Writes Shira A. Scheindlin in "If the Supreme Court Abolishes Affirmative Action, Here’s What Women Need to Do" (NYT).
She's asking for oddly little. She speaks of those who were called "the first woman" in some area and then only the ones who "proudly bore the title." I don't think I was ever the first woman anything, and if I were, I wouldn't have regarded it as my "title" and vaunted it in any way. I don't get this "proud bearing" of a "title." I would have wanted to believe I was the best candidate, not someone chosen ahead of anyone else so that the employer could express pride in its accomplishment, finding one of those who'd do well enough in the position.
And then even within that category of proud bearers of the "first woman" title, Scheindlin is only asking that they ensure "access" for "underrepresented communities." Access? What does that mean other than to have an open system of application and selection? That's exactly what we'll be left with if and when the Court bans affirmative action.
Finally, white women are called on to "stand alongside communities of color." What is that? What good does it do?
Posts
62 comments:
"What is that? What good does it do?" Signals her moral superiority, of course.
Condensing this post to two words: "Virtue Signaling"
It's merely a modern version of praying the Rosary.
---
Praying the Rosary
Familiarize yourself and/or your group with the prayers of the rosary.
Make the Sign of the Cross.
Holding the Crucifix, say the Apostles' Creed.
On the first bead, say an Our Father.
Say one Hail Mary on each of the next three beads.
Say the Glory Be
For each of the five decades, announce the Mystery (perhaps followed by a brief reading from Scripture) then say the Our Father.
While fingering each of the ten beads of the decade, next say ten Hail Marys while meditating on the Mystery. Then say a Glory Be.
(After finishing each decade, some say the following prayer requested by the Blessed Virgin Mary at Fatima: O my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell; lead all souls to Heaven, especially those who have most need of your mercy.)
After saying the five decades, say the Hail, Holy Queen, followed by this dialogue and prayer:
V. Pray for us, O holy Mother of God.
R. That we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ.
Let us pray: O God, whose Only Begotten Son, by his life, Death, and Resurrection, has purchased for us the rewards of eternal life, grant, we beseech thee, that while meditating on these mysteries of the most holy Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary, we may imitate what they contain and obtain what they promise, through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.
(A prayer to St. Joseph may also follow.) Conclude the Rosary with the Sign of the Cross.
Source: https://www.usccb.org/how-to-pray-the-rosary
"If the Supreme Court overturns or neuters this well-settled law, every one of us who proudly bore the title 'the first woman'..."
Annnnnnnnd there it is. More proof at long last that the ultimate goal has always been bearing the title 'first of something' instead of actual acumen, competence, or innovation.
Yep. "First of something" has completely replaced actual merit. It's right there in that quote. This is what women and minorities actually believe...the journey ends when you're "first of something".
You wanted to know why Kamala Harris is Kamala Harris? Now you know.
The NY Times stands for segregation forever. Those BIPOC could never make it on their own. They need liberal white women to help them make it.
"communities of color" does not, of course, include Asian-Americans, and probably not African immigrants, or really anybody who can make it one their own without discrimination in their favor. Good to know Scheindlin is still enslaved to liberal ideology.
Excellent remarks, Professor.
It reads, to me, that she only has the job because she's a white woman, and not because of her capability; such that the 'loss' of this protection (sic) would lead her to be judged on performance.
She sounds like a "Karen" to me.
BTW, did Grandma O'Connor, in her ruling in favor of Affirmative action and discrimination against white, and white men in particular, explain why it was constiutional and could go on forever?
OR did she just say, I want it that way.
This tribalism a/k/a cultural Marxism is tearing this country apart.
I think it was Justice Sandra Day O'Connor who wrote that this affirmative action can't go on forever. At some point it has to end.
Women now are solidly in business, the professions and politics. I can tell you from personal experience that some of the best judges and lawyers in Omaha are women. And some are men!
