next »

[a_cinema_interval]

In my experience (tenured prof in Humanities) I'd have to say no.  It's about *comfort* and reproducing themselves, about *not* challenging themselves, about not having to deal with those issues/concerns/populations in their *homes* (departments).  Diversity work is for other people.

[acrimone]

I don't care.  I joined up with the Western-Culture-Is-Superior-Assimilate-And-Speak-English fascists a long time ago.  White people love me.

[stagolee]

"I don't care.  I joined up with the Western-Culture-Is-Superior-Assimilate-And-Speak-English fascists a long time ago.  White people love me."

Of course they do.  You, Michelle Malkin, and Ward Connerly can always get a seat at the table.

Don't bother saving any wine and cheese, I'll eat elsewhere.

[larryc]

We want diversity of background, ideas, approaches, and teaching styles in my department.  Our recent hires confirm our seriousness.

[acrimone]

"I don't care.  I joined up with the Western-Culture-Is-Superior-Assimilate-And-Speak-English fascists a long time ago.  White people love me."

Of course they do.  You, Michelle Malkin, and Ward Connerly can always get a seat at the table.

Don't bother saving any wine and cheese, I'll eat elsewhere.

You sure?  The caviar is simply delicious...

[old_school]

We want diversity of background, ideas, approaches, and teaching styles in my department.  Our recent hires confirm our seriousness.

I'm glad to hear this. Often this seems just lipservice. My department professes the same, but I have my doubts.

Here I was sitting as a VAP in a deparmental meeting at self-congratulatory overly-politically correct SLAC listening to the "permanent" faculty make jokes about the alphabet soup of applicants (ie their foreign names) for our TT opening.

Given my ethnic background this made me extremely unwelcome and uncomfortable. I have worked with these people for a few years .. I am so happy to leave. Needless to say, I was not one of the applicants.

The sad thing is, they probably don't even realize how they act.

Oh, by the way, they did hire someone, with a "good" name akin to Smith or White ..

[onion]

I just don't understand why some people on this forum and in real life are so hostile to the idea and reality of diversity.  I know that, in my own department, the older white men don't like me (or, perhaps, are threatened by the way the field is changing and I represent that).  They've told me to my face--but they express their hostility by making fun of the fact that I study gender, immigration, or what-have-you.  One even asked me, on my way to class one day, if we were going to talk about tampons and pantyhose in my women's studies course.  I guess I should count my blessings that no one has ever said "we think you're stupid and you aren't allowed in the academy."  Although one did say that he'd like having me around better if I "dressed like more of a lady."  I value diversity, but I hate hate hate that I'm a diversity hire in a department that really didn't want to change.  Not only do they "rib" me, as I mentioned above, but in my annual reviews, they are vicious about the journals I publish in, and mark me down.  In my subfield, journals such as the Journal of Women's History, the Journal of the History of Sexuality, American Quarterly are legitimate scholarly journals.  Routledge publishes worthwhile anthologies.  I have a PhD from one of the top 5 departments in my field.  And I'm treated like sh*t every single day that I go to work.  And you should see the way they treat the students who aren't little dudes interested only in military history.  It's shocking--and these students end up in my office crying.

So, seriously, what's the problem?  Can someone get real with me on this?

[larryc]

One even asked me, on my way to class one day, if we were going to talk about tampons and pantyhose in my women's studies course. 

Good Lord, that is shocking.  Have you considered filing a harassment charge?

[onion]

Yes.  And then I was threatened with being dismissed for lying because no one else heard him say it and he denied it.  The AA/EEO officer explained to me that the offending individual has been around for a long time and "just doesn't get it" and when the offending individual caught wind that I had filed a grievance against him, he threatened me with a defamation of character lawsuit and then my paperwork "disappeared" from the AA/EEO office and the provost called me in to his office and reminded me that I could be fired at any time because I "serve at his pleasure."  This isn't even the worst of it...and no lawyer in town will touch the university...and the AAUP has been no help....etc etc etc

Sad as it is, this forum has become my lifeline, and when I see these screeds on here, it makes me want to leave the academy altogether.

[oldchair]

One even asked me, on my way to class one day, if we were going to talk about tampons and pantyhose in my women's studies course.

Good Lord, that is shocking.  Have you considered filing a harassment charge?

It is shocking and entirely unforgivable. I hope it's as uncommon as it is grotesque.

In my experience white faculty (oh boy, would we even dare make such generalizations about other groups?) are certainly not opposed to diversity.  Many are deeply committed to it.  Some are opposed to new directions within disciplines that may be associated with under-represented groups.  There are many reasons for this resistance, not all of them bad all the time. 

