New scholarship created for whites only

[TheFunkMonkey]

New scholarship created for whites only
Sunday, February 15, 2004 Posted: 6:46 PM EST (2346 GMT)

BRISTOL, Rhode Island (AP) -- A student group at Roger Williams University is offering a new scholarship for which only white students are eligible, a move they say is designed to protest affirmative action.

The application for the $250 award requires an essay on "why you are proud of your white heritage" and a recent picture to "confirm whiteness."

"Evidence of bleaching will disqualify applicants," says the application, issued by the university's College Republicans.

Jason Mattera, 20, who is president of the College Republicans, said the group is parodying minority scholarships.

"We think that if you want to treat someone according to character and how well they achieve academically, then skin color shouldn't really be an option," he said. "Many people think that coming from a white background you're automatically privileged, you're automatically rich and your parents pay full tuition. That's just not the case."

The stunt has angered some at the university, but the administration is staying out of the fray. The school's provost said it is a student group's initiative and is not endorsed by Roger Williams.

Mattera, who is of Puerto Rican descent, is himself a recipient of a $5,000 scholarship open only to a minority group.

"No matter what my ethnicity is, I'm making a statement that scholarships should be given out based on merit and need," Mattera told the Providence Journal.

His group took out a full-page ad in last week's issue of the university's student newspaper to tout the scholarship, which was for $50 until two donors came forward to add $100 each during the weekend, Mattera said.

It's not the first brush with controversy for the group. The school temporarily froze the Republicans' money in the fall during a fight over a series of articles published in its monthly newsletter. One article alleged that a gay-rights group indoctrinates students into homosexual sex.

 

[KMAN]

I don't think that scholarships should be limited to color, religion, etc. The best person qualified should get the scholarship, but as long as you have affirmative action and other programs designed to help one race over another I don't see a problem with the white's only scholarship.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, isn't that what they say.

KMAN

 

[chonce]

Wow. I was just about to post this link.

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/046/region/University_student_group_offer:.shtml


I am totally opposed to affirmitive action.

I think this is a fair and just protest. It does a good job of pointing out the logical flaws in "affirmitive action."

 

[Redneckman]

Well said, both of you fellows. John Kerry is in favor of affirmative action.

 

[angusr]

I attend a local university here in the Boston area and there are definitely certain minority groups that are under-represented on campus. Clearly there are some kinds of social barriers to these kids attending decent schools. Scholarships aimed at under-represented groups are one mechanism of trying to make the system more equitable overall. Probably not a perfect solution but I would be interested to hear some alternatives from some of you guys who've come out against this sort of thing. BTW I am a male and am as pasty white as they come . . .

 

[Shotgun]

My family set up a scholership fund in my grandpa's name when he died a few years ago. He was a farmer who put all 12 of his kids through college, and we set up a list of criteria that would award the scholership to someone in similar circumstances as my family. We excluded everyone not Catholic, from a farming background and so on. Nothing wrong with that; Bill Cosby certainly would rather help out someone from his background than giving scholership money to a white guy in Nebraska.

It's a publicity stunt...a damn good one. But not a big deal as long as it is private money that is involved.

 

[lander]

I don't think any racist scholarships should be allowed to exist, but given the fact that the United Negro College Fund (amongst other racist scholarships) has been discriminating for years it would only seem fair to allow a "white pride" scholarship.

 

[FloydGondolli]

In my opinion, the lines on college applications that ask for the applicant's race and gender should be completely eliminated.

 

[PatPatriot]

Affirmitive action is racist by definition..therefore should be unconstitutional.

 

[PatPatriot]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Scholarships aimed at under-represented groups are one mechanism of trying to make the system more equitable overall. Probably not a perfect solution but I would be interested <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Has achievment ever entered your equation?

 

[KMAN]

It's true, John Kerry is a big supporter of Affirmative Action.....atleast right now anyway....I'm sure that will change just like evry other issue.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0130.html

 

[xpanda]

Outspoken feminist here. My opinion has always been that hiring me because I am female is equally as insulting as not hiring me because I am female. Either way, my record (academic or professional) is not speaking for itself.

That in mind, there are certainly many employers or possibly educational institutions that still practice discrimination against minorities and women. The dollars invested in affirmative action would be better spent organising an appeals board wherby complaints of this sort could be tabled. Additionally, getting to the heart of why minorities and women experience lower levels of lifetime achievement should be uncovered and addressed.

One thing that I think all of us can agree upon is the notion that your expectations of yourself are generally indicative of the kind of life you will lead. It follows then that growing up in the projects may well lower the standard of expectation for many individuals. Some will break that mold, but it won't be the majority. This is where communication of a higher form needs to occur. Simply granting scholarships to minorities, which are really a form of charity at that level, does not get at the grassroots issue.

