View the h-teach Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in h-teach's July 1997 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] View the Next Message in h-teach's July 1997 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] Visit the h-teach home page.
I must admit to some fatigue on the way in which this discussion is being carried out. I am a "white" (I prefer the term European American because I do not like the way "white", "black", etc. are used as if they are objective and neutral constructions which they are not -- see any dictionary for proof) male; I define myself in these terms only because at least one person posting to this list has made the ethnicity and gender of those participating in this discussion an issue (this is one of the reasons for my fatigue). When any business or academic institution uses the phrase "women and minorities encouraged to apply", it does not mean and *never* has meant that "white males" should not apply. That is simply absurd. It means that the institution for whatever reason wants the broadest possible pool of applicants and *may* mean that the department or business especially wants a large number of applicants who are women and/or minorities to apply (it may also be pure boilerplate, which I suspect is true in far too many cases). It is, in fact, an indication of racism and sexism and, yes, "white male privilege" that such a phrase is used (it is not an indication of "political correctness" which has become an ad hominem term used against those who protest bigotry and discrimination and as such is devoid of intellectual merit). The reasons may be to increase the diversity within a faculty, business, student body and, I hope, all of us would agree that diversity is a "good" thing. It does not mean and never has meant that only minorities and/or women will be considered or hired but it may mean that given that candidates have sufficient qualifications for a particular position, being a woman and/or minority may be important for a myriad of reasons including considerations of promoting diversity, etc. No one, in my experience as a "white male" (and an older one at that), who opposes affirmative action has ever defined what they mean by "most qualified" -- do they mean as a teacher, researcher, administrator, or even great lecturer, facilitator of discussions, student affairs or curriculum development specialist, etc., etc., etc., etc. -- the list of what makes a person "most qualified" among a host of "qualified" applicants is endless. As an "older, while male" (and for that matter Anglo-Saxon, Protestant to boot (am I sufficiently "white" to gain the privilege of supporting affirmative action without having my ethnicity or gender used against my position?), I firmly embrace affirmative action for the simple reason that it has already and, hopefully, will continue to make our society a more just and humane place, both for myself and for my children and their children. Finally, for those like me who are white, who are male, who are protestant, who are, dare I say it, *privileged* BECAUSE they are white and male and protestant and who, unlike me, oppose affirmative action I challenge you to reflect on whether your opposition is based on principle or whether it is, as I suspect it is, based on the fear that you will "lose" your access to a privileged status if affirmative action succceeds. To those who feel threatened by affirmative action, I commend to you the words of Franklin Roosevelt: you "have nothing to fear but fear itself." David Rayson, Ph.D. Preparing Future Faculty 120 Fraser Hall, 625-3829 rayso001@tc.umn.edu
|