On the plus side (or negative, depending on how you look at it) this was the longest discussion ever on the site.

If an auto factory is located in a city with a 50% white, 50% black population and that factories labor force is 80% white, 20% black affirmative action goes into effect.  And you disagree with it.

Affirmative action is a form of reversing racial discrimination, not promoting it.

Tell you what – if and when racial harmony is a reality, you and I will look back at how it was accomplished and decide who was right.

Wikipedia.org

From 1960 to 1995, according to data in The Shape of the River by William G. Bowen and Derek Bok, the percentage of blacks aged 25–29 who had graduated from college rose from 5.4 to 15.4%, the percentage of blacks in law school grew from below 1 to 7.5%, and the percentage of blacks in medical school increased from 2.2 to 8.1%.

I apologize for not being explicit enough.  Allow me to revise this to read:

The former involves sex and promotes gender equality, the latter involves race and promotes racial discrimination.

Re: the Title IX thing, you’re glossing over a crucial point – Title IX affects all races equally, thus it does not promote racial inequality in any way, while promoting equal opportunity between the sexes.

The latter involves race and promotes discrimination.

Only if minority and majority were already equal.

What if, because of Title IX, a school had to cancel some boys teams in order to raise the funds for girls teams?  Therefore by your logic, Title IX would involve sex and promote discrimination.

THE AXE CONTINUES TO FALL ON MEN’S SPORTS PROGRAMS EVERYWHERE

Since the last Task Force Media Notes, men’s athletic programs have been slashed on college campuses across the nation. The victims were not just wrestlers – they were male athletes in a variety of sports. They all have been axed because of the gender quotas that are being forced upon athletic departments in the name of Title IX.

1998 NCAA TITLE IX SEMINAR VIOLATES PROPORTIONALITY

It reinforces the racial paternalism argument by insinuating that minorities need help from the majority because it’s too hard to make it without that help.

I feel one could reverse this logic and state something like:

It’s too hard to prevent racial discrimination from the majority.  Especially with the current climate of a near white artistocracy dominating politics, business, and resources. Therefore blanketing minorities with slight advantages can offset potential (and sometimes obvious) disadvantages the majority can/will/does against them.

If you’re implying that it is contradictory to be in favor of Title IX, yet oppose some applications of affirmative action, I would disagree with you.  The former involves sex and promotes equality, the latter involves race and promotes discrimination.

Your last paragraph makes it apparent that you feel the best way to combat discrimination and eradicate racism is with more discrimination.  I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on that point.