Affirmative action is a term used to describe rules and regulations that were established to protect minorities and women from being discriminated against (Simmons 1982). Affirmative action has changed the way people were treated since it was first brought into order in 1961 by president John F. Kennedy through executive order 10925(Alexander 1999). It helped established more opportunities for minorities and women in education, employment and housing (Dietz 2001).
Nevertheless, affirmative action has caused much controversy in our society and whether it has benefited America (Altschiller 1991). As a result, there are those who believe minorities have benefited, yet the dominant group has suffered. Before the passing of executive order 10925, minorities and women were treated unfairly. Before president Kennedy brought the executive order into action, minorities suffered a great deal of discrimination. In the past, minorities were abolished from specific areas. For instance they were not allowed to use the same bathrooms as whites (Alexander 1999).
The minorities were spatially segregated from the rest of society meaning outsides did not accept them; they weren’t allowed to obtain certain jobs, live in close proximity to the dominant group or receive the same educational opportunity (Parrillo 2003). After Kennedy, president Lyndon Johnson established several laws that helped establish better opportunities for minorities such as his ” Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 1965 and then the office of Federal Compliance in 1967″(Alexander 1999). In addition, he was simultaneously establishing the Fair Housing Act as well as the Economic Opportunity Act.
The Civil Rights Movement was one of the major contributors to the establishment of the parity laws. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 made it possible that the federal level could enforce the law on those who violated it, which helped give minorities the protection they needed from the Dominant group. After the implementation of affirmative action and the laws that followed, “the proportion of blacks in white-collar jobs grew from 10% to 24% and the ratio of black median family income to white rose from 55% to 62%”(Alexander 1999). As one can clearly see, there were major improvements for minorities.
They were given more opportunities to contribute to society without facing discrimination from businesses, education, and they began to gain a little more respect from others. Before these laws, minorities and women were subjected to institutional discrimination (book). They were judged upon on the bases of their race, origin and ethnicity. These minority groups were able to gain socioeconomic status within their society (Parrillo 2003). They were making their way and beginning to assimilate more with the society. Due to minorities being discriminated against in various circumstances, it was presidents Franklin D.
Roosevelt, Kennedy, and Johnson who wanted to see an end to it. They didn’t feel it was right that minorities and women were being discriminated against. They wanted the minorities to receive a better chance at life than their predecessors did. They wanted everyone to have an equal opportunity in America. Further, it was their goal to alleviate the way minorities had been treated in the past (Simmons 1982). However, it wasn’t as easy for the dominant white group to accept the new laws in favor of minorities. The dominant whites were xenophobic in that they were afraid of those were not like them.
They had for so long created social distance from the minority group (Parillo 2003). They liked being surrounded by those who were similar to them. It was much easier for them to associate with people who were like them and to judge those who were not. Trying to enforce the laws wasn’t the hard part in most cases; it was how they were still treated even after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was enacted. The laws couldn’t always prevent discrimination in businesses or schools although they did help provide minorities with a better opportunity.
The laws established quotas that the businesses had to follow. They were mandated to allocate so many minorities to a particular business. Some people, particularly whites, reacted toward the minorities gaining more opportunities in their companies. Although the law said they had to meet a certain quota, it didn’t mean that the business managers acted in the approved manner toward minorities. For so many years they were taught to be prejudice and to discriminate against those who were of a different race, ethnicity and gender.
And then suddenly, the law was changed and they began to see these minority groups upwardly mobilizing towards becoming more accepted into society and being given an equal opportunity. The dominant group was sort of like a stranger lacking “Intersubjective Knowledge” because they were unaware of what minorities were like and capable of. “Hence being white and being male in the United States historically has lead to greater employment opportunities, greater advancement, and higher wages”(Dietz 2001).
With the enactment of these laws, the dominant white groups felt they were competing with the minorities and felt they were going to start to take over. There was much talk about whether the laws had actually created reverse discrimination. One of the major cases that went to the Supreme Court was the University of California in 1978 v. Bakke (Simmons 1982). This was the first case that dealt with reverse discrimination issues at the Supreme Court level. Due to Bakke’s dominant group status, he was rejected from the school while minority groups were accepted although he had attained a better educational background.
Further, the reasoning behind this case was Bakke felt he was being discriminated against because The University of California at Davis Medical School was basing their admission on race and reaching a certain quota. ” The school offered four justifications for this policy countering the effects of past societal discrimination; reducing the historic deficit of minorities in the profession; increasing the number of professionals willing to practice in underserved, predominately minority communities; and increasing the educational benefit derived from maintaining a racially diverse student body (Friedl 1999)”.
The fourth explanation was of major importance in the decisions by the Supreme Court. Justice Powel, the Supreme Court Judge, believed all students could benefit from being around diverse people. In our society, diverse people surround us and much can be learned from a person with a different culture, ethnicity, race, gender and religious background ” With four justices joining him this portion of Justice Powel’s opinion,–allowing the medical school to continue to consider race, along with other factors, in its admissions policyreceived a majority vote and became the law of the land”(Friedl 1999).
