It seems true. But so what? MassMutual are a private company. They can offer scholarships to whoever they want. Why shouldn't they be free to choose who they offer their scholarships to?

It's not a "new" scholarship though. It's been offered since at least the 2010-2011 academic year. Here's a press release from MassMutual themselves promoting their policy:

http://www.massmutual.com/aboutmassmutual/newscenter/pressreleases/articledisplay?mmcom_articleid=de7d6bf4862a3310VgnVCM200000d37106aaRCRD

But again, I ask, so what? Unless you oppose capitalism*, why shouldn't a private-sector company be allowed to decide how to invest their money?

* I do, but that's a seperate issue.

You are right 100%, they can offer it, but what if a company offered one for Whites only? Would it be accepted so easily? I only bring it up, because my daughter asked "Why am I getting the shaft, and finding scholarships so hard to get" At the end of the day, she will end up at a community College for 2 years (as I think MOST kids should) and then go somewhere else to finish, but she had some anger in her voice when she spoke of it.

I am not a capitalist in the way you are thinking. You would be hard pressed to pin me down on economics, to one

thanks for the link jamie, I laughed. An Asian won, and they are per ccapita far better off than any other racial group (including Whites) in this country.

She said it 'eased the financial burden" on her family. I would be lots better with this, if it went to someone who came from below the damn poverty line, regardless of race

NAACP anyone? Get real. Discrimination against whites is so the norm nowadays. But try to form an NAAWP and see what kind of stink the minorities raise.

Stressed, the reason people would be upset about a whites-only academic scholarship is because we live in a still-racist society dealing with the aftermath of even more racist laws and social codes. It's a tiny, tiny way to make up for centuries of racial discrimination, which continues today.

Draug, as soon as we have centuries of white slavery and then decades of black supremacist laws, then get back to us with your National Association for the Advancement of White People idea. You do understand the historical background of the NAACP, right?

So you want to discriminate a group of people, which happens to share the skin colour of some long dead people who enslaved another long dead people with different skin colour, for no reason at all except their skin colour? How does that make sense? How is that not racist?

There are so many scholarships out there. I'm assuming you haven't had to look for any in a while. As someone who graduated last week I can tell you there are thousands of weird scholarships. You want to find a scholarship for Hispanic/Italian's who's aunt is a dental hygienist, you probably can. You want to find one for white pregnant girls under 21, you probably can. I've run across all types of scholarships. The point is they are all offered by people who give their money for a cause, usually one that is personal to them. If I'm rich and want to give money to kids of veterans then I should be able too, same with minorities.

Fairfax, the problems with your statement are "long dead people" and "for no reason at all". Even if society were perfectly colorblind today, which it isn't, the people who lived through segregation and Jim Crow, and the people who enforced it, are still alive today. Their children are still dealing with the aftermath. It will probably take at least a couple of generations to overcome.

I don't even support affirmative action, and I think the NAACP is mostly a waste of time nowadays. But to act like these kinds of programs come out of nowhere or have no good reason is absurd.

Historical background is irrelevant. Discriminating against young men and women because they happen to be white for things that happened decades and centuries before they were born is wrong. IF you want to right an injustice, do so by making economic status the requirement. Then blacks and whites and hispanic and asians from poor neighborhoods or working class households can all take advantage of it and rich blacks and rich asians and rich hispanics get no more advantage than rich whites. And yes, rich blacks, asians, and hispanics damn well do exist.

But you are still discriminating an entire race of people for what a few who enforced the segregation did. That is a textbook racism, no?

They have a good reason. To continue to divide based on race, keep the victim mentality alive and well, so we will always need more NAACP, Rev. Jackson, Government, etc. to help us fix the problem.

@ck - A couple of generations have passed. I'm 47 and old enough to have grand children (if I had children) and yet I was born in 66. I got married in 89. If my wife and I had conceived on our honeymoon, that kid would be 23 and would turn 24 before the year is out. So they could easily have an infant or even preschooler. That would be generations removed from any affiliation with the Civil Rights movement.

Draug: What is this centuries ago talk? There is racism going on today. It's usually not the law any more, but both government and society discriminate against black people all the time. I agree that economically based aid would be better, although rich black people (and rich women and rich hispanics and so on) are discriminated against as well. It's interesting you say "Civil Rights Movement," as if everything automatically got fixed in 1964. Ending racism and the aftermath of racial segregation is an ongoing process.

Fairfax, "a few who enforced the segregation" is not the correct way to phrase. A whole society generally doesn't maintain such a widespread and invasive practice without the support of a substantial minority.

For both of you: To put this another way, would you trade the all the social and legal benefits of being white for the tiny number of affirmative action-style benefits available to racial minorities? I wouldn't.

