Reply to Has Yale Become a PC Joke?

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Has Yale Become a PC Joke?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I do not like the tenor of this thread:  if you are black and/or are FA and something bothers you on an elite campus you should say nothing and just go to the library.  You are spoiled and entitled just because you go to a prestigious university, and therefore have an easy life and should just let go and get back to class if you are denied entrance into a party because you are black. The behavior of these students is very mild compared to the free speech movement  and the black power movement in the 60s. You have no idea what their lives have been like, or are now.
Do I think all their demands are reasonable, not I don't.  But they have every right to articulate them.  I also know from personal experience, that even if you are middle class or wealthy, you are subjected to racism if you are black. It is everywhere in our society.

The intense anger expressed toward these minority students makes me feel uneasy because it seems to be based on the notion that these students have already gotten something they were not qualified for: an ivy league education, and therefore they should be grateful and shut up.  These kids have the right to express themselves. They did not forfeit that by going to Yale.[/quote]

Many white students at Yale by no means discount that racism exists, but question whether the types of racism the protestors identify -- often very subtle, not intentional -- are things which are failings at all of the university and whether the proposed remedies are only going to create more problems, and not fix the ones for which the students have protested.  But it is hard to even get an accurate account of who feels how because the atmosphere has become toxic -- if you express any doubt about what the protestors are doing you are called "racist" -- a term which in our culture carries almost as much stigma as the "N" word.  After that, there is no debate, discussion, nothing.  Erecting a statue declaring Yale stole land from indigenous peoples will not sure discrimination. Mental health workers may help students cope, but will not cure discrimination.  The only way ignorant people learn not to discriminate is to comingle with other people, ask questions, and become comfortable.   More money for cultural centers probably will not achieve this.  Minority students complain about other students feeling they don't deserve to be there and wondering if they got in boosted by affirmative action.   That is a valid observation.  But that one will never stop until affirmative action is ended -- and a belief that ending affirmative action is a good policy at this point is not a "racist" belief.   Affirmative action has always been a racist policy by definition -- one that we tolerated as a society for some perceived greater social good.    But now one must wonder.

[/quote]I will assume that you understand that affirmative action encompasses far more than college àdmission based on ethnicity.  It also includes disability, geographical, and women (it is a documented fact that white women have been the biggest beneficiaries of affirmative action to break the glass ceiling, monetary compensation, etc).  S

So to keep throwing out terms that affirmative action is 'racist', the definition needs to be quantified as equal pay for women is most certainly not racist.[/quote]

Well, this is a definitional thing.   My understanding is that "affirmative action" goes back to John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, and absolutely was focused on race.  The thought originally was you could not figuratively take the leg irons off of an African Americans man - saddled with a legacy of centuries of slavery -- and expect him to suddenly run a competitive race when the other runners had not been wearing leg irons so they started out with a huge lead.  It was an appealing concept in man ways.  At the time, it was not as necessary to unpack race vs. class very much because of where the country was in the early 1960s.  I think today in theory most people who accept affirmative action would also agree that the same notion of affirmative action should boost anyone who has had a disadvantaged background -- socio economic, difficult family circumstances, etc. -- but statistics reported tend to focus on race and ethnicity.  Starting with a Bakke decision in the early 70s I believe, there was some national push back on affirmative action (recall the white med school applicant who sued claiming reverse discrimination).    Over time, the concept of "diversity" was promoted.  This  is not the same thing as affirmative action.  In theory, diversity -- taking into account different backgrounds of people -- is supposed to bring together a wide range of perspectives to campus (or the work place) and make for a richer environment for all involved - male, female, black, white, Latino, Asian, Native America, etc.   I expect many people believe, however, that the way diversity policies are implemented is very much like affirmative action -- that is to say that other objective standards may be more flexible in order to accept a person with a desirably diverse background. In theory, it makes some sense.  But in practice, a lot of people are wondering as these debates play out on college campuses in recent weeks.      [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics