Holy Toledo!

Here are a few highlights (or lowlights) from another example of how affirmative action is understood and portrayed across America, this one from a recent “Black Bag Lecturer series, attended by a 24-person crowd comprised of students, faculty and staff,” at the University of Toledo.

Racism still exists, and in some cases, even flourishes in our society, said Brenda McGadney-Douglass, associate professor of social work.

She said affirmative action helps reduce the effects of racism, but it gives a leg up to minorities of all kinds, including women and disabled people, not just racial minorities.

When did women become a minority?

Granting minorities access to school and jobs is the main role of affirmative action, said Carter Wilson, professor of political science.

UT needs to be more active with affirmative action, Wilson said, starting by making recruitment of minorities a higher priority.

Grantng access? Without affirmative action there is no “access.”? I think what Prof. Wilson means by affirmative action is not “access” to jobs and education, not the opportunity to be considered fairly along with other applicants, but outright hiring and admissions. To him, affirmative action is not about “access” to jobs and education; it is simply being hired or admitted.

Michael Jones, a freshman majoring in sociology, said he’d rather have a “blind faith” policy where race wouldn’t be a question on college applications.

“The fact that I’m black shouldn’t count more than my [grade point average],” he said.

Oh well. These days you find one in every crowd. Actually, on some days you find more than one, no doubt to the chagrin of the Professor Wilsons and McGadney-Douglasses.

With the limited progress toward equality, it could be thousands of years before the need for affirmative action or similar programs cease, said Morris Jenkins, assistant professor of criminal justice.

“The need for affirmative action will continue until we have economic, gender and racial harmony,” he said.

I wonder if that’s what Justice O’Connor had in mind when she hoped for curtains for affirmative action in 25 years. But, hey. “Harmony” is a nice, easily attainable goal.

“Without diversity it can become a deadly, volatile situation that gives a chance for classism and racism to surface and take hold of society,” said Greg Braylock, a junior majoring in middle-childhood education and president of the Black Student Union.

Pity the children.

“After hundred of years of discrimination, there is no fair policy – somebody is going to get hurt. The current affirmative action is the best of both worlds,” McGadney-Douglass said.

I always said affirmative action advocates had to scrap traditional notions of fairrness, but I do wonder what the two worlds are that affirmative action is the best of. The best of the discriminatory world and the “reverse” discriminatory world? (For the record, as longtime readers will be aware, I don’t think there is any such thing as “reverse discrimination.” Discrimination is discrimination, and there’s no “reverse” about it.)

I also wonder how many of these professors were affirmative action hires. What I don’t wonder is which of the two students quoted here is going to be more successful.

Say What? (1)

  1. ts February 27, 2005 at 1:56 pm | | Reply

    If you look at the demographics of the student body, you will find that the gender and ethnic make up of the student body is fairly consistent with the demographics of the state as a whole. That makes sense for an open enrollment university that is part of a state system. So, histrionics aside, I am not sure that I see a factual basis for the professors’ arguments.

Say What?