I think many liberals have made the mistake of believing that the civil rights movement should have overnight changed the standard of living for people whose freedoms had just been [re]instated. What affirmative action continues to do, that the civil rights movement attempted to abolish, is grant the white male patriarchy the power to keep handing out opportunities, as though they belong to the white man first, and the rest of us second. Instead, we should be building a society that empowers the people to take those opportunities, opportunities that are rightfully theirs. Feminism has been more successful with this than any other civil rights mandate.

Women have had the vote in North America for over 75 years -- how many women are in politics so far? It takes a long time to undo hundreds and thousands of years of oppression.

 

[xpanda]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Floyd Gondolli:
In my opinion, the lines on college applications that ask for the applicant's race and gender should be completely eliminated.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed.

 

[angusr]

To all of you who want a strictly achievement/merit based system: I assume then that you would have no objections to the majority of the spots at your more prestigious universities being awarded to foreign students? 'Affirmative action' ensures that American students (who would otherwise lose their spot to a more 'qualified' foreign student) get to attend schools like Harvard and MIT, and makes it much harder for students from China, India, Canada, Mexico etc.. to get admission.

Ignoring race/nationality/ethnicity is great in theory but can't anybody see the link between providing wider access to education among under-represented groups and seeding the long-term societal changes that will allow us to eliminate these kinds of measures 100 years from now?

Xpanda, I am an employer who is choosing between a white male and a marginally more qualified female. The woman is recently married and of child-bearing age. Given the fact that it is a distinct possibility she will have children and I will lose her services for months/years, thus incurring significant costs, why should I hire her? Without affirmative action in place, the answer (strictly from a bottom-line point of view, dealing with the probabilties and costs etc..) is that it doesn't make sense to hire her. Another example . . . should a single mother who wants to attend school be held to the same standard as me in terms of grades etc..? Should we force her to pay 100% of her own daycare because it's not our fault she got knocked up? No. There are other issues in play and it's important that as a society we make an attempt to level the playing field. In the short term there are costs, but in the long term there will be benefits.

 

[truthteller]

I am against affirmative action since hiring should not be based on quotas. Another reason is if any minority achieves anything out of the ordinary, people always jump to say it's because of affirmative action.

Case in point. Last year my cousin got into Yale. His SAT score was like 1585 and had very good grades otherwise.
Yet, alot of the white students were saying he got in because of AA.

 

[nepenthe]

Let me ask any and all of you a (very easy) hypothetical albeit relevant question, based on a non-academic scenario. Imagine that a female student, Alice, at a given College is well-qualified in terms of physical prowess and overall skill to compete in an established men's basketball team. The college does have a separate women's basketball team, to which equal funding is distributed despite the fact that the men's division have historically performed much better and accorded the college significantly more exposure than the female division has. Alice is the point guard for the women's division and is frustrated by the rest of her team's lack of ability and competitiveness. Assume that Alice's skills are such that had she been male, she would most likely have been admitted to the men's division from the beginning. Should Alice be allowed to transfer from her division and compete with the men in the upcoming NCAA season? Why?

This is going somewhere, believe me.

 

[FloydGondolli]

nepenthe,

No, women should play in women's leagues etc. and men should play in men's leagues.

Otherwise, if you allow women to compete in men's sports, in order to be fair, you would have to allow men to compete in women's leagues. This of course would lead to nearly all women not competing.

Can't have things both ways.

 

[TheFunkMonkey]

Billy Packer once said if you wanted TRUE equality, each college should have *one* basketball team. Then you have open tryouts, and the best players make the team.

 

[PatPatriot]

I believe in affirmitive action if it is based soley on ones achivment and ability to pay...You can't say the son of like Michael jordan who fxcked off during high school (example) deserves a shot over a poor white student who worked his ass off...and thats exactley whats going on...If they want to set up aff.act. based on achivment and economic standing fine...If then your argument is well poor blacks in the inner city can't get a good public education..then its time for vouchers to private schools be given a shot.
Whats happening in the real world is that employers are seeing black names on resumes and passing them over because they don't think they were qualified because they were pushed through by the system,,,another injustice caused by liberals...would you take your son to a black eye doctor if you thought he may have been pushed through by an entitlement???...If you would then your blind.
YOU DON'T REWARD FAILURE!!
Racism by the democratic plantation hurts more than helps.
Punishing one race over another hurts both races.

 

[lander]

I'm convinced that the majority of Dems in favor of AA are simply whoring themselves out for votes.