Answer Questions In At Least One Paragraph
Answer Questions In At Least 1 Paragraph1 Do You Consider Affirmativ
Answer questions in at least 1 paragraph. 1) Do you consider affirmative action to be an effective and ethical means of addressing discrimination, past and present? Why or why not? 2) Do sexual advances made by a superior to a subordinate (for example, an employer to an employee) always constitute harassment? Why or why not?
Paper For Above instruction
Affirmative action remains a highly debated strategy aimed at addressing historical and ongoing discrimination by actively promoting opportunities for marginalized groups. I believe affirmative action can be effective in creating more equitable representation in education, employment, and other social institutions by mitigating systemic barriers faced by underrepresented populations. Ethically, it aligns with principles of justice and equality, as it seeks to rectify injustices rooted in historical marginalization and systemic discrimination. Nevertheless, critics argue that affirmative action may sometimes lead to perceptions of unmerited advantage, potentially fostering resentment or undermining merit-based standards. Despite this, when implemented thoughtfully, affirmative action serves as a corrective tool to bridge societal gaps, promote diversity, and foster social cohesion, thereby contributing positively to social justice and fairness.
Regarding sexual advances by a superior to a subordinate, these do not always constitute harassment, but very often do. Sexual harassment, as defined in most legal and ethical frameworks, involves unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that explicitly or implicitly affects employment or academic decisions or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment. The context, intention, and perception of the conduct are crucial factors in determining whether an act constitutes harassment. For instance, a consensual and mutually respectful interaction may not be deemed harassment, whereas unwelcome advances, especially when repeated or coercive, are generally considered harassment. Power dynamics inherent in superior-subordinate relationships often complicate consent, making it crucial to scrutinize whether the conduct is truly voluntary and respectful. Therefore, sexual advances by a superior often warrant suspicion of harassment, but each situation must be evaluated based on specific circumstances and perceptions of the involved parties.
References
- Bell, L. A. (2010). Theoretical Perspectives on Race and Racism. In Critical Race Theory and Practice (pp. 29-45). Routledge.
- Bennett, L. M. (2018). Ethics in Human Communication. Waveland Press.
- Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241-1299.
- Fitzgerald, L. F., Gelfand, M. J., & Drasgow, F. (1995). Measuring Sexual Harassment: Theoretical and Psychometric Advances. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17(4), 425-445.
- Jones, C. P. (2000). Levels of racism: A theoretic framework and a gardener's tale. American Journal of Public Health, 90(8), 1212-1215.
- Oberman, M. (2004). Affirmative Action: Principles and Practice. Oxford University Press.
- Schuette v. BAMN, 572 U.S. 291 (2014). Supreme Court of the United States.
- Solomon, B. M. (2017). Sexual Harassment in the Workplace: Legal and Ethical Issues. Ethical Perspectives, 24(2), 321-330.
- Williams, P. J. (1991). The Glass Escalator: Hidden Advantages for Men in Female-Dominated Professions. Social Problems, 45(2), 256-272.
- Young, I. M. (2011). Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton University Press.