So the Sotomayor confirmation hearings have made me contemplate something. No, not her abyssmal track-record when it comes to choice. Her track record on affirmative action, which is admittedly quite wonderful if you support affirmative action. The Supreme Court apparently does not, or at least they don’t agree with her definition of it as demonstrated in the last case they ruled on this year, where they overturned Justice Sotomayor’s ruling on the New Haven Fire Department’s promotion policy.
Now, with that case specifically, it’s hard to see both sides. I don’t see how the testing process could have been bad for Latinos unless it was counted against them for answering the question “Are you a Latino?” in the affirmative, but apparently Justice Sotomayor felt there was a clear case of racism in the way the test was devised. Whatever. Not really much concern to me, or anyone else, I suspect.
What this made me contemplate was this thing a lot of people opposed to her confirmation refer to as “reverse racism.” I'm personally undecided about her, but I’ve decided that phrase is just a code-word, something to hide behind if you don’t have the courage to stand up and say…racism is racism. Period. Now, I’m not afraid of being accused of racism since I spent most of last year being called a racist simply because I was prepared to vote for either Hillary or McCain but not Obama, irregardless of the fact that there were major policy differences involved in that choice as well as a level of experience and just plain old gravitas. So if I get called a racist for discussing this, well…nothing I haven’t already heard. Still not true, but when has that ever stopped anyone?
I spent two years working in admissions at the Tisch School of the Arts, one of the most prestigious arts schools in the world. We accepted 10% of our applicants, on average. And we had a lot of applicants. I met roughly 70% of them in any given admissions cycle. Personally. It’s what I did on a daily basis. And the hardest part wasn't meeting people every day who I knew were not going to be admitted (you just get to a place where you know, you can just tell). Every day I met a lot of people who were not going to get in, and by all rights , should not get in. They were not a good fit for the program, and the program was not a good fit for them.
That wasn't the hard part. The hard part was the people I’d meet once a month, or maybe every other month…who should get in but would not. Because they were white. Or maybe, if they were very lucky, they’d get in but not be offered financial assistance and thusly would almost never be able to attend since NYU has not only one of the most prestigious arts schools in the world, but also the highest tuition of any private college in the United States. Financial assistance on occasion went to a non-minority student, and priority housing slots on occasion went to a non-minority student, and fellowships on very rare occasions went to a non-minority student, but…it was not the norm. There were not quotas per se, just unspoken rules. Or occasionally spoken rules, like the time Spike Lee, the “artistic director” of the Film Department at Tisch insulted the fuck out of the admissions staff by insisting we turn over to him for personal review every black applicant’s paperwork that had been rejected after thorough vetting because despite dealing the admissions team having handled admissions in this capacity for nearly twenty years…he thought they were clearly racists because not enough black candidates had made it to the final round of review. Since he was only able to add back in two himself (who were both later rejected), the admissions team felt pretty vindicated, but I wish I could say that type of behavior was out of the ordinary. It wasn’t. We rejected many highly qualified candidates who stood to benefit greatly from their studies at NYU—and who would have brought a great deal to NYU’s programs in turn—simply because they were not an ethnic minority and we had “enough” white candidates.
So what I'm saying is...there's no such thing as reverse-racism. There's just racism. Which I do not support. Period. In any form or capacity. I come from a very large southern family, and did not spend my early years knowing many people who were not white, but making a judgement about someone based on the color of their skin has never made sense to me, and makes even less sense the more people I come to know who are not white. It’s stupid, and hateful, and wrong. And you don't have to be white to think so.
But included in that great big "wrong?" Ever, in any circumstances, making a decision about someone’s education, employment, housing, or other benefits based on the color of their skin. Period. Even if it's because they're white.
I'm so angry. I just typed a HUGE comment (because I'm wordy) and the stupid comment posting pooped out on me. So now you just get a comment with the word "pooped" in it.
ReplyDeleteTwice.
I'll agree that racism is racism--and I'm often uncomfortable with affirmative action, which seems to backfire on the recipients, who then end up feeling unworthy.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, there are situations wherein integration (race, creed, gender) would never have happened _without_ the courts stepping in, so in some cases, it has been valuable, and even imperative.
It has been disturbing to me to discover that many of the Democrats I had always considered open-minded and intelligent have turned out to be the opposite, and utterly held hostage to the notion of labels. (i.e. if you don't hate Sarah Palin,you must be stupid and a bad American--and, of course, racist.)
I miss tolerance, and civilized political discourse.
Your Friend Kate