*

*
Today at the Forum
Opinions from members of the Enquirer Editorial Board


David Wells,
Editorial Page Editor


Ray Cooklis,
Assistant Editorial Editor


Krista Ramsey,
Editorial Writer


Dennis Hetzel, General Manager,
Kentucky Enquirer/NKY.Com


Jim Borgman,
Editorial Cartoonist



Powered by Blogger

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

Race, gender (and philosophical) diversity all good

A reader chastised us over today's editorial about diversity in sports and politics.

He noted it's not diversity if your name is "Clarence Thomas, Condi Rice, J.C. Watts, Elizabeth Dole or Alberto Gonzales," apparently because we named Democrats prominently in the editorial. (He might have missed the mention of Dole in paragraph 12.)

Answer: Of course it is, and I've favorably written about many of them, particularly Watts and Rice, in past editorials and columns.

A testy message board can be seen at the end of the editorial as well, including the well-worn notion that we are all Americans -- no hyphens.

True, but those willing to face the truth would acknowledge the historical road of progress in America has been less smooth for those who were born tan, brown or chocolate or female. The point is that things have changed and are changing still. So what's the harm in celebrating that?

I believe in the opportunity that America provides for all people today. The fruit hangs a bit lower for all now. But those unwilling to acknowledge historical inequities need to open their eyes and gain a fresh perspective.

Recently, Katie Couric noted how she was the only major network female anchor at a White House press briefing.

She wrote: "As I was looking at my colleagues around the room—Charlie Gibson, George Stephanopoulos, Brian Williams, Tim Russert, Bob Schieffer, Wolf Blitzer, and Brit Hume—I couldn’t help but notice, despite how far we’ve come, that I was still the only woman there. Well, there was some female support staff near the door. But of the people at the table, the “principals” in the meeting, I was the only one wearing a skirt. Everyone was gracious, though the jocular atmosphere was palpable."

Even the well-compensated Couric, who appears to have it all, acknowledges the obvious -- to a point. All of those "principals" at the meeting surely work really hard and deserve to be there. Surely some can tell stories about the hardships their ancestors faced.

Yet should it matter that all but one were men and none were born tan, brown or chocolate?


12 Comments:

at 4:48 PM, January 23, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

All of those "principals" at the meeting surely work really hard and deserve to be there. Yet does it matter that most were men and none were "brown."

In a word:
No.

What matters is that those that hold a job (whether that job is a new reporter, or a CEO of a Fortune 500 company) are qualified for that position.

 
at 6:10 PM, January 23, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anymore, I hear the word 'diversity" and my skin crawls. The more you think about and discuss, ad nauseum, diversity, I want to run out of the room and hire a bunch of white males. I am so sick of you diversity merchants. You want a race divide in our society? Keep stressing diversity. Keep shoving the concept down our throats, at the expense of all other considerations.

 
at 7:53 PM, January 23, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Katie Couric wont be there long at the tahle either. Her TV news ratings are sinking.

 
at 2:25 AM, January 24, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Those who soemething something are domed to repeat it

 
at 12:01 PM, January 24, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Using Anon’s “qualified” logic, could we assume that there weren’t enough “qualified” pro basketball players of color in National Basketball Association before Earl Lloyd, Charles Cooper, or Nat Clifton, in 1950?
I suppose we might also assume that there been absolutely no women or minorities “qualified” enough until now to be seriously considered president of the United States.
CEO of a Fortune 500 company? Ten women. Four “African-Americans.”
It is a matter of being “qualified” or it is that we’ve failed to build capacity so that a more “diverse” pool is available to be considered to be “new reporters” or “Fortune 500” CEOs?

 
at 12:24 PM, January 24, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bryon, last I looked, this is 2007, not 1950.
I was stating the qualifications TODAY, not what has happened in the past.
I would look at the possiblity of there being a woman or African-American president as the proof of progress. And again - if they are qualified, then more power to them.
But I won't be voting for someone BECAUSE they are a woman or African-American, I will be voting for them because I think they are the best candidate.

 
at 12:49 PM, January 24, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Byron, by your picture, I am assuming you are a black person. I'm white but I am not the poster you refer to "Anon's" in your "qualified" rebuttal.

However, I also am not speaking for that person but my reading of his/her comments is only that: qualifications to do the job should matter the most at this point in history, not meeting quotas of gender, race or creed.

I've noticed more blacks are being hired for head coach in the NFL, without a policy of affirmative action.

Were minorities "screwed" in the business world in the past? YES! But affirmative action has proven to benefit far too few to the detriment of a vast majority of the under represented, that the quotas were intended to aid.

In today’s world, setting the same high standards for all, with a fair playing field of equal opportunity, allows the cream to rise to the top. This policy will help far more minorities advance, then setting low standards, low expectations, and resulting in predictable low performance. Let’s help ALL minorities and not just a favored few.

 
at 2:06 PM, January 24, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cincinnati is a city filled with people who believe in remaining separated based on complexion. Blacks overwhelmingly feel this way; so do whites. Browns are lumped into "black" boxes they don't belong in, simply to please the folks who insist on segregation...and every brown person who allows it is buying into the garbage.

That's why we have separate police fraternities, chambers of commerce, judicial organizations, civic organizations, college greek houses, etc. etc. etc....

