SEARCH BLOG: CULTURE
Debbie Schlussel wrote a piece about how that is working. This is the account of the trial of those who planned and executed the attacks on the U.S. on September 11, 2001 and the "cultural sensitivity" of their lawyer:
Yup, that’s Islam. The men can’t take it upon themselves to control their impulses. The women–even on American soil (and the U.S. Naval Base at Gitmo is, indeed, American soil)–must cover themselves completely up, lest someone’s hair or ear’s turn them on. In Islam, there is no personal responsibility and discipline, contrary to popular belief. Instead, it’s just women who “deserve to be raped” because they are “unwrapped meat,” as several prominent Muslim imams around the world have declared. And Ms. Bormann’s display is just more pandering to that backwards world that is quickly, rapidly expanding on U.S. soil beyond Gitmo.Sure, I'll bet the defendant would wear a yarmulke if the judge was an orthodox Jew. But we don't need to use nutcake terrorists as the foils. How about racial sensitivity?
The Blaze reports:
Academia’s outsized love of political correctness is, by this point, infamous. But did you know that journalism pertaining to academia is now being expected to follow similar standards?
No? Neither did Naomi Schaefer Riley, a higher education reporter with 15 years experience who was recently fired from the Chronicle of Higher Education for criticizing several black PhD students for giving their discipline a bad name by writing about unserious topics.In a diverse society, you can't call a... oops, almost got in trouble there. Well, apparently she did:
But topping the list in terms of sheer political partisanship and liberal hackery is La TaSha B. Levy. According to the Chronicle, “Ms. Levy is interested in examining the long tradition of black Republicanism, especially the rightward ideological shift it took in the 1980s after the election of Ronald Reagan. Ms. Levy’s dissertation argues that conservatives like Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, John McWhorter, and others have ‘played one of the most-significant roles in the assault on the civil-rights legacy that benefited them.’” The assault on civil rights? Because they don’t favor affirmative action they are assaulting civil rights? Because they believe there are some fundamental problems in black culture that cannot be blamed on white people they are assaulting civil rights?Well, that's not respectful. After all, their culture might have different academic standards.
But a Ph.D. is still recognized as a Ph.D. That's not a black Ph.D. or a Muslim Ph.D. or a female Ph.D.
What's the point of this? Simply this: emphasizing diversity... differences... and demanding that small groups, or any group, can demand that all others "accommodate" their differences [meaning do what they want] is not the American way. The American way is just the opposite: you can be whoever you are and live as you see fit [as long as it doesn't harm others], but don't expect anything more from others than being acknowledged and judged the way anyone else would be judged.
Or to relate back to the two examples above You can be uncomfortable looking at women, but don't expect women to change their appearance for you ... your personal beliefs are not reason for someone else to have their rights limited. You may have a juvenile perception of education, but don't expect the world to confer adult credentials on your juvenile work.