minority issues, major idiocy
I just passed by the ampitheatre of the student union and saw some sort of mini-rally, so I poked my head in. A group of minority students were awarding what appeared to be called "Zero Awards" to University departments. Looked juicy. What could it mean? Zero tolerance for racism? That'd be a plus. Zero diversity? That'd be a minus.

It turned out to be the latter, and just as I arrived they were awarding their second to last award to the Department of Geography. Then they awarded their top "Zero Award" to the Department of Geological Sciences. I was nonplussed.

All these shennanigans were started by some pissed off minority students in the Colleget of Education who felt that the CoE's policies didn't foster diversity. They seemed to have forgotten two important issues. First, that that CoE doesn't make it's own policies and so picking on CoE administrators does little more than incite a riot. The CoE is a subsidiary of the UO like any other department and follows administrative policies from the higher-ups. Apparently today's rally is part of an attempt to widen their scope. Or something.

Let's get PISSED OFF!

The second issue, and the one that irks me the most, is that these students are going around and labeling the university "racist" for a lack of diversity in some areas. Excuse me? A lack of diversity DOES NOT EQUAL RACISM. It can be a SYMPTOM of racism but it does NOT equal it.

I'm getting peeved at all the stupid people carrying around signs that say "Stop Racism in the XXX" when they mean "Increase Diversity in the XXX." It's sensationalist assholery and it will get them attention but WON'T get them what they want.

Furthermore, picking on departments like Geography and Geology is ridiculous. So WHAT if they don't have any professors of color? I'm sure it wasn't intentional! By nature, these small, specialized departments are MUCH LESS LIKELY to have professors of color than large departments like English and Journalism.

Minorities are given the term "minorities" for a statistical reason: there are fewer of their race, per capita, than other races. That means that there are likely to be fewer black or hispanic geologists than white geologists... but says nothing about the likelihood of the UO excluding people of color from its geology department. The geology department does, however, include one male-to-female transexual. I think that's pretty goddamn expressive of diversity and tolerance.

It's ludicrious to expect, too, that the University make some policy about hiring a certain percentage of staff and faculty from minority groups. The University should hire the most qualified professionals from a pool of applicants, not excluding minorities. But I wouldn't want to see an unqualified candidate given unfair treatment because he fit the bill for increasing diversity!

Yes, these student-advocates are making a valid point about a lack of diversity in general. But there's no sense throwing around racist accusations where there's no fault, or using numbers to tell lies about the University's diversity policies.