Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Reverse discrimination
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==By race, ethnicity or caste== {{See also|Reverse racism}} === China === {{See also|Affirmative action in China|One-child policy}} The [[affirmative action]] of the [[Government of China|Chinese government]] has been called into question, especially from the ethnic group of [[Han Chinese]]. Unfair policies on Chinese college entrance exams ([[Gaokao]]) as well as human rights considered to be favoring the national minority have both been believed to be causing reverse discrimination in the mainland. [[Han chauvinism]] has been becoming more popular in mainland China since the 2000s, the cause of which has been attributed to the discontent towards Chinese affirmative action.<ref name="凭栏观史">《凭栏观史》第34期:中国到底有没有大汉族主义 [The 34th issue of "Viewing History by Leaning on the Railings": Is there any Han nationalism in China?]{{Full citation needed|date=June 2022}}</ref><ref name="皇汉史观">{{Cite web |url=http://news.dwnews.com/china/news/2017-04-26/59812518.html |title=皇汉史观:今天我们如何定义中国?|trans-title=The History of Emperor Han: How do we define China today? |website=DW News |date=26 April 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191210025126/http://news.dwnews.com/china/news/2017-04-26/59812518.html |archive-date=10 December 2019 |language=zh}}</ref> The [[one-child policy]] was only introduced for Han Chinese, with minorities being allowed two or more babies.<ref name="Whyte 2015">{{Cite journal |last1=Whyte |first1=Martin King |last2=Feng |first2=Wang |last3=Cai |first3=Yong |date=2015 |title=Challenging Myths About China's One-Child Policy |journal=The China Journal |volume=74 |pages=144–159 |doi=10.1086/681664 |issn=1324-9347 |pmc=6701844 |pmid=31431804}}</ref> === India === In India, in higher education institutions and in employment by Government, around 49.5% seats are reserved for members of socially disadvantaged castes.<ref name="Neelakantan 2009">{{cite news |last1=Neelakantan |first1=Shailaja |title=India's Education Minister Says Foreign Universities Will Have to Observe Quota Law |url=http://www.chronicle.com/article/indias-education-minister/47891 |work=The Chronicle of Higher Education |date=16 July 2009 |archive-date=13 February 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100213094018/http://www.chronicle.com/article/indias-education-minister/47891 |url-status=live |url-access=limited}}</ref> Reserved category candidates can select a position from the Open 40% also. In [[India]], the term is often used by citizens protesting against [[reservation in India]]. <ref name="Nesiah 1997">{{cite book |last1=Nesiah |first1=Devanesan |title=Discrimination with reason? : the policy of reservations in the United States, India, and Malaysia |date=1997 |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=Delhi |isbn=0-1956-3983-9}}{{Page needed|date=June 2022}}</ref><ref name="Excess reservation">{{cite news |author=<!--anonymous author, no byline--> |url=http://www.hindu.com/2006/10/24/stories/2006102401031300.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061109011448/http://www.hindu.com/2006/10/24/stories/2006102401031300.htm |url-status=dead |archive-date=9 November 2006 |work=[[The Hindu]] |date=24 October 2006 |title=Excess reservation will cause reverse discrimination, cautions Supreme Court}}</ref><ref name="Greenawalt 1983">{{cite book |last1=Greenawalt |first1=Kent |title=Discrimination and reverse discrimination |date=1983 |publisher=Knopf |location=New York |isbn=0-394-33577-5 |edition=1st}}{{Page needed|date=June 2022}}</ref> === United States === Opponents of [[affirmative action in the United States]] use the term ''reverse discrimination'' to say that such programs discriminate against [[White Americans]] in favor of [[African Americans]].<ref name="Carlisle 2005">{{cite book |editor1-last=Carlisle |editor1-first=Rodney P. |title=Encyclopedia of Politics: The Left and The Right |date=2005 |publisher=SAGE Publications |location=Thousand Oaks, Calif. |isbn=978-1-41-290409-4 |page=1009 |doi=10.4135/9781412952408 |chapter=Appendix: Glossary}}</ref> In the U.S., affirmative action has focused on the under-representation of ethnic minority groups and women, and attempted to remedy the effects of past discrimination in both government and the business world.<ref name="Embrick 2008">{{cite book |last1=Embrick |first1=David G. |title=Encyclopedia of Race, Ethnicity, and Society, Volume 1 |date=2008 |publisher=SAGE Publications |isbn=978-1-41-292694-2 |editor1-last=Schaefer |editor1-first=Richard T. |location=Thousands Oaks, Calif. |pages=12–19 |chapter=Affirmative Action in Education |doi=10.4135/9781412963879.n6 |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofra0001unse_o0i9/page/12/mode/1up?view=theater |chapter-url-access=limited}}</ref> Historian [[Nancy MacLean]] writes that during the 1980s and 1990s, "so-called reverse discrimination occurred on an inconsequential scale".<ref name="MacLean 2006">{{cite book |last1=MacLean |first1=Nancy |title=Freedom is Not Enough: The Opening of the American Work Place |date=2006 |publisher=Harvard University Press |isbn=978-0-674-02749-7 |page=232}}</ref> The number of reverse discrimination cases filed with the [[Equal Employment Opportunity Commission]] (EEOC) doubled in the 1990s<ref name="Evans 2004">{{cite journal |last=Evans |first=W.D |title=Reverse Discrimination claims: Growing like kudzu |journal=Maryland Bar Journal |year=2004 |volume=37 |issue=1 |pages=48–51 |issn=0025-4177}}</ref> and continued to reflect a growing percentage of all discrimination cases {{As of|2003|lc=yes}}.