Thank you for the links anon, I’ll leave them here for people to look through.
I’m going to leave out the chicksontheright link though, it’s needlessly biased, talks down to minorities, and I don’t see it as an effective argument in this case on affirmative action. I really don’t think anything on their website constitutes a reliable source of information.
The author(s) claims that there’s very little racism in Stanford and I cannot help but think they should not be the ones making that claim.
I’ll just start with the disclaimer that I do not study this field and what I know is only from what I’ve read. In no way do I believe affirmative action will solve the racial inequality in our education system or this country. However even the slate article admits it did help some minority students (It unfortunately did not help the ones that needed it the most however and therein lies one of its problems). I also find it funny that all the blame is heaped onto liberals but, what alternatives are being suggested by opponents? This isn’t a ‘liberal’ problem it’s a problem everyone needs to help address.
If reports are true and there was a drop in enrollment from Black, Latino, Native American, Southeast Asian, and Pacific Islanders - then it does seem to point that something was working - even if it was only by a little. If you have something that would refute this by all means link it and I’ll post it tomorrow when I get back from work.
- California passed a proposition called Prop 209 which effectively killed affirmative action in their public university system.
- A bill has been reintroduced that will roll back Prop 209 and allow ethnicity to be used as one factor (NOT a quota) in university admission decisions.
- The bill would undoubtedly benefit, to a large or small degree, under-admitted and lower income groups such as: African-Americans, Latinos, Southeast Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders.
- The bill might “take more spaces” from other Asian groups (highly dependent on income AND ethnicity) who are typically more represented in the UC system.
- The bill might also “take more spaces” from the white population, which is why conservative Republicans are allying against it
Unless you know a lot about California politics (I know a little, but not a lot) it’s a very tricky issue to wrap your head around. You really need to take it slow and read all the way through.
Jenn Fang: http://reappropriate.co/?p=4602
Ultimately, you need to think about who more privileged East Asians should have solidarity with. The answer to me is obvious. I didn’t come from a rich family by any means, and I worked in restaurants starting at the age of 15, but my family was always able to support my college aspirations and made sure I got into college. A lot of other families don’t have that tradition and aren’t so lucky. I think the anti-SCA5 campaign is especially cruel and deceptive to Pacific Islanders and Southeast Asian-Americans. Hmong, Laotian and Cambodian-Americans actually have LOWER college graduation rates than African-Americans, so they have some of the most to gain from the restoration of affirmative action.
I’d like to post an alternate link with a pro-SCA5 perspective from Asian-American activist Jenn Fang. I think people should read through this issue very carefully before making any determinations.
Nearly twenty years ago, California voters passed Proposition 209, a ballot measure that effectively outlawed affirmative action in state-run institutions. Among other effects of Prop 209 was the loss of affirmative action policies — the ability for college admissions officers from being able to consider race among other application criteria — in the state-wide UC college system.
Prop 209 has had a devastating effect on UC schools: Black, Latino, Native American, Southeast Asian American and Pacific Islander admission rates have dropped precipitously relative to the pace of their population growth over the last twenty years, resulting in a public, taxpayer-funded university system that has effectively excluded many of the state’s underrepresented minority community — roughly 45% of the state’s total population — from access to quality secondary education.
Currently, the California House and Senate are considering Senate Constitutional Amendment 5 (SCA5), a bill that would create an exemption for public education from Prop 209, re-empowering the UC system to once again employ reasonable affirmative action policies in their admissions process. Should SCA5 pass the California Senate later this year, it will be put on the November ballot for public consideration. Passage of SCA5 is anecessary first step to restore access and equality for California’s underrepresented minorities to a college education.
Unfortunately, although 61% of Asian American voters in California voted against Proposition 209 in 1996 to protect affirmative action, recent efforts by conservative Asian Americans — predominantly Chinese American non-profits and news outlets — have resulted in a widespread campaign of misinformation and outright fear over SCA5 in many Asian American voters.
To set the record straight, here are the top 5 myths — and facts — about SCA5, and why you should support it.
EVERYONE PLEASE. PAY ATTENTION. Especially if you’re Asian.
On January 30th, 2014, California Senate just passed SCA-5, a legislation that would repeal portions of California Proposition 209.
In condensed words, this bill allows schools to DISCRIMINATE AGAINST ASIANS.
To understand SCA 5, we have to remember what Prop. 209 is. In November 1996, Proposition 209 (also known as the California Civil Rights Initiative) amended the state constitution to prohibit state government institutions from discriminating against, or granting preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment , public education, or public contracting. In the 18 years that Prop 209 has been in effect, California has become the most diversified state in the US.
State Senator Ed Hernandez, the one who introduced this bill, claims that due to Prop 209, Non-Asians have a harder time being admitted into state universities.
