1
0
1

How is affirmative action justifiable? (self.socialjustice101)

submitted by FunctionPlastic

I don't understand this. Isn't the rational position to support success and acceptance based on merit? Isn't preferring one group over another like that institutional racism and sexism?

I do understand that there are biases against women (e.g. a woman with the same skillset is less likely to be admitted to some position or something like that), especially in IT which is my field, but how is making "reverse" biases (that are even institutional!) morally justifiable?

all 5 comments
sorted by:
best
best
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順

[–]TSA1984 26 ポイント27 ポイント

You pretty much answered your own question: "a woman with the same skillset is less likely to be admitted to some position". Can you propose a better way of redressing that?

A non-privileged member of society who cannot find a place in their field is not an abstract political theory; they're a real person, who society can help. Yet you don't want to help that person, because of something which is an abstract political theory.

By that, I mean that "no preference of one group over another, ever, under any circumstances, because biases are bad" is a political abstract. It looks good on paper, but when it comes to practical real-world situations, it only maintains a racist/sexist status quo, by failing to address unofficial biases.

Tl;dr: sometimes in the real world, ideas like "biases are bad" can't be treated as absolute.

[–]jfpbookworm 1 ポイント2 ポイント

There's also no such thing as an unbiased definition of "merit".

[–]FunctionPlastic[S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント

By that, I mean that "no preference of one group over another, ever, under any circumstances, because biases are bad" is a political abstract. It looks good on paper, but when it comes to practical real-world situations, it only maintains a racist/sexist status quo, by failing to address unofficial biases.

Nicely put, thanks for the answer. I think I can support the idea.

[–]kinderdemon 13 ポイント14 ポイント

We are playing chess.

For the entire history of human chess the side playing white got an extra rook. Now that seems unfair, especially since white has a 9-1 track record.

We also can't take the rook from the white players: public outcry, impossible to reverse all history etc.

So why not give the black player a second rook?

[–]addiaaj 1 ポイント2 ポイント

Programs such as Affirmative Action are in place in order to promote equality. The concept of equality cannot feed itself because ignorance is deep rooted in our societies. Therefore it must be nurtured until society can change their behaviour (i.e. racism, and all forms of discrimination).