Discriminating Among Discriminations

At Northeastern Illinois University, you can't charge different prices to different races at a Republican-sponsored "affirmative action bake sale," but you can charge different prices to different sexes at a feminist-sponsored "pay equity bake sale."

Comments

[db]

"Affirmative action back sale?"

I hope that's a typo.

[David]

That depends on which definition of back you're using. If it's the 1-900-MIX-ALOT version, I can see why the sale got banned.

Other than that, it's standard university enforcement of "diversity" by limiting "contraversial" speech.

[Jesse Walker]

Typo fixed. Thanks.

[Xrlq]

I know, I know! I'll bet the university is trying to give its students a real-world lesson in the difference between the strict scrutiny, which applies to racial discrimination, and intermediate scrutiny, which applies to sex. Either that, or ... or ... oh, nevermind.

[rst]

Blame it on Title IX.

Universities have to appear sufficiently leftist, otherwise they won't get hip, cool commencement speakers. Next year: compulsory attendance at the Vagina Monologues.

[Brian Courts]

The lack of any shame (or sense of irony) in such blatant viewpoint discrimination, carried out in the name of non-discrimination no less, is yet more proof of the elitist arrogance that is university administration and faculty these days. It is also another wonderful example of their pursuit of political agenda rather than any principled position on the true value of diversity. Do they not believe that racial (and gender - just ask Larry!) differences are purely superficial? Yet that is the only type of diversity they seek, while, as this example shows, actively suppressing the most substantive form of diversity - diversity of ideas. You would think a university of all places should know this. That universities today are at the vanguard of thought control and political correctness instead of critical thinking and free expression should be a cause for some reflection in those who find comfort and validation in their political allegiance with the overwhelmingly liberal academics.

[Bruce]

What Brian said.

[Tim Cavanaugh]

Shouldn't black and Latino students be complaining about this, since the school is denying them access to attractively priced bake goods?

[Jamie]

I think it's interesting that the ACLU wont touch this with a ten footer. If it was a leftist protest, they would be all over the college. Not to troll, but I curious if there are any ACLU advocates out there that would like to explain this?

[Mo]

Tim,
Brilliant.

[Mr. Nice Guy]

The kids should've ran the thing anyway, and have plenty of cameras ready for when the thought police show up. The lefty students back in the 60s were ready/willing to get the shit kicked out of them. What's the difference?

[Evan Williams]

The difference is that these kids are fucking pansies. It's all fun and games when they're sitting around their dorm room study halls holding young republican meetings and devising cute little tongue-in-cheek demonstrations of the follies of leftist policies---but what are mom and dad gonna say when they get booted off campus in the name of...ending affirmative action?

I'm as anti-AA as the next libertarian, but the simple fact is, these policies don't affect these kids anough for them to get into some real civil disobedience over them. This isn't about civil rights, this isn't about being forced to die in Nam. This is about bad policy that may or may not lessen their chances at certain modest successes.

And if you ask me, that's the reason these policies are still alive: precisely because of their relative tameness and lack of direct affect on most people.

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Evan:

You make good points, but I don't think reverse discrimination should be dismissed so easily. There are only so many slots available at the better schools. My step-daughter is going to college in a few years.. she has excellent grades in AP courses, and tests very well. However, she will not be competing only with other scores, but with skin pigment.

But the kids "protesting" are already in, so I see what you're saying there.

[Evan Williams]

I'm not dismissing discrimination (I HATE the term "reverse discrimination, because it assumes that there is one default group which gets discriminated against, which is hogwash. affirmative action is discrimination, plain and simple), I was just saying that the possible cost of getting tossed off campus, etc., typically outweighs the tertiary or removed nature of the beast here (at least relative to the immediacy of the sacrifice). Shit, I applaud anyone who protests against AA---but the reality is that, for most people, if they figured into a cost/benefit equation the relative reward of making a loud but insignificant statement about AA, versus the risk of certain repurcussions, then it probably won't make much sense for them to tempt fate. That sucks, but I was just responding to an earlier post from you telling them to do it anyway and fuck the consequences.

[Brian Courts]

but the reality is that, for most people, if they figured into a cost/benefit equation the relative reward of making a loud but insignificant statement about AA, versus the risk of certain repurcussions, then it probably won't make much sense for them to tempt fate.

All too true, sadly. This is why the government can chip away at freedom little by little - with each encroachment, even those that see what is going on are likely to make the rational decision that it is just not worth fighting this one. So the encroachments keep coming little by little (this is not to say, by the way, that I think AA is only a little encroachment - it is utterly morally repugnant at its core; that so many can rationalize around this simple fact is deeply distressing).

It is just the insidious nature of government action - the benefits are concentrated to enrich a few while the costs are spread so diffusely that each individual sees little personal harm so there is little incentive to fight. It is like a thief that steals a dollar here and a dollar there, but on any given day the trouble to hunt down this petty crook costs more than the dollar he's likely to steal. At some point, however, those dollars start to add up and you ought to realize that stopping the thief has benefits beyond the dollar you save today.