• Canadian Court strikes down "White, straight, single male" scholarship and "White, straight, single
    114 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Wowza!;49800769][IMG]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/6909475/chart2.PNG[/IMG] White students make up 69% of high GPA students, but receive 77% of scholarships. Minorities make up 30% of high GPA students, but receive 22% of scholarships. Minorities receive a higher average scholarship amount, but receive disproportionately fewer scholarships overall.[/QUOTE] So.. 8% discrepancy, and minorities still get 23% more money. What are you trying to prove? Do you think it's impossible that maybe the white students earned their scholarships? Are you suggesting the discrepancy is clearly due to skin color and couldn't possibly be influenced by a variety of other factors, including application rates? [QUOTE=Raidyr;49800853]Related: I see a lot of people complain about the lack of scholarships for white students but few solutions. Most scholarships are private ventures. What stops a group of concerned citizens from starting their own trust?[/QUOTE] That's what this entire thread is about, someone starting a scholarship for white people and having it shut down.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;49800996]The Canadian government stops a guy with a lot of money from giving away some of his money to prospective college students? News to me.[/QUOTE] dude do you even know what thread you're posting in
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49798374]Same, being asianish sucks. No [B]white privilege[/B] or institutionalized racism in my favor to make up for it.[/QUOTE] Well. That would be the case if you're American. Isn't Canada a bit better in that regard as a lot of that shit falls under the blanketed "Visible Minority" category.
I wish that graph showed gender. The so called 'straight white man' would not be the majority as more women are attending college/uni.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;49800506]The "can't be a feminist or a homosexual" stipulation to the scholarship is stupid and wrong and I wouldn't be surprised if it was canned on that wording alone. But no it's all because the institution hates white people, right?[/QUOTE] Is it OK to have scholarships that require you identify as a feminist?
[QUOTE=srobins;49798986]When I was applying for scholarships there was basically one I could even apply for, the rest were for Mexican girls of below average intelligence who require tutoring and whose parents may or may not be here illegally. My favorite was the one geared towards minorities who needed financial aid to study abroad.. Like, are you fucking kidding me? Somewhere out there, there's some girl living the dream in Italy for the summer while I'm killing myself with work just so I can afford the base tuiton while living with my parents. [editline]23rd February 2016[/editline] But hey, at least I.. Uh.. I.. Wait, what do I get for being white again? [editline]23rd February 2016[/editline] Because something something racism something something privilege something something institutionalized. It's all bullshit. Well meaning progressives turning a blind eye to poor white kids and continuing to demonize them while middle class black girls get carried to class on a throne. [editline]23rd February 2016[/editline] Oh right and men too, because apparently women are also inherently poor as well. [editline]23rd February 2016[/editline] In what universe do white people have more scholarship opportunities than minorities? Really, tell me so I can get in on this, because so far being a white man is the worst part of my college experience.[/QUOTE] Oh my god the sense of entitlement and arrogance coming from this post. "Ooooh I should have gotten to go to Italy unlike some dumb mexican girl because I'm totally smarter then her." I seriously doubt they could have gotten that fucking scholarship without putting some fucking work into it. They would not hand that shit out for no fucking reason. [editline]23rd February 2016[/editline] Now why would they do that? It's not like these people hate you. They just did some thinking, unlike you, and realized that more then likely a middle class black girl would have the worse chance as you do to get a scholarship even if she did way fucking better then you. Racism is far from dead in this country. Get used to it. [editline]23rd February 2016[/editline] Because in Canada they actually fucking do.
[QUOTE=_Axel;49801208]It shouldn't be news to you. That's what this very thread is about.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Lord of Ears;49801544]dude do you even know what thread you're posting in[/QUOTE] My phrasing was a bit blunt. Yes, the government can stop a guy from giving his money to college students in this specific scenario, where the government doesn't happen to particularly like the angle the person is coming from in regards to their will and how he specifically wants the scholarship to be set up. He wants to do it through these two schools, who would have to endorse it as financial aid options. This would, in effect, be endorsing this beliefs. That's why they have to ask a judge what to do in the first place, because they are finding out how best to use the trust in question. I find it hard to believe that anyone at any level of the Canadian government would step in if someone of their own accord set up a trust that gave money to students outside official government grounds, which the two colleges in question were. I could be wrong but I know for a fact it isn't like that in the US. [QUOTE=_Axel;49801208]You say "most scholarships are private ventures", as in there can be no interference by the government ie scholarships can go to whatever demographic the donor wants them to. But then a scholarship aimed solely at straight, white people is taken down because the will is "racist and misogynistic". Of fucking course it is, it discriminates against people that are not of a specific race or sexual orientation. But then again so are every scholarship that are limited to certain races, yet those aren't taken down. Your argument about the will being racist is nil, because so do every other race-based scholarship, and those are left alone. It is obvious that the government operates under a double standard here, most likely to appeal to the "power+privilege" braindeads.[/QUOTE] While it's possible that they are acting in bad faith and that this could repsent a double standard, I really just think we should take the judges word for it that this isn't the case, and that they just didn't want put two schools in the awkward position of securing financial aid from someone with really questionable views. I also see a lot of people focusing on the race aspect and not so much on the heterosexual aspect which, again, would make this entire matter void regardless of who it was limited to. Speaking personally I'm not a huge fan of race-based scholarships anyway but even coming from that angle I see this as more of a "We don't want to accept scholarships from this particular person" story, and less about institutional racism against white people.
