Perspectives: Banning Affinity Groups Shows Lack of Understanding
On most college campuses, the term “self-segregation” only applies when students of color choose to establish associations. Self-segregation is itself a political, ideological and racialized term. Thus, this attempt in Arizona to legislate integration shows a stupendous lack of understanding of the fraud that often masquerades as campus diversity efforts, as well as the reality of the experience of many racial minority students on predominantly White campuses.
April 22nd, 2008 at 11:53 am
Well written and makes the point. This is what has been missing from the conversation. It is not the business of the state
April 24th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
I agree with most of it but…
“Many people unleash vitriolic attacks on students of color who form groups based on their racial identity, yet these same people refuse to even acknowledge the continued existence of Whites who form or maintain clubs that are predominantly or exclusively White. (Read dining clubs, secret societies, and lacrosse clubs).”
The critical difference is mandating the race of membership versus what just happens by chance. I play lacrosse and it’s a poor example to use since even though most people think of the sport as a majority white, there have been a lot of minorities that have been and are very prominent in the sport all the way up through the pros and as a Native American sport, involvement is still high. Discrimination and Racism in the sport is very rare and most encourage diversity, the sport just hasn’t matured to the point where it is completely past it’s original demographic of east coast prep schools.
Regardless of the qualities of the sport, the point is the difference is telling someone they can’t be in a club because of their race and it just happening to end up that way. One is racism and the other is chance.