One of the worst judges I ever appeared in front of is a man, Gary Randall. He tried to become a federal judge but was rejected in favor of my friend Bob Rossiter, Jr. Judge Randall was so bad that he screwed up a sentence on this crazy murderer. When this guy got out early, he promptly went on a murdering spree; killing a bar waitress after she got off of work and was on her way home. Randall's pitch to Obama was that he would have been the first openly gay federal judge in NE. Regardless of his sexual orientation, he was a terrible judge!
This special treatment needs to stop.
And Judge Scheindlin has revealed herself to be biased.
"I would have wanted to believe I was the best candidate, not someone chosen ahead of anyone else so that the employer could express pride in its accomplishment, finding one of those who'd do well enough in the position."
Shut up and dribble.
Is it OK to be White? Or is that not a "community of color"?
Women need to stand alongside communities of color because blacks are children.
There is a huge disconnect in our society between traditional adherents of what Niall Ferguson called the "5 killer apps of Western Civilization" and all of the demographic imports who focus solely on the prestige those killer apps provide.
The non-Western cargo-culture civilizations of the rest of the world only see the result, the prestige of Western Civilization's magic trick, without appreciating the massive heavy lifting culturally and scientifically taking place behind the scenes it took to get it there. They see Neil Armstrong landing on the moon, and they want to be the "first something" to land on the moon too without any appreciation that putting your foot in moon soil is the cherry on top of a multi-decade civilizational struggle sundae.
They all want to be the first woman, the first black, the first transvestite, the first Indian, the first otherkin pyrofox. They all want the prestige of copying and paying lip-service to the killer apps of Western Civilization without actually having to adopt or do any work with those killer apps require to get there.
People like Kamala Harris and Kentanji Brown Jackson crave this prestige but clearly don't deserve it, and are befuddled people think they don't, as if getting to the top and deserving to be there were the same thing.
AWFLs May destroy society
There's no satisfaction in titles and awards unless you're no good. Otherwise the work that went into it was where the satisfaction comes from.
"I don't get this "proud bearing" of a "title." I would have wanted to believe I was the best candidate, not someone chosen ahead of anyone else"
Yeah but.."well settled law" says you will forever need special leniency.
And all outside the protected classes will wonder why you are working next to, or above them.
But we have expanded the dimensions of protected classes so much, in some professions, a case can be made that white men have become almost non-existent.
Does "well settled law" address different academic standards being applied before even arriving at a job interview?
Class-disordered ideologies progress with Critical Diversity Theory (CDT) that denies individual dignity, individual conscience, and individual value, and normalizes color blocs (e.g. "people of color"), color quotas (e.g. "Jew privilege"), and affirmative discrimination (e.g. too many Asians). #HateTrumpsLove #HateLovesAbortion
"...If the Supreme Court overturns or neuters this well-settled law, every one of us who proudly bore the title 'the first woman'..."
If I identify as a woman and get nominated to the Supreme Court, can I proudly be the "First Woman with XY Chromosomes" on the Court?
If the Supreme Court Abolishes Affirmative Action,
Diversity of individuals, minority of one. A baby... fetal baby is human, too.
That said, there is a not so fine difference between affirmative action and affirmative discrimination. #HateTrumpsLove #HateLovesAbortion
Prof A: your parsing of this op-ed is well-done but it's shooting fish in a barrel. The identifier "first woman" and "first black woman" and "first black autistic left-handed woman" and so on and on...is now endemic, fixed, automatic, part of the cultural matrix. It's how we all please ourselves and finesse the real issue which, as you say, is objective merit.
See also the spin from "equality" to "equity," where some kind of objective parity is replaced by rationing in favor of some and against others. It's embedded. Whatever the Supremes decide, really won't matter.
Signals her moral superiority, of course.
Signals her ethical superiority... a relativistic religion.
Why is my first thought that white women got us into this mess in the first place? Too much voting based on the feelz
"Finally, white women are called on to "stand alongside communities of color." What is that? What good does it do?"
It feels embarrassing to me. What are white women imagined to be thinking of ourselves that it's such a benefit if we stand next to you.
