General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Babies Of Color Are Now The Majority, Census Says [View all]Igel
(37,541 posts)When the student body was well over 50% male there were calls for affirmative action to increase the student body's female population. The response was, "Well, perhaps the men are just smarter or more competent."
In some schools the student body is well over 50% female, skewed at the levels that still had calls for increasing the female representation. So now some are calling for outreach (etc.) to increase the male population back to parity.
The response has been, "You hypocrites." That's fine as far as that goes, but doesn't address the underlying morality of the name-calling side, which is that sex parity was a social goal.
But then parody is added to the mix, and the side of good continues without any awareness of the irony, "Perhaps the women are just smarter or more competent."
A local principal was commenting on how the school she was over had shifted demographics a bit. It had been something like 65% black, 25% Latino, and the other 10% had been white and Asian and Native American. Then the next year it was 75% black, a bit more than 25% Latino, and the remaining 3-5% white/Asian/Native American. And she said it was "increasing diversity." It wasn't; for her, 100% diverse would mean "100% non-white/Asian/Native American."
Some of the "good guys" are just the bad guys inverted, but since you're on the side against the bad guys you have to be good. They forget that Stalin and Hitler fought a war, and that in that fight there were no good guys. Similarly, China and Vietnam had a bit of a skirmish while Vietnam was in the throes of its re-education camp program (or pogrom, little difference).