Reverse discrimination. Why is one way bad to discriminate and the other good?  For example...

My son was speaking to one of his bosses at the newspaper this week.  The boss was told by the higher ups in the company that the next hire HAS TO BE either an African American or a woman.  He has a sports writing position open but can only hire either a black person or a female.  He asked my son "do you know how hard it is to find a woman journalist that wants to write only sports?"  He has to turn away anyone else that might show up with a good resume if they don't meet these very strict specifications.  In other words, it doesn't matter how good you are at the job, it matters what sex and color you are.   

My son was not only a sports journalist himself before taking his current job in circulation but he was also a sports editor.  Therefore he, because of their discrimination against white males, is not allowed to apply for this open position.  Why?  Because he's white and male.  That's it.  He's not black and he's not a female. 

Also in the news this week is another such case only this time it's centered around just the females. 

Virginia Military Institute (VMI) is being accused of sexism.  Why?  Because they don't have enough female graduates in relation to the male graduates and because of the low numbers of females they wouldn't be able to advance as readily as the boys. 

Many might remember about a dozen years ago VMI fought hard to keep this an all male school which it had been since 1839.  In 1997 a court ruling made it clear females were to be allowed in.  Ever since then VMI has complied and starting in 2001 the first female cadets were allowed to graduate.

Recently the National Women's Law Center in Washington filed a complaint citing sexism saying that only 159 females have graduated since 2001.  During this same time 2,349 men have graduated.  And far more women drop out after their first year than men, 29 percent of women to 11 percent of men. 

Well no kidding.  This school has been rich in male tradition since 1839.   It's not an easy school to go to.  It's like going to prison for 4 years with rigorous training and fitness required.  It's a very very tough school with strenuous physical and mental requirements. 

So now the school is defending itself against a lengthy investigation into accusations that the school's policies are sexist and hostile towards the female cadets. 

They even went after the fitness requirements.  So VMI lowered the number of pull-ups required of women from five to one for this academic year. 

Now, I can just hear the guys griping over this.  They have some pretty hard standards to attain to and seeing the girls once again get standards relaxed must be irritating to them.   When my son was going there he said the pressures were enormous from Washington to keep the girls from dropping out even though the boys were dropping like flies.  The boys resented the unfair treatment they were getting in comparison to the girls. 

Many of the graduates go on to become officers in the military.  So every girl that is allowed into this very tough military  school means one boy is not allowed to go.  If this continues and the women in Washington are not happy until they achieve 50% status all around, what will this mean to our military?  

It's interesting when I read about this in this week's AP that a senior VMI female cadet when asked about all this seemed surprised by the accusations saying that she hasn't noticed any mistreatment and that since the barracks are so open any mistreatment would be easily noticed.   She said she didn't feel forced into a male system saying she looked at VMI as not a male system per se but a military one. 

It doesn't matter though.  What matters is what the National Women's Law Center in Washington think.  

maybe Rush is right...it's all about the chicification of our country.  We should just outlaw any white males and be honest about it.