This bill will ALLOW THE STATE to use RACE, SEX, COLOR, ETHNICITY, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN as a consideration for accepting students or hiring employees. SCA-5 is out to punish Asian-Americans simply because we set the bar too high for getting into schools with high exam scores.
Asian-Americans often need test scores hundreds of points higher than applicants from other ethnic groups to have an equal chance of admission.
This bill goes against EQUAL PROTECTION, our 14th Amendment, as American citizens!
IF WE ALLOW THIS BILL TO PASS. WE HAVE STUNTED GENERATIONS FROM GROWING AND EXPANDING THEIR MINDS, THEIR HORIZONS OF UNDERSTANDING.
IF WE ALLOW THIS BULLSHIT BILL TO PASS, WHO’S NEXT UNTIL THE LAST RACE WHOM IS DEEMED “WORTHY” OF EDUCATION IS LEFT STANDING?!
Xudong Sun, president of American Anhui Association of Scholars and Students, told Xinhua that this legislation is racial and is a serious discrimination against Asian Americans. He said right now at the University of California and state universities, Asian students account for 36 percent, but Bill SCA-5 would restrict Asians to 13 percent. He said under-represented minority groups, like African Americans and Hispanics need protection, but such protection should not be made at the expense of Asian Americans.
Here is the Whitehouse.gov petition: WE NEED 100,000 SIGNATURES BY MARCH 18TH. THAT’S 10 DAYS FROM NOW.
Here is the Change.org petition.
PLEASE SIGN THESE TWO TO GET THIS BILL TORN TO SHREDS! and PLEASE. SPREAD THE WORD.
Um Hold up, can someone with a background in this do some further explanation? Just looking into it on google, I found that the original prop 209 actually ended affirmative action programs??? As a 1st gen Taiwanese american I’ll be pretty upset if this is used to prevent other Asian americans from getting into the schools they want, but I also want to see the whole picture? Will this help other minorities who need the boost get better education or not? Idk it seems everyone is quickly jumping into this without doing a proper background check and sometimes tumblr just needs to slow down.
edit: OKAY I SUCK AT HTML and y’all keep reblogging without reading what I’m saying about taking it slow and not spreading needless fearmongering so I’m striking through most of it for now until I figure something better out sheesh
30 Greatest Anime Openings (21/30) → Gundam 00
L’Arc~en~Ciel - “Daybreak’s Bell”
I am sick and tired of the way we critique misogyny in fandom.
Why is it always “shame fanwork creators (overwhelmingly young women and queer ppl) for not including enough female characters” and never “question the fact that we’ve created a media culture where canonical female characters are by and large so boring that no one wants to create fanworks based on them?” (Not to mention the fact that any person who dares to include an original female character in a fic will have the deadly accusation of “Mary Sue” leveled at them, even if they’ve written the most well-rounded character in the world)
Why do we talk about the danger of fetishization when straight women are writing about male/male pairings, and never think about the fact that slash is often being written by young women who have been socialized to be so ashamed of their sexuality that their own fantasies never include people of their own gender?
Why are we placing the burden for destroying problematic tropes about sexuality and romance exclusively on this tiny, relatively powerless subculture made up of relatively powerless people who are creating media exclusively for their own enjoyment, and not on the gigantic megacorporations that are profiting off the romanticization of abusive, unhealthy, destructive relationships, an attitude fans are only repeating?
Why do defenses of fic always turn to “it’s not all gay porn !!!1!!!!111” as an argument? What’s wrong with people creating erotica that they can enjoy, when almost no one is making mainstream porn for the audience that reads fic, when people can explore potentially problematic or even dangerous kinks/desires without actual performers having to participate in making video porn, when the “gay porn” side of fandom can lead to some of the most wonderfully freeing discussions about sexuality possible in our society?
Say I write a fanfiction. The only female character complies to the problematic sassy/helpful best friend trope, mostly because the story revolves around two main male characters (well-developed in canon, with lots of canon jokes about how much they love each other, and played by male actors I find extremely attractive) getting together and having a fair amount of extremely explicit sex. This fic is read by, oh, 200 people, all of whom are already familiar with the conventions of fandom. How does that compare to the literal millions of people who watched, for example, the first Hobbit movie, which contained (as I recall) no women or queer characters at all, and had an audience full of all kinds of people, likely including little girls who are looking up on screen and learning that their stories aren’t seen as worth telling?
I’m not saying fandom tropes aren’t harmful, I’m just saying we should look at the scope of the damage done by them as opposed to, oh, every other kind of media ever, and then think about why we’ve chosen to shit all over the not-for-profit hobbies of young women and queer people.
A coolio fuck-ton of female arm angle references.
Credit goes to melsrefs (on tumblr). You should flood Mel’s inbox with fanmail so s/he’ll make more of these epic references.
Meet the World’s Smallest Rabbit.
Columbia Basin Pygmy Rabbits are the world’s smallest and among the rarest.