Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Affirmative action no longer necessary

Guest Columnist

Published: Sunday, June 10, 2012

Updated: Sunday, June 10, 2012 14:06

President John F. Kennedy first established affirmative action in 1961, and since then, it has been seen as a monumental controversial move for minorities. Affirmative action was originally meant to level the playing field not just for racial minorities but also for women and the gay community. 

However, when affirmative action is brought up today, it is largely seen as a way for racial minorities to receive priority in college admissions or employment. The irony of this is that racial minorities are quickly becoming the new majority and, with racial blending at an all-time high, America is truly living up to its melting pot reputation. 

I was born in India, but have been raised in America my entire life. Despite being 100 percent Indian, I always strongly identified with American culture much more than my Indian side. Unlike many immigrant families, we were not determined to live in our own cultural bubble. Instead, we blended the best of both cultures and embraced the fact that we were Americans and Indians. 

When an elementary school teacher told me about affirmative action, I was confused — why was she telling me? I had been in America for a decade now! At the time, my brother explained it to me like this: If a white female and I were both applying to a university and had identical GPAs, SAT scores and recommendations, I would get in.

When it came time to apply to colleges, I found I got into every in-state and out-of-state university I applied to. Additionally, a plethora of financial aid was available simply because of my race. While I was pleased with my choices, I was also extremely bewildered — why was I receiving priority over somebody else? How did affirmative action even apply to somebody who has lived here her whole life?

Simply put, it doesn’t. Affirmative action was at one time seen as a way to right a wrong. However, after 50 years of civil rights movements for minorities, women and gays, it’s time to realize that affirmative action has once more brought way to discrimination. Racial and gender equality do not exist in a world where employment and admissions industries are so eager to look for ways to fill their diversity quotas. If it is discriminatory to reject somebody based on race, religion, sexual orientation or gender, then it is also discriminatory to give priority in hiring or admissions based on the aforementioned criteria.

Minorities are important in maintaining cultural preservation. However, why should minorities include those who are also American citizens? The only exceptions in affirmative action should be for international students, since those students would truly be a minority. If a prospective employee or student is an America citizen, then he or she is not a minority. They need to embrace that they are part of something bigger. Being an American citizen means maintaining one’s cultural minority while being a part of the majority.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

10 comments

Anonymous
Wed Aug 1 2012 14:58
The author of this article sounds utterly clueless. There are quite a few factual mistakes here. For instance, Indians (from the subcontinent) have never been the beneficiaries of affirmative action. Neither have gays.

Further, the analysis here is childish: "Racial and gender equality do not exist in a world where employment and admissions industries are so eager to look for ways to fill their diversity quotas. If it is discriminatory to reject somebody based on race, religion, sexual orientation or gender, then it is also discriminatory to give priority in hiring or admissions based on the aforementioned criteria."

I can't make sense out of the last paragraph here at all.

Come on now....I know very little about UCF, but am unpleasantly surprised that it would produce this kind of writing.

Anonymous
Thu Jun 14 2012 13:17
"In order to be absolutely sure that no discriminatin occurs, especially in colleges, how about NOT ASKING about race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. on the application, and considering only what the applicant has accomplished."

Because that wouldn't be fair to the people who got into college because of their ethnicity and would only work to reward those who actually studied and got good grades. What? You think people should be rewarded because of their work ethic? You're an idiot. They should be rewarded on things they can't control like their race and gender. Only then will America be fair.

Anonymous
Wed Jun 13 2012 20:57
Here's an idea:

In order to be absolutely sure that no discriminatin occurs, especially in colleges, how about NOT ASKING about race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. on the application, and considering only what the applicant has accomplished.

Just because there are no citations does not mean she doesn't know what she's talking about, she's speaking from personal experience, the best form of research there is.

This is a great article from a great American.

Anonymous
Wed Jun 13 2012 10:23
"Affirmative action sets slightly lower bars for racial and ethnic minorities because, while you may be an exception, far more minorities as a percentage live in poverty and experience institutionalized oppression than do whites. Minorities have far less opportunity to succeed in primary and secondary education due to these conditions that are outside of their control (resulting in less competitive GPA's and test scores), and so affirmative action adjusts for their level of ability *relative to their socioeconomic opportunity associated with their minority status.*"

So screw the whites and Asians who worked hard. A minority may have been oppressed!

Anonymous
Tue Jun 12 2012 19:00
This is poorly written and there is no research or citations. In one word: weak. Why would CFF publish this piece?
Facts & Sources
Tue Jun 12 2012 16:24
You obviously didn't do any research into the actual reasons behind affirmative action, or the reasons for keeping it today.

First of all, to state that gays and lesbians were part of affirmative action in 1961 is absolutely absurd and highlights that you don't know what you're talking about. Back then, sexual minorities were still heavily locked in the closet and discriminated against. 1961 was before Stonewall, Harvey Milk, or *any* significant step in the gay rights movement had occurred at all. Furthermore, gays and lesbians still face rampant workplace and educational discrimination today. Only a minority of states even provide discrimination protections for LGBTQ individuals, and although most public universities do, there isn't a box that you can check "gay" or "lesbian" on your application like gender, race, and ethnicity.

Just because "white people" may no longer be the absolute majority does not mean that they don't still enjoy white privilege and minority groups are still not oppressed. Affirmative action sets slightly lower bars for racial and ethnic minorities because, while you may be an exception, far more minorities as a percentage live in poverty and experience institutionalized oppression than do whites. Minorities have far less opportunity to succeed in primary and secondary education due to these conditions that are outside of their control (resulting in less competitive GPA's and test scores), and so affirmative action adjusts for their level of ability *relative to their socioeconomic opportunity associated with their minority status.*

Not all individual minority students may need such treatment, but if you read the following study of University of California schools, you will see that banning affirmative action by law increases enrollment of Asian students and decreases enrollment of African American and Hispanic students. Another interesting fact to note is that our State of Florida also bans affirmative action in education.

Since the comment box won't let me post a link, please Google "affects of affirmative action ban in California colleges" and read a few studies. And please do your research the next time you try and publish something online on a subject that you know nothing about.

Anonymous
Tue Jun 12 2012 16:22
Interesting how the CFF Opinions policy arbitrarily changes from writer to writer. Why are there no factual statements with citations? How come Sejal is permitted to comment on her own article while the rest of us may not? Kaley, I'm calling you out right now :\
Sejal M.
Tue Jun 12 2012 11:54
Sorry, I should have been more clear: I am 100% Indian racially. However, I am also an American citizen, and I identify culturally with being American, as this is where I have been raised.
Anonymous
Tue Jun 12 2012 11:25
" Being an American citizen means maintaining one's cultural minority while being a part of the majority."

Uh, no it doesn't.

Anonymous
Tue Jun 12 2012 11:24
You can't be 100% Indian and American at the same time (unless you were talking about ethnicity).




log out