[Debate] Positive discrimination

[MilicaS]

Is positive discrimination good or bad thing? Compared to what/who? In which cases?
I had a debate on this topic and I was in the team For.
I'm interested in your opinions, so thanks in advance for replying.

Also if you don't know what a positive discrimination might be, here are some examples (benefits for/of vulnerable groups of people, grants/scholarships, senior citizen discounts,...).

[★Skylar Knight]

Discrimination is discrimination, and I find it bad.
I understand if people don´t find it bad though.

[Kira was Righteous]

What like black people are fast and have massive... snakes and that all chinese people are smart?

Its better then negative discrimination i guess

[Vallerie]

Discrimination is discrimination, and I find it bad.
I understand if people don´t find it bad though.

Yeah you're right, discrimination is discrimination wheter it is a positive or negative one. :y

[The Demonic Kazekage]

So when people say that black people have big packages and Asians are smart it's not ok,is it bad if its actually true in some cases
Let me finish
Sometimes people will play into there races own stereotype without trying and it just happens
(Example)I have an Asian friend that is very smart,but doesn't think of himself as a nerd or geek and doesn't have the stereotypical Asian parents That wants him to be a doctor or lawer
(Example 2)Im black and I've been said to have a larger trouser snake than others,I can't help the fact that I'm big but that's life

[rikerslade]

Positive discrimination is like cold fire: nonexistent.

[Jay T]

I don't agree, the fact is that it is prejudice that you only mate with your species... I hope lol.

Now is it bad to he prejudice??

[rikerslade]

Half of the things here are stereotypical, not discrimination.

[SasoriOfTheRedSaand]

We can safely assume that this guy has a worm in his pants, and what he basically meant was that certain ethnicitys have a bigger chance of getting somewhere than others. For instance I don't know the exact details, but Asian people have to get higher scores than White and black people because their average is higher or something, if someone knows the exact details please post.

While Asian Americans make up only 4% of the U.S. population, Asian-American students make up a much higher percentage of student bodies in top universities around the country. The percentages are astounding: 24% at Stanford, 18% at Harvard, and 25% at both Columbia and Cornell. More Asian Americans over the age of 25 have bachelor's degrees and advanced degrees than any other race or ethnic group. And after outperforming their colleagues in school, Asian Americans also bring home higher incomes than their non-Asian counterparts - almost $10,000 more annually than the rest of the population (2002 statistics).

So what does this mean? Are Asian students simply smarter? Contrary to what much of the public may believe, Asian students are no more intellectually gifted than non-Asian students are. The reason that Asian students outperform their peers in the classroom has nothing to do with how they were born and everything to do with how they are raised.

The statistics are startling, so we decided to explore and reveal the various practices or "secrets" Asian families utilized to maximize their children's chances at academic and professional success. Top of the Class: How Asian

Parents Raise High Achievers - and How You Can Too was the result of these efforts. In Top of the Class, we discuss 17 practices that are common throughout many Asian households; we also include a section discussing the parenting pitfalls to which many Asian parents fall victim.

[YowYan]

Anything that shows our differences should not be shown at all. That's the easiest way to get rid of categorizing ppl.

[Supermacaquecool]

o_o I understand what ya mean! It my country is quite a topic to discuss! We've this ethical groups that are vulnerable because when we're colonized by Spanish ppl they were treated as slaves during 300 years. Then the war for Independence came, and was only achieved thanks to their blood, but did they new brand country retributed them? Not at all, not only they kept living in miserable conditions, but around 40 years later Mr. Tejada promulgated the Law of Confiscations of dead goods. It was initially created (or so they say) to retrieve the ecclesiastical and un-used goods, but it also affected the ethical groups' ejidos, because they weren't exploiting them right (o_o For God sake, who could? The country was in civil war since it was born, and the ethical groups were always used as pawns)...
Emm, well to finish quickly our country was built on their blood, yet they're seen as the $hit of the country, and have no access to education. I think it cases like this it's the best thing to do. Many criticizes that kind of "special benefits" because they think it attacks the premise that every 1 should be equal under the law...when in fact sometimes it's a compulsory step to achieve a real equal state.
SO, yes, in some cases, I agree with it.