<ref name="Pincus 2003">{{cite book |last=Pincus |first=Fred L. |title=Reverse discrimination: Dismantling the myth |url=https://archive.org/details/reversediscrimin0000pinc/page/n4/mode/1up?view=theater |url-access=registration |date=2003 |publisher=Lynne Rienner Publishers |location=Boulder, Colorado |isbn=978-1-58-826203-5}}{{page needed |date=August 2017}}</ref> ==== Colleges ==== White college applicants who have felt passed over in favor of less-qualified Black students as a result of affirmative action in college admissions have described such programs as "reverse discrimination". Elizabeth Purdy argues that this conception of reverse discrimination came close to overturning affirmative action during the [[Conservatism in the United States|conservative]] resurgence of the 1980s and '90s after being granted legitimacy by the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in ''[[Regents of the University of California v. Bakke]]'', which ruled that Alan Bakke had been discriminated against by the school's admissions program.<ref name="Purdy 2005">{{cite book |last=Purdy |first=Elizabeth |editor1-last=Carlisle |editor1-first=Rodney P. |title=Encyclopedia of Politics: The Left and The Right, Volume 1: The Left |date=2005 |publisher=SAGE Publications |location=Thousand Oaks, Calif. |isbn=978-1-41-290409-4 |page=133 |doi=10.4135/9781412952408.n60 |chapter=Desegregation}}</ref> In 1996, the [[University of Texas at Austin|University of Texas]] had to defer the use of racial preferences in their college admissions after the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit|US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit]] barred the school from considering race in admitting students. The ruling determined that diversity in education could not justify making race-based distinctions. ''[[Hopwood v. Texas]]'' in 1996 was a lawsuit brought by four white applicants to the Texas Law School who were denied admission even though their [[grade point average]]s were greater than minority applications that were accepted. The four white students also had greater Law School Admission Test scores.<ref name="Menache 1999">{{cite journal |first1=Robert |last1=Menache |first2=Brian H. |last2=Kleiner |title=New Developments in Reverse Discrimination |journal=Equal Opportunities International |year=1999 |volume=18 |issue=2/3/4 |pages=41–42 |issn=0261-0159 |doi=10.1108/02610159910785790}}</ref> However, in ''[[Grutter v. Bollinger]]'' in 2003, the Supreme Court allowed the University of Michigan Law School to continue to consider race among other relevant diversity factors. The decision was the only legally challenged affirmative-action policy to survive the courts. However, this ruling has led to confusion among universities and lower courts alike regarding the status of affirmative action across the nation. In 2012, [[Fisher v. University of Texas (2013)|''Fisher v. University of Texas'']] reached the Supreme Court.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6161900559426345780&q=Abigail+Fisher&hl=en&as_sdt=2,7&as_ylo=2012 |title=Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, 132 S. Ct. 1536 |publisher=Supreme Court of the United States |date=21 February 2012 |via=Google Scholar |access-date=26 October 2015 |archive-date=14 May 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150514111330/http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6161900559426345780&q=Abigail+Fisher&hl=en&as_sdt=2,7&as_ylo=2012 |url-status=live }}</ref> The University of Texas allegedly used race as a factor in denying Abigail Fisher's application, denying her a fair review. The lower courts upheld the program, but the Supreme Court vacated the judgment of the lower courts and sent the case back to the Fifth Circuit for review. ==== Complaints ==== A draft report on claims of reverse discrimination was prepared for the [[United States Department of Labor]] in 1995.{{efn|The report, by [[Rutgers University]] law professor Alfred W. Blumrosen, stated there were at most 100 reverse-discrimination cases among at least 3,000 discrimination opinions by Federal district and appeals courts from 1990 to 1994. National surveys showed only a few{{vague|date=July 2020}} whites had experienced reverse discrimination, and 5 to 12 percent of whites believed that they had been denied a job or promotion because of it. 2% of cases were of white men charging sexual, racial or national origin discrimination and 1.8% were of white women charging racial discrimination.<ref name="Blumrosen 1995">{{cite journal |last=Blumrosen |first=Alfred |title=How the Courts are Handling Reverse Discrimination Claims (Draft Report on Reverse Discrimination) |year=1995 |journal=Daily Labor Report |publisher=Bureau of National Affairs |location=Arlington, Va. |volume=147 |page=D-43 |issn=1522-5968}}</ref>}} Its analysis of employment discrimination cases in federal courts between 1990 and 1994 concluded that between 1 and 3 percent involved claims of reverse discrimination; and that a "high proportion" of the claims were found to be without merit.<ref name="Bendick 2000">{{cite journal |last1=Bendick |first1=Marc |title=Social policy: affirmative action |journal=International Journal of Economic Development |date=2000 |volume=2 |issue=2 |pages=256–275 |url=https://go.gale.com/ps/anonymous?id=GALE%7CA176368824 |issn=1523-9748 |url-access=subscription |access-date=22 April 2021 |archive-date=22 April 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210422020244/https://go.gale.com/ps/anonymous?id=GALE%7CA176368824 |url-status=live }}</ref> Newer reports by the EEOC have found that less than 10% of race-related complaints were filed by whites. When national samples of whites were asked if they personally have experienced the loss of job, promotion, or college admission because of their race, 2%–13% say yes.<ref name="Pincus 2008">{{cite book |last=Pincus |first=Fred L. |chapter=Reverse discrimination |date=2008 |publisher=SAGE Publications |location=Thousands Oaks, Calif. |isbn=978-1-41-292694-2 |editor=Schaefer, Richard T. |title=Encyclopedia of race, ethnicity, and society, Volume 3 |doi=10.4135/9781412963879.n480 |pages=1159–1161}}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)