Affirmative Action

Like Graham, I have mixed feelings on Affirmative Action (unfortunately, I was not able to listen to the lecture, so I suppose I'll just have to go on views not informed by that). On the one hand, I believe in the essence of this policy: that we need to give minorities and women a fair shot, as they have been lacking that chance in the past and still face insurmountable discrimination (both subtle and obvious). On the other hand, I am unconvinced that Affirmative Action is the best way to go about solving the issue, and am fairly certain that at some point it will need to become obsolete. Like Graham, I think that the problem and solution lies much earlier in education; it is essential that we give all children, of all genders, races and classes, an equal starting point. Unfortunately, this might still be equal only on paper, but lacking quotas, which have been outlawed and are far more discriminatory than Affirmative Action, I suppose it is impossible to completely guarantee the lack of racial and gender bias in hiring and admissions processes. Honestly, this requires a major restructuring of social ideology that will probably not occur over night, although I hope to see it happen in my life time.

Having said this, I voted no on 46, for a multitude of reasons. The first being that I do not want to take the chance of important programs being cut in the way that they have been in other states that have passed similar laws.

Secondly, if Affirmative Action is to be eliminated, as I believe to be necessary down the road, there MUST first be put in place alternative programs and educational funding to maintain opportunities for minorities and women. Additionally, as per my point above, I believe it would be hazardous to eliminate programs targeted specifically for interesting women, minorities, and lower-class individuals in opportunities they may otherwise not have considered because of low numbers within a profession. In other words, although I don't think the law should favor individuals because of their race or gender, even if to remedy past discrimination, I do believe outreach and other such programs designed to increase opportunity are important. At the same time, we must be careful not to further disadvantage minorities and women, or to curb their opportunity growth.

Affirmative Action to me is so incredibly complicated. On the one hand, I think it is unfair and unconstitutional to discriminate based on race or gender, including discrimination against members of a power-holding group (white, middle-class, able-bodied, heterosexual males). On the other, I am very aware of the matrix of domination and oppression that plays into our policies, hiring practices, and social worlds, and am as uncomfortable encouraging it as I am with saying that members of a power-holding group should be discriminated against because they are already advantaged within the structure of our political-economic-social landscape.

Gender roles and race relations both follow certain social scripts that we cannot chuck overnight, much as we'd like to, because the opposition is too great and we don't know how to live entirely outside of such scripts. Thus, we need to navigate toward the edges of those scripts, creating new boundaries that can later be pushed yet again. As with most issues I am ideological about, I am impatient that we are not yet at a point that these long-held social scripts have not disappeared entirely. But I am hopeful that they will continue to mutate so that, eventually, we can live in that ideal world where there is no need for Affirmative Action, because women and minorities will have equal opportunity and will no longer face the discrimination they have for so long.