The fact remains that the vast majority of white people alive today didn't partake in any repression of black people. And they are the ones disciminated against.

What are the social and legal benefits of being white exactly?

I have absolutely zero legal benefits being white. What is this scent you peddle? It smells like complete and utter horseshit to me.

Draug doesn't seem to know what White Privilege is, and he's working awfully hard to deny that he has any.

Are you guys genuinely arguing that there is no meaningful racism in America today? Since it was in the news, here is a link about the lawsuit against New York City's enormous racial disparity in stop-and-frisk arrests. It is the first link I could find that looks good; I am sure you can find some more. http://ccrjustice.org/floyd

Here is a video about racism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge7i60GuNRg

Here is a report about racism in health care:
http://academic.udayton.edu/health/07humanrights/wcar02.htm

Here is a poll about it.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/27/14740413-ap-poll-majority-harbor-prejudice-against-blacks?lite

Here is a funny Louis CK bit about being white.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4f9zR5yzY

AverageWhiteBoy, I find your handle appropriate here.

For Draug and Fairfax: the incarceration rate for racial minorities is several times that of whites. You can either argue that is indicate of existing or past racial bias that continues to influence us today, or you can argue there's something inherent about racial minorities that get them arrested more. I would argue the former.

Again I ask what legal advantage I have? As far as the so called white privilege... I was raised in farm country with a father who was raised in the poorest part of Nashville in the 40s and 50s. He went into the service because the so called white privilege didn't extend to Tue working class of Nashville then. Dinner was whatever they could scrounge up in the fields and my dad, as the oldest of nine kids, usually went without to male certain my aunts and uncles got to eat. He is paying for it with poor health no. Where was this so called white privilege for him. That term is a bogus and bullshit term. It is rich privilege, not white privilege, and Michelle Obama enjoyed rich privilege her entire life. So don't give me your bullshit. Discrimination is now and has been for a long term socioeconomic. Skin color don't mean shit. It's the color of your money that counts. Is it green and in lqrge denominations or ia it silver and copper and occasionally doesn't even rattle.

Draugnar, the difference between your dirt poor dad in Nashville and a dirt poor black guy living in Nashville in the 1940s and 1950s is that your dad didn't have to worry that someone of a different race could rape your father's wife or beat his kids or kill him and likely face zero legal consequences. Black people did.

@CK - I would argue that gang life and drug life are glamourized by urban music and so urban people flock to that very illegal lifestyle therefore getting themselves incarcerated more. Drug buyers get probation. Drug dealers get jail.

And you have tons of advantages! Look at the information about arrest and incarceration rates. As a white guy I can be more confident that an encounter with the police or the justice system will go well, compared to a black or hispanic man.

Urban people, my goodness. So okay, more black people are "urban." Why is that? White flight and residential segregation.

I can be confident my encounters go better because I treat police with respect and don't listen to crap that encourages murdering them.

Oh my word Draug, before we consider how much you are ignoring objective facts about racial disparities in the justice system, I want to know how old you are. 90? I can't remember the last time someone talked about rap as encouraging cop murder in a serious way.

Read above for my age. I don't chew my cud twice like a cow.

And I was specifically referring to gangsta rap. There is rap I enjoy. But any song that degrades women and talks of.killing cops encourages the cops to feel threatened.

That's right, you said your age above. I just forgot in the 80s-esque panic about rapping and cop killing and such. Do you know Ice T did that song first, and then he played a cop on TV?

Anyway, to get it straight: You are saying that because of gangster rap, black people are arrested at something like seven times the rate white people are arrested (depending on how you count), and that this is the fault of the arrestees, not any racism in American society? I want to be clear about what exactly you are trying to argue.

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_md3pgs58v71qd7dni.gif

http://whitewhine.com/

Huh.....how 'bout that...

http://amptoons.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/concise_color.png

I hope this helps

White Privilege: the theory that Sasha and Malia Obama automatically have worse prospects in life than any white person who was raised by an abusive single parent who was constantly strung out on drugs and alcohol.

Because hey, white privilege can erase ALL of that - but despite the Obama girls' Sidwell Friends and Ivy League educations and multi-millionaire parents, we all know they're always going to get the short end of the stick in life and need to have the playing field leveled in their favor.

Tolstoy, you're being deliberately obtuse. No one is suggestion there is a perfect inverse correlation between 'blackness' and initial prospects in life. Having said that, minority-oriented scholarships and similar initiatives are a useful--if imperfect--means of countering the very real difference in average prospects available to whites and minorities in this country.

I'm being no more obtuse than those who argue that social inequalities necessitate systematic official discrimination against white people for things they have no control over, with no consideration for anything but peoples' melanin levels.

