduced from this. Another point is that when a group of people call for more diversity, which would be attained by employing more people from this group, I tend to see tribalism more than diversity. Of course in a way it's fine, it's the basis of human behavior, but it still feels weird to me.

nojokes 5y ago

There is no such thing as positive discrimination.

tylerhou 5y ago

In my opinion, much of the time "positive discrimination" is a misnomer. The most salient debate is in college admissions — some people believe that BIPOC have an "easier" time getting admitted to schools like Harvard with the same amount of "merit." ("Easier" and "merit" in quotes for reasons below.) Often, they justify this by claiming that Asian and white people have to score much higher on the SAT to gain admissions. But that's probably the wrong metric. The purpose of college is to grow students, which means a better metric of merit is not a snapshot of how proficient a student is at a particular moment in time, but by how much they have improved from some baseline. We also know that society puts BIPOC at a disadvantage because of their race. For example, historical and present day discrimination means that they have less economic power, which directly translates to educational disadvantage (worse schools, worse nutrition, less time interacting with parents who may work longer hours). BIPOC are also less likely to be recommended for gifted programs at the same level of skill. Therefore (because of society) their baseline is lower. So given the above two points, I don't really see admission of BIPOC as discrimination at if you shift the metric to "ability to grow." IMO this is also reflected in the admissions criteria; the ability to overcome adversity is sometimes cited, and adverse life events usually accompany some amount of growth. And even though the average SAT score is lower for BIPOC applicants, that average is not low enough for those people not to be able to handle the courseworks. That's not to say that all BIPOC applicants come from a lower baseline than all Asian/white applicants; of course there will be some distribution overlap. But using growth as a metric (instead of absolute score) could probably explain most of the test score/GPA discrepancy.

Manuel_D 5y ago
I think this is getting into semantic mismatch at this point, it seems like you and the above commenter agree pretty much in entirety at a conceptual level just using different terms. Your comment describes the meaning encapsulated in the term "positive discrimination". Groups have been disadvantaged throughout history, so the institution is deliberately assigning advantages for members of the group to offset that. > And even though the average SAT score is lower for BIPOC applicants, that average is not low enough for those people not to be able to handle the courseworks. This is not entirely true. Lower SAT scores are correlated with dropping out of certain majors at much higher rates. This is a significant factor in lower URM representation in STEM graduates: https://lawreviewblog.uchicago.edu/2020/10/30/aa-arcidiacono/ https://lawreviewblog.uchicago.edu/2020/10/30/aa-arcidiacono...