[Jay T]

Point is, should it he okay for people to gain certain things based on their attributes. Such as scholarships or discounts at resturaunts . I think it is entirely okay as long as it is justifiable to Tue majority of people such as veterans being able to get a loan from a bank easier than a civilian due to their lack of being able to build credit while they are on a tour, or something like that.

[Guilty as Sin]

This is also known as affirmative action or reverse discrimination. I think a working definition would be helpful: These refers to policies that take factors including "race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or national origin" into consideration in order to benefit an underrepresented group "in areas of employment, education, and business", usually justified as countering the effects of a history of discrimination.

It's called reverse discrimination for a good reason: The irony is that those who seek to counter discrimination actually perpetuate it by continuing to factor in someone's race, color, etc.

Thus, according to the definition, "senior citizenship discounts" and even scholarships do not fall under this category. I think it's painfully obvious that giving someone a leg-up simply because of what they look like or where they come from as opposed to their qualifications is unfair and therefore wrong. With this note, since every type of person becomes a senior citizen, this means discounts apply to every race, so this is obviously not an example of discrimination.

Scholarships are difficult, and it's easy to see how that might be discrimination, but it's not. There are two kinds of scholarships: those that are available to everyone, and specialized ones that are available to a select few who meet those special requirements, which I imagine is what is specifically in question.

These specialized scholarships can range from being for only-children who have only a Latino mother, to Left-handed swimmers. They are funded by people who sympathize with these students because they have been in their own situation. It is not discrimination for these scholarships to help the people they want. Granted, they sometimes require things like race, nationality, etc., but to claim that it is discrimination would be to claim that scholarships for the left-handed is discrimination against the right-handed. This argument, however, holds little water.

[The Demonic Kazekage]

We can safely assume that this guy has a worm in his pants, and what he basically meant was that certain ethnicitys have a bigger chance of getting somewhere than others. For instance I don't know the exact details, but Asian people have to get higher scores than White and black people because their average is higher or something, if someone knows the exact details please post.

You assume wrong sir

[Wang]

What dafaq is positive discrimination?

[ImmaculateShadow]

Is positive discrimination good or bad thing? Compared to what/who? In which cases?
I had a debate on this topic and I was in the team For.
I'm interested in your opinions, so thanks in advance for replying.

Also if you don't know what a positive discrimination might be, here are some examples (benefits for/of vulnerable groups of people, grants/scholarships, senior citizen discounts,...).

Three words: Japanese Internment Camps

Discrimination is discrimination, and I find it bad.
I understand if people don´t find it bad though.

You Relativist.

[Jay T]

This is also known as affirmative action or reverse discrimination. I think a working definition would be helpful: These refers to policies that take factors including "race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or national origin" into consideration in order to benefit an underrepresented group "in areas of employment, education, and business", usually justified as countering the effects of a history of discrimination.

It's called reverse discrimination for a good reason: The irony is that those who seek to counter discrimination actually perpetuate it by continuing to factor in someone's race, color, etc.

Thus, according to the definition, "senior citizenship discounts" and even scholarships do not fall under this category. I think it's painfully obvious that giving someone a leg-up simply because of what they look like or where they come from as opposed to their qualifications is unfair and therefore wrong. With this note, since every type of person becomes a senior citizen, this means discounts apply to every race, so this is obviously not an example of discrimination.

Scholarships are difficult, and it's easy to see how that might be discrimination, but it's not. There are two kinds of scholarships: those that are available to everyone, and specialized ones that are available to a select few who meet those special requirements, which I imagine is what is specifically in question.

These specialized scholarships can range from being for only-children who have only a Latino mother, to Left-handed swimmers. They are funded by people who sympathize with these students because they have been in their own situation. It is not discrimination for these scholarships to help the people they want. Granted, they sometimes require things like race, nationality, etc., but to claim that it is discrimination would be to claim that scholarships for the left-handed is discrimination against the right-handed. This argument, however, holds little water.

I'm having a hard time understanding exactly what it is you're trying to say, what the word discrimination means is that you are creating or showing a difference within a group. This can come in many shapes and forms. For instance make any group, we will say fruits.
If I say a orange is better than an apple then the discrimination is the opinion that one taste better than the other.

I'm just wondering how it is not discrimination for somebody to give lower class people scholarships, it is clearly separating a group of people by a class system. It is positive discrimination because the the group being the subject of the discrimination is given the scholarship based on a set of morals.