Others oppose the idea of reducing diversity to gender and skin color.  IMO, such folks offer a valuable, though not a complete, argument.

[merce]

...

In my experience white faculty (oh boy, would we even dare make such generalizations about other groups?) are certainly not opposed to diversity.  ...

to keep from getting the creepy  crawlies when you say "white faculty" try saying Wonderbread or WhiteBread faculty. I find that helpful.

[pyshnov]

onion:

I have no sympathy whatsoever with people developing certain aspects of "women studies", but here it doesn't matter.

Universities became intolerant at the moment when the issue of tolerance was raised. Such is the logic of forcing people to do something they don't want to do and have a full damn right not to do.

Practical advice:
1) Wear on you always a voice recorder. The thing is now small and around $100 for a good one. You've got to catch them lying and uncivilized. Nobody actually can be punished for expressing their views about your reseach, ability, etc. But they must remain honest and civil.
2) Never submit to suggestion from anyone to remain silent. your silence is your enemy # 1.
3) I can not say it's absolutely right, I hesitate, but think: What if you will post your grievances on this forum under your real name? Give their names. Provided you have evidence recorded, and, of course, you remain strictly within the borders of this evidence, this can relieve you from your sufferings.

The situation now is such that going to the press can be completely frustrating. The secret is that usually attackers have connections.

Consult http://bulliedacademics.blogspot.com/
I strongly disagree with them on two points: I do not place any confidence in improving procedures. I believe the guilt is with men, not procedures. And, I believe that help should be given to a person, and only then - to the "cause". Otherwise, it's a good site.

[dr_crankypants]

I think that some people are genuinely committed to diversity, but I think that the profession actually has quite a long way to go on this.  I think that part of the problem is that many people still have a mental image of the ideal professor, who remains (in their minds), a white male.  "Diverse" candidates are supposed to be the female/black/lower-class version of that, and aren't. (I realize you didn't include women in the question, but I think it's part of the same issue, in my opinion.)   Sometimes it's an issue of field, or methodology.  Sometimes it's just subtle things, such as the way that people associate authority with white males, and less so with women or non-whites (strong men are admirable, strong women are b*tches).  So while few people actually oppose diversity, there's often not true commitment to it on the level of really tackling some of the unconscious prejudice that works against "diverse" candidates. 

The AA/EEO officer explained to me that the offending individual has been around for a long time and "just doesn't get it"

And this gets to the second problem.  Institutions and departments too often think of diversity only in terms of recruiting, and not in terms of ensuring that the institution is a welcoming place for non-white-male faculty.  Onion's experience sounds a bit worse than others that I've heard, but offending behavior is often trivialized as a personality quirk.  And, of course, stopping such offensive behavior is just the tip of the iceberg in ensuring that a department or university is genuinely welcoming.

(And, of course, by the time that it gets to filing a grievance, a professor is probably going to look elsewhere for jobs.  There are too many stories out there about retaliation for complaining that very few (and generally only those who would be willing to leave academia entirely) are willing to pursue the legal action that they could.) 

[oldchair]

to keep from getting the creepy  crawlies when you say "white faculty" try saying Wonderbread or WhiteBread faculty. I find that helpful.

I was just quoting the title of the thread.  Please help me understand your joke, though. 

Is it OK to call a white person WhiteBread?  I know; it's a joke, but sometimes jokes can be offensive, like it someone makes a Tampon crack about a women's studies course.

Is it OK to assume that all white people maintain similar attitudes towards all other people?

Or is that white people just aren't very interesting?

I only want to understand.

[merce]

to keep from getting the creepy  crawlies when you say "white faculty" try saying Wonderbread or WhiteBread faculty. I find that helpful.

I was just quoting the title of the thread.  Please help me understand your joke, though. 

Is it OK to call a white person WhiteBread?  I know; it's a joke, but sometimes jokes can be offensive, like it someone makes a Tampon crack about a women's studies course.

Is it OK to assume that all white people maintain similar attitudes towards all other people?

Or is that white people just aren't very interesting?

I only want to understand.

WhiteBread refers not so much "white people" as I am white but not WhiteBread. If you want to talk about White faculty in a way that stands as a huge generalization and assuming that they are not for some reason actually touched by color in some way (v. learned on subjects of cultural interest, married to someone of another color, etc. etc. etc. ) but want to talk about people who are defined by their whiteness or waspiness then I'd use WhiteBread. I figured you were wanting to make a generalization about white professors who have little knowledge of or exposure to other cultures and think of other colors/ethnicities/cultures/religions etc. as other. If that is the case WhiteBread allows you to use a term that recognizes that all white people are not the same and are not equally clueless about others.
Is that helpful?
geez, I have to work on honing down these concepts.