As we discussed in class, anthropologists Ralph Linton stated, “that any given culture contains about 90% borrowed elements”(Parrillo 2003). Justice Powel’s ruling stated that everyone could learn from those who are not like you. It can expand our knowledge and help everyone become more accepted. They can contribute to the society and to learning which can help the society prosper. Ralph Linton’s beliefs can pertain to Justice Powel’s ruling because our society is multicultural. After this case became widely known, it stirred up more consciousness of reverse discrimination and more racial tension between minorities and whites.
In higher education programs and in employment, there has been controversy over whether affirmative action has created the opposite by discriminating against the dominant white group. As stated earlier, the goal of affirmative action was to stop discrimination against minorities and women. Yet, opponents believe that by making it easier for minorities to obtain a job and receive placement in education, we have corrected one problem and created another by discriminating against dominant whites, predominantly males. They believe that although we tried to solve the problem of unfair treatment, we have just created a double standard.
In businesses, people are being hired on the bases of their race rather than on how qualified they are for the job. Businesses are being forced to reach a certain quota and the person most qualified may end up jobless due to reverse discrimination (Thomas 2003). Also, the businesses are being hurt because they aren’t hiring the most successful applicant, which could be harmful to the company. Also, in higher education programs, like in the case of Bakke discussed earlier, schools are admitting students based on their race rather than how educated they are.
They also need to obtain a quota and do so by lowering the standards for minorities. One issue opponents argue is that although we have made it easier for minorities and women to be more successful in our society, we have created a double standard because whites are facing unequal treatment just as minorities and women did in the past (Gross 1977). Further, another issue they argues is that affirmative action has actually hurt minorities because there is a stigma behind it. Whether a minority is hired because they are qualified or not, others will believe they were hired because of Affirmative action.
They will never receive the credit they deserve if they were hired because they were qualified. Instead, they will always have a stigma attached to them. However, a study was conducted which showed clear evidence that whites still receive benefits and still receive more advantages in our society than minorities and women do. The study was on whether ” the effects of gender, ethnicity, education, family characteristics, geographic residence over time on economic attainment” (Dietz 2001) There is a significant relationship between being a minority and how much income one receives.
Depending on your age, gender, race and where you live can play a major role in your income. ” White males compose only about 30% of the total population” and ” they continue to hold 75% of the highest earning occupations”. As one can see, it clearly shows that white males receive an advantage. Minorities and women receive less income and they continue to experience discrimination, especially in employment (Alexander 1999). Further, minorities are more likely to be in poverty. They are likely to use welfare services than are dominant whites.
As author Kurt Jacobson and Alba Alexander stated, “Some ten million blacks live in poverty: 31% overall, and nearly half of all black children” (Alexander 1999). Many minorities are stuck and need the guidance from the government, yet minorities continue to be discriminated against in America. In order to stop the cycle of poverty, the society needs to be aware that America is a diverse society and everyone deserves equal treatment. Women have experienced greater advantages since the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as well as the Women’s Rights Movement.
They have made their way into the workforce, in receiving an education and making a living for themselves and their family. They do not rely on the males as much as they did in the past. Although they do obtain the jobs, men have and continue to receive more income. Women are discriminated against due to the fact that they are women. They are not judged on how well they can do the job or whether they are the best one suited for the job. Further, minorities have been subjected to the same treatment. In 1999, Muame found ” that black men are generally not promoted as quickly as white male”(Alexander 1999).
In regards to minorities who have an educational background, they still receive less income. Further, this study did find an increase for minorities and women since the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. They have attained more achievements in education due to affirmative action, which helped protect them from discrimination. They have made progress in our society. However, even though there have been improvements for minorities and women, the dominant white male population still continues to do better in our society. They receive more benefits and are still looked upon as the dominant group.
They continue to obtain higher incomes not solely because of their educational background but also because they are white. “Furthermore, these data reveal that arguments that affirmative Action and equal opportunity have created a new trend in business toward “reverse discrimination” against white men are not substantiated”(Dietz 2001). Today affirmative action still raises a lot of concern between the different ethnic groups in America. People believe that it has benefited our society while some believe it still causes students and companies some disadvantages based on their racial background.
In our society, we have faced discrimination since the beginning of time. We have progressed and changed since then and will continue to change as time passes by. Advanced employment and educational opportunities were difficult for minorities and women to obtain in the past. Today, past efforts and changes in laws has made the United States more unified than it ever was. As discussed in class, when immigrant’s first came over, they were subject to hostility by the dominant group. As time went by, they began to assimilate and eventually weren’t as noticeable to the dominant groups.
Change isn’t easy for anyone and it takes time to become accustomed to it. The immigrants suffered harsh discrimination when they first came to America as did minorities before The Civil Rights Act was enacted. And they continued being discriminated against after it was enacted. People have become accustomed to minorities having more opportunity in education and employment. It is more accepted today than in the past. In conclusion, affirmative action has progressed since it was first brought to order in 1961.
America has seen a significant change in the United States. Minorities have experienced discrimination throughout the past but they have ended up gaining more opportunity in our society. There are people who advocate for affirmative action as well as those who are against it. There have been major benefits for women and minorities due to affirmative action. Furthermore, how much someone earns is usually based on their ethnic background and their gender. Affirmative action has caused controversy and will continue to cause it for years to come.
