Back to Table of Contents

Debunking Diversity

By Jen Chamberlain

I was in class a few weeks ago, a tutorial, and the topic of the day was diversity: what it was, how to achieve it, etc. We began discussing underrepresented groups and my professor asked a question he answered himself.

"You know what the most underrepresented group on this campus is?" he asked.
"Trailer trash."

He said this as a bit of a joke, but it got me thinking; when colleges say they want to encourage diversity, what type do they mean? Who are considered the minorities in this country, really? When one hears the word "minority" it is usually being used in some kind of racial or ethnic context. But the term does not apply just to these groups.

According to an AP story by Allison Schlesinger, professor Channa Newman of Pittsburgh's Point Park College will soon be teaching a course called "Wealthy White Males." Newman said the course will focus on an "elite set - those who not only posses wealth, but also carry the power to make corporate and governmental policy changes. Because only a few people belong to this group, 'wealthy white males' adheres to the strict definition of the word 'minority.'"

On the most basic level, this is probably true. Wealthy people, Bill Gates-style wealthy, are about as rare as, well, Bill Gates. And since college students are probably some of the poorest privileged people around, a course about how the wealthy white males live would be new information.

There are bunches of students enrolled in institutions of higher learning who have parents who belong to the ever-burgeoning middle-class, which for most people means they live comfortably but there is, unfortunately, no private jet in the backyard and no expense account provided by doting parents. So students are resigned to feed on Ramen noodles, Easy-Mac and spaghetti all week to be able to afford weekend expenses like a $5 cover-charge at The Nines, a $6 pack of cigarettes and $8.50 for a pitcher at Moonshadows during Happy Hour. Every Sunday, Wegmans becomes the gathering place for anyone who threw a party over the weekend as scores of students can be seen recycling cans for money to buy things like food and rock salt.

So really, as a financially-strapped-but-privileged college student, I wouldn't mind taking a course to see how the others do that voodoo they do so well. And as Newman points out, they are "a minority that doesn't view itself as a minority. Most colleges and universities offer programs and courses that focus on America's minorities. A quick glance at the list of established minority programs (African-American, Hispanic and Women) reveals that there is no study devoted to [white] men. We have no male studies."

This is true. My high school offered a class called "Woman As Hero." When the men asked where the "Man As Hero" course offering was, the reply would always be "United States History."

So when college admissions offices try to promote diversity by encouraging minorities to attend their schools, do they mean ethnic minorities like blacks and Hispanics, or do they also include groups like wealthy white men and students who grew up on houseboats, who are also minority groups?

Indeed, many believe an important goal of college admission policy should be to encourage minorities to attend schools in order to broaden the perspective of non-minority students, or in other words, to provide a "black" or a "Hispanic" point of view for students. The immediate response to that is the question, "well, what is the black or Hispanic experience?" Is there just one?

Not likely.

University of Michigan student Kristy J. Downing does not like the assumption that she can shine light on the black way of life for other students.

In an article by Richard Morgan in the Chronicle of Higher Education, Downing said that while she believes minority students can offer a unique perspective, she objects to assumptions made by both students and professors that a racial perspective "is the only thing [minority students] can contribute." Therein lies the problem. How can a university decide which minority students have a unique perspective, and which ones want to provide that perspective? And moreover, doesn't every student have a unique perspective to offer a university, regardless of the color of his or her skin? Is one person's perspective more unique or more valuable than someone else's?

By now, most students are aware that colleges and universities are most often labeled as hotbeds of liberalism, and these liberals are given different labels: hippies, tree-huggers, radicals, socialists, or even "green, green lima beans" as President Bush refers to them. American Enterprise magazine joined up with the Center for the Study of Popular Culture to see whether the myth of the liberal college phenomenon was more than Noam Chomsky's dream come true.

The Washington Times reported in a staff editorial that it "commissioned student volunteers to compile voter-registration records from the local Board of Elections and cross-reference them with faculty rosters across the nation." The professors who registered in the Democratic, Green or Working Families Parties were deemed as members of the left. Professors who registered as Republicans or Libertarians were deemed as members of the right.

At Cornell, the left exceeded the right by a 166-6 margin. Even in the Political Science department, the ratio was 16-1 in favor of the left. But as any good college student knows, statistics are not always reliable, and maybe the conservatives chose not to fill out the survey. In any case, one has to admit that at many of the country's colleges and universities, a liberal perspective rules the day. Should Cornell, and other predominantly liberal institutions, attempt to promote ideological diversity by encouraging conservatives to apply for teaching positions? Would this help provide unique perspectives for the student body?

What people can contribute usually has little to do with what they look like on the outside, but instead, what's on the inside. Encouraging diversity on campuses should not only be about race. It should be about people. Even wealthy white ones.