That's also why so many college graduates are fleeing this place in droves, why venture capital dollars are waning, why the downtown tax base is eroding, and the general region is falling apart. (Yep, even West Chester, where they have a budget deficit they can't fix and tax rates that boggle the mind with more increases planned.)

Given our current ignorance, this will NEVER change. We can try all we want, but only until Christ returns and sets all of us straight will we see complexional harmony.

It's NOT about diversity. Lose that crap, that's the problem. It's about UNITY, the unity of one human race under God.

However, I believe in suggesting solutions rather than just complaining. So:

First, lose the hyphens, folks. We are all Americans, PERIOD. We are all equal and precious in God's sight. GOD MADE US ALL! And God makes no mistakes in His perfect plan.

Secondly, stop calling brown people "mixed". They're not mixed, they're 100% human. The ONLY RACE IS HUMAN. Many brown people enjoy the rich advantage of a cultural history that embraces all the previously separate segments of our society. Brown pepople should have (and are starting to demand) the right to fully claim their entire birthright.

Also, please realize that some brown people are not African. Look at the peoples of the Mediterranean region. I'm "brown" (actually olive) from this ancestry, I have no African in my heritage...and I have to argue with people continually in this city, both white and black, about "what I am". How dare you insult my intelligence or question my lineage? How stupid is that, to try and force an ancestry on a person to fit your closed mind? GET OVER IT!

This is important. Barack Obama is NOT BLACK; please stop ignoring his mother in such a manner. Hasn't Tiger Woods made this point clear enough for you yet? "Honor thy father AND thy mother..." these men are brown. Lose the racist 1/64th rule and accept the fact these people have an ancestry that comes from multiple countries and complexions...they are simply Americans now.

Step three - Journalists, get it right. When the media gets it right, the public will, too.

I agree with the posters who have said all employment should be based on qualifications, ability, experience, grades, etc. We should have a blind hiring system, where names, gender and appearance are omitted from the process until time comes to actually accept the position offered. Not until AFTER the offer is made should a person's appearance be known. If we did that, we might see no difference in current trends, or we might see a huge difference. But until we truly level the playing field by actually removing the physical indicators can we then say we are being fair in hiring practices.

This city could be so trendsetting, so progressive and so much of a role model if only we could try some of these things...and the way to do that is for each person who lives here to individually try to make a difference.

God bless us everyone.

 
at 7:22 PM, January 24, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

"First, lose the hyphens, folks. We are all Americans, PERIOD. We are all equal and precious in God's sight. GOD MADE US ALL! And God makes no mistakes in His perfect plan."

Correction: the flying Spaghetti Monster created us all. If you don't believe me, check out the scriptures at:

http://www.flyingspaghettimonster.org/

I hope this brings to the zealot's attention that people in America are indeed NOT "united" under God because we believe in many different things, or, in many cases, in nothing at all.

Don't presume to umbrella every American under your exclusive banner please.

Remember, the Spaghetti Monster sees all . . .

 
at 4:39 PM, January 25, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks to all for this string of thoughtful comments.

For the record, I'm no fan of quotas, and the term affirmative action has been politicized so much that many consider it a euphemism for free rides for underachievers (which it is not).

My orgiginal point was to celebrate today's diversity. Forgive me for perhaps misinterpreting some comments.

All things being equal, resumes, qualifications, etc., I agree with one of the Anons who talked about progress today.

I'm just saying the pool has always included qualified people of all hues and backgrounds, and thankfully today more are getting chance to prove their salt, to have a place at the table...

 
at 11:14 AM, January 26, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why is it okay to label a person "brown", but not "black" or "mixed"? Aren't they all labels of some sort? I don’t think MOST people are meaning to be insulting when they use these terms, it is a matter of using these as a description.

Case in point...
My daughter attended a Cinti public school for kindergarten. It was her first real contact with "black" children. I had not pointed out to her that there may be black children in her classroom, I didn't feel the need to make a distinction. She had made friends with both black and white children, but when she would talk about one of the children, she would use the term "dark skin” or “brown skin”, simply for the purposes of a description. It probably would not have occurred to her to use the word “black”, but if she had used the word “mixed”, I wouldn’t have thought about her disrespecting a person’s heritage, I would have thought she was innocently describing a person who appeared to be half white and half black, whether they were or not.

Referring to a complexion in any way as a descriptive word seems about as harmless as referring to one as “tall”.

But then, somebody, somewhere is going to be offended.

 
at 11:45 AM, January 27, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

To anon 11:14 AM, January 26, 2007 and "sensibilities".

We have become so politically incorrect. The media refuses to provide skin color descriptions of ongoing criminal manhunts, even as they ask the public for assistance with the whereabouts of suspects.

 
Post a Comment*

* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.

By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site. << Home


Blogs
Jim Borgman
Today at the Forum
Paul Daugherty
Politics Extra
N. Ky. Politics
Pop culture review
Cincytainment
Who's News
Television
Roller Derby Diva
Art
CinStages Buzz....
The Foodie Report
cincyMOMS
Classical music
John Fay's Reds Insider
Bengals
High school sports
NCAA
UC Sports
CiN Weekly staff
Soundcheck