[QUOTE=FinalHunter;49800071]lol this is such a poor perception. Scholarships shouldn't be need-based they should be MERIT based. You should earn it, not be given a handout just because you don't make as much money as the next person.[/QUOTE] this isn't the fucking stone age where you need to slay an elephant to prove you're more worthy every human being deserves education have fun with your objectivist wet dream
[QUOTE=FinalHunter;49800071]lol this is such a poor perception. Scholarships shouldn't be need-based they should be MERIT based. You should earn it, not be given a handout just because you don't make as much money as the next person.[/QUOTE] Why can't they be both?
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49801841]Is it OK to have scholarships that require you identify as a feminist?[/QUOTE] Sure, why not? I know you're trying to just spin this around but IMO it's asinine to call out feminism in particular as a reason to deny someone a scholarship. It would be like denying someone for being an activist for a particular political party. But the heterosexual requirement is the actual issue here and it's most likely why these scholarships were struck down, but it figures you're not going to address that because it doesn't fit into your ridiculous narrative that white people are being oppressed by the unholy trinity of SJWs, Feminazis, and the PC Police.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;49802142]Sure, why not? I know you're trying to just spin this around but IMO it's asinine to call out feminism in particular as a reason to deny someone a scholarship. It would be like denying someone for being an activist for a particular political party. But the heterosexual requirement is the actual issue here and it's most likely why these scholarships were struck down, but it figures you're not going to address that because it doesn't fit into your ridiculous narrative that white people are being oppressed by the unholy trinity of SJWs, Feminazis, and the PC Police.[/QUOTE] So it's fine to require feminism but not exclude it? That's pretty ridiculous.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49802271]So it's fine to require feminism but not exclude it? That's pretty ridiculous.[/QUOTE] Actually what's pretty ridiculous is your OP making this out to be a scholarship race war.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;49800996]The Canadian government stops a guy with a lot of money from giving away some of his money to prospective college students? News to me.[/QUOTE] Did you read the article
[QUOTE=ZestyLemons;49800421]According to our Canadian Charter of Human Rights, yes. Discrimination of any form (age, race, gender, etc) is clearly stated as a right that you shouldn't be discriminated against.[/QUOTE] While that is correct and is stated in section 15(1) of The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 15(2) goes on to stipulate that discrimination may take place it if it to be for the better of people who have been historically disadvantaged. [quote=Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms] 15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. (2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.[/quote]
[QUOTE=phygon;49803341]Did you read the article[/QUOTE] I made my point more clear in the last reply.
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;49801847]Oh my god the sense of entitlement and arrogance coming from this post. "Ooooh I should have gotten to go to Italy unlike some dumb mexican girl because I'm totally smarter then her." I seriously doubt they could have gotten that fucking scholarship without putting some fucking work into it. They would not hand that shit out for no fucking reason.[/quote] Yeah man, that's exactly what I'm saying. You caught me! It has nothing to do with the fact that if you require financial assistance, you probably shouldn't be blowing money on extravagant trips overseas to study in beautiful European vacation destinations, but more to do with the fact that I actually secretly hate Mexican people and have a deep sense of entitlement! [QUOTE=TornadoAP;49801847]Now why would they do that? It's not like these people hate you. They just did some thinking, unlike you, and realized that more then likely a middle class black girl would have the worse chance as you do to get a scholarship even if she did way fucking better then you. Racism is far from dead in this country. Get used to it.[/quote] Uh.. Right. So in order to combat the entirely unsubstantiated idea that the middle class black girl would be randomly denied a scholarship based solely on race (despite having multiple scholarships designed specifically for her demographic, lol), they're paying for minorities to go overseas and meanwhile white people can't even apply to the majority of the scholarships listed on my university's scholarship portal. Sorry to ruin your extremely self-righteous personal attack post, but maybe you should take a time out and actually think before you go on a ridiculous tirade and accuse somebody of being entitled and racist just for opposing the idea that minority students need to experience a semester in Paris more than a poor white kid needs to buy his fucking books.