There's no denying the persistent legacy of historical racial injustices, but perpetrating *new* injustices in the name of fairness is not just wrong, but does much to encourage the perpetuation of racial animosity. We as a nation have been practicing quotas, preferences, and set-asides for decades now. It has not made the playing field equal, as all the advocates for such policies are acknowledging here. When will we be able to say "this isn't working, we should think of something else"? Another 10 years? Another 100? Or must my great-grandchildren keep checking that "white" box (assuming the whiteness hasn't been bred out of them by then) so future college admissions counselors and HR busybodies can continue to discriminate against them in the name of "fairness"?

I got it! The ultimate AA equalizer! We ban same race marriage unless it is a minority marriage or a smae sex marriage. That way no more whitr children will be born and the blacks can rule the earth like they so desperately want to do.

Anyone ever notice that Affirmative Action and Alcoholic's Anonymous share the same initials? Coincidence? Or was the AA concept dreamt up by an alcoholic democrat - maybe a Kennedy.

reminder that mlk supported affirmative action

Tolstoy, is your opinion that minorities no longer face greater challenges than whites in America, purely by virtue of race? because if that's the case, you're delusional beyond the scope of argument.

Hey Landowner... you still here?

If you're genuinely concerned about discrimination, and affirmative action is the thing you are most worried about, I can only assume you have no idea what kind of discrimination actually goes on in American society, that you have no sense of proportion, or that you find discrimination against white people to be more significant than discrimination against black people.

@Thucy - He also supported civil disobedience that was disruptive and would force people to be arrested. Oh and he beat his wife. So I guess if MLK did it, it's OK for me to do it.

Draug, could you clarify something from yesterday, that you believe that the difference in black and white incarceration rates are due to rap music and not the lingering or current effects of racism? If that isn't correct, to what do you attribute them?

Tolstoy, something I thought of and I'm genuinely curious: do you have the same level of concern for legacy admissions and athletic scholarships, both of which play a larger role in an average white applicant not getting into college or getting a scholarship than affirmative action does?

I attribute them to the higher instance of the felony crimes being committed by the socioeconomically disadvantaged and that the majority of those at that disadvantage are black. Why? There isn't one single factor that can be pointed to. It isn't a black and white world we have here where all things have a single cause or factor influencing them. We do have a problem with our inner city environment. Part of it is racial, no doubt. Much of it is more economic. Additionally, the absentee dad issues within both inner city and rural communtiies ("trailer trash" comes to mind: even when the dad is there he may as well not be) are a significant problem. Role models are severely lacking in poor communities.

As I just alluded too, we have a similar situation with our rural communities where poverty also runs rampant. The key difference is that rural communities can't afford large police forces and typically have Andy Taylor and Barney Fife on the job so the moonshiners and the potheads and the wife and kid beaters more easily hide from Johnny Law.

That doesn't mean Barney Fife is not racist. He often is. But the law itself is not inherently racist. By that, I mean there is nothing in the law that says "black people have no rights". There used to be. But there hasn't been for more than two generations (a generation is consider 20 years typically). I do believe that blacks, latinos, and whites (and any one else) all get a fair shake in front of our courts over all assuming they have a color-blind judge. The things that need the reform, though, have nothing to do with AA. The whole idea of being able to buy a better defense team is socioeconomically biased, but it isn't racist. Judges should never be for life and should come from the city which they preside over. I think the same should apply to police. The idea that a neighboring less racially diverse city often supplies the police officers or that judges typically live out side the district/city they preside over is what leads to potential abuse of the system. But the *law* does not say "blacks are less worthy than whites". If you can show me a law currently on the books and enforced that says that, I'd be very surprised.

My whole argument is that

Oh, and CK... I know you asked Tolstoy, but I am absolutely against legacy being a determining factor in school admissions at any school that receive tax payer dollars. But I would question your "athletic scholarship" argument considering how many black football and basketball players get to go to college on those shcolarships. If anything, they are a great equalizing factor. Although I do have a problem with atheletic scholarships in general, but only in their current implementation. If the athlete were still required to have the grades to getg into the school and the scholarship just paid the bills because he was disadvantaged financially, I would go for it. But the typical college athlete will never play at the professional level, so athletics focused on a specific sport should never be a program of study and all athletes should have to have the same grades as any other non-atheletic student or the school risk losing it's accredidation.

Hi "minister of war," I am still here. Can I help you?

uh... source on the claim that MLK beat wife? can't find anything credible

Can't find it on the phone... But I did find plenty of citations including his biography by a good friend and confident which talks of his numerous extramarital affairs and visits to prostitutes. So I guess cheating on my wife with whores is OK?