[QUOTE=srobins;49803561] Uh.. Right. So in order to combat the entirely unsubstantiated idea that the middle class black girl would be randomly denied a scholarship based solely on race (despite having multiple scholarships designed specifically for her demographic, lol), they're paying for minorities to go overseas and meanwhile white people can't even apply to the majority of the scholarships listed on my university's scholarship portal. [/QUOTE] Wouldn't mind linking it would you? That's shocking to me because just looking up the Canadian universities mentioned in the article it was exactly the opposite.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;49802134]Why can't they be both?[/QUOTE] Because it appropriates funds potentially to well-to-do students who happen to be ethnic minorities or women, ignoring the fact that they may be notably more privileged and financially well-off compared to people that don't tick the minority boxes who are then left with lesser options and lesser funding despite having a greater need for financial assistance. It's targeting students one layer of abstraction above the actual issue, which is money. Rather than targeting minorities because X% of minorities require financial assistance, just target everybody who needs financial assistance and take race out of the equation. No offense to any rich minority kids, but you don't need a special scholarship just because someone asked to touch your hair in middle school. Either you can afford school or you can't. Help the people that can't. [editline]24th February 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Raidyr;49803570]Wouldn't mind linking it would you? That's shocking to me because just looking up the Canadian universities mentioned in the article it was exactly the opposite.[/QUOTE] I'm at an American university so this may be irrelevant to Canada, at this point I'm talking more in generalities and about the principle of minority-based scholarships so what I'm saying may not even apply elsewhere. No offense but I'm about to head to bed so I can't be bothered to go through the portal right now and post it, but I've been honest about my personal experience and in describing the scholarship requirements I read a few weeks ago when I was applying. They targeted first generation Americans, specifically Mexican-American women, who specifically required tutoring, and the studying abroad one targeted ethnic minorities who had an interest in studying abroad. I know I got a little butthurt at the beginning of the thread and went a bit off the deep end, but I don't think it's unreasonable to be irritated that while I'm struggling to stay afloat and living at home just to pay my way through school, someone out there is paying for minority students to experience Europe just for being non-white. I agree with the general sentiment of minority-based scholarships in the sense that I think those who truly need assistance should receive it, and that the people who design these scholarships mean well and largely target groups that are statistically disadvantaged, but I feel that it'd be way better to target those that are quantifiably disadvantaged (i.e. low-income students and other non-race metrics), because by targeting people based on race you're also including minorities who may be significantly [I]more[/I] privileged than their non-minority counterparts.
At the university I go to, if I was a woman my degree would be costing me nothing.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;49801939]My phrasing was a bit blunt. Yes, the government can stop a guy from giving his money to college students in this specific scenario, where the government doesn't happen to particularly like the angle the person is coming from in regards to their will and how he specifically wants the scholarship to be set up. He wants to do it through these two schools, who would have to endorse it as financial aid options. This would, in effect, be endorsing this beliefs. That's why they have to ask a judge what to do in the first place, because they are finding out how best to use the trust in question. I find it hard to believe that anyone at any level of the Canadian government would step in if someone of their own accord set up a trust that gave money to students outside official government grounds, which the two colleges in question were. I could be wrong but I know for a fact it isn't like that in the US. While it's possible that they are acting in bad faith and that this could repsent a double standard, I really just think we should take the judges word for it that this isn't the case, and that they just didn't want put two schools in the awkward position of securing financial aid from someone with really questionable views. I also see a lot of people focusing on the race aspect and not so much on the heterosexual aspect which, again, would make this entire matter void regardless of who it was limited to. Speaking personally I'm not a huge fan of race-based scholarships anyway but even coming from that angle I see this as more of a "We don't want to accept scholarships from this particular person" story, and less about institutional racism against white people.[/QUOTE] Once again, what difference is there between the racist beliefs of the guy who sets up a scholarship for exclusively white people and the racist beliefs of the people who do the same with other races? There are only differences between the two for the people who subscribe to the "can't be racist against whites" mentality. So no, even if these are set up on government grounds, this still shows the hypocritical nature of the government. Anybody who restricts a scholarship to a certain race has "really questionable views". I also don't see why a restriction to heterosexuals would be a dealbreaker if restrictions to certain races aren't: Both are largely irrelevant to academic performance and aren't a result of personal choice. Scholarships restricted to females are fair games yet restricting to a specific sexual orientation isn't? That doesn't make a lick of sense.
[QUOTE=_Axel;49804222]Once again, what difference is there between the racist beliefs of the guy who sets up a scholarship for exclusively white people and the racist beliefs of the people who do the same with other races? There are only differences between the two for the people who subscribe to the "can't be racist against whites" mentality. So no, even if these are set up on government grounds, this still shows the hypocritical nature of the government. Anybody who restricts a scholarship to a certain race has "really questionable views". I also don't see why a restriction to heterosexuals would be a dealbreaker if restrictions to certain races aren't: Both are largely irrelevant to academic performance and aren't a result of personal choice. Scholarships restricted to females are fair games yet restricting to a specific sexual orientation isn't? That doesn't make a lick of sense.[/QUOTE] I was looking up more information regarding the case because I didn't feel comfortable going up to bat for the government without facts and discovered this telling nugget in another article. [QUOTE]“I have no hesitation in declaring the qualifications relating to race, marital status, and sexual orientation and, in the case of female candidates, philosophical ideology...void as being contrary to public policy,” Mitchell wrote in her decision.[/QUOTE] So I actually completely agree with you and retract any previous support I had for the school. This is absolutely a double standard. You can't declare qualifications related to race as being "contrary to public policy" when its for white students while allowing it for non-white students.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;49802342]Actually what's pretty ridiculous is your OP making this out to be a scholarship race war.[/QUOTE] Its a blatant double standard.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.