I makes me think of this song.
rhhardin said...
There's no satisfaction in titles and awards unless you're no good. Otherwise the work that went into it was where the satisfaction comes from.
Excellent.
Jimmy Carter gave you TRILLIONS his 'Affirmative action' shtick. Been doing this for decades...
Just cause you all squandered it all does not mean you get more.
The Party is over and the music has stopped. This goes for EVERYONE of every race, creed, color, etc...
Get a job like everyone else and stand on your two feet.
Virtue doesn't signal itself, ya know?
I don’t know what this means with respect to university admission. Do white women want 75% of college students to be women now and support affirmative action to make it so? It’s already 60% or so female.
Wokester: I care about everybody and everything.
Skeptic: Whatever this means, does it prevent you from being completely self-absorbed and self-indulgent, with a little virtue signallying mixed in?
W: I guess not.
S: How about this: aren't you promising to express yourself less, giving up some of your constitutional rights to free expression, protest, and perhaps free exercise of religion, just to prove you're a nice person?
W: A nice person is nicer than a nasty person.
"I would have wanted to believe I was the best candidate, …"
You may have been, but most people don't have the data to know that. They have to form judgements based on the data available, and if you were appointed in an environment of affirmative action it is impossible not to take that into account. It's one reason affirmative action is so pernicious. It taints the deserving. There's no way it can't.
Calling all KARENs!
every one of us who proudly bore the title 'the first
If that is part of your identity, I think you care too much about what other people think of you. You should be striving to be the best at what you do, not at being the first.
Virtually every business and organization today is looking to hire women and people of color in preference to white males. What is the message being sent if, in today's world, affirmative action is still needed for them (women and people of color, not white males) to get hired?
"...elite..."
That's the tell - holding that as an important objective.
I don't know what will happen - I'm uncomfortable with either outcome.
On the one hand, you have the upholding of the Bakke precedent - a 4-1-4 decision, hardly " well-settled law." Bakke, upheld by Grutter v. Bollinger found that the Constitution "does not prohibit the law school's narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body." However, Grutter also said that "race-conscious admissions policies must be limited in time" and famously concluded that "We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today."
On the other hand, you have the minority position - "Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens." Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U. S. 537, 559 (1896) (Harlan, J., dissenting), which should be the rule, but has never been.
So, I'm very uncomfortable with a former Federal Judge calling on colleagues to adopt a massive resistance if the Supreme Court holds that Justice Harlan was right and the Constitution is indeed color-blind.
Shira A. Scheindlin - "If the Supreme Court Abolishes Affirmative Action, Here’s What Women Need to Do"
Give up your seat to a dude wearing a dress?
Big Chill privilege is always asinine.
"Give up your seat to a dude wearing a dress?"
And don't complain about the gal-spreading.
"... I feel it is incumbent upon me and other white women in my generation to reaffirm the policies that helped us secure our positions [regardless of merit]...." There. Fixed.
The emergence of Affirmative Action Women in positions of influence has certainly wrought change in our society. Just look where we are today.
Finally, white women are called on to "stand alongside communities of color." What is that? What good does it do?
Camouflages the fact that the more opaque you make the selection standards, the more the privileged can game the system.
If you approached the status of males in the higher education system today the way it is done for, literally, every other category of division, we would have to practice affirmative action for males. What say Ms. Scheindlin to denying some women positions at the higher education trough and more for men? Yeah, I know- rhetorical question.
Everyone is colored or else you couldn't see them.
"If the Supreme Court overturns or neuters this well-settled law, every one of us who proudly bore the title 'the first woman'..."
Isn't it well-settled law that Affirmative Action was supposed to be unnecessary in five years anyway? The clear implication is that Affirmative Action should continue indefinitely. Isn't that simple racism and sexism?
The basic argument being made here is that people of color can't be successful without an artificial advantage and the help of White people. Just like Black people are incapable of obtaining photo IDs. She and those like her are the real racists.
"Finally, white women are called on to "stand alongside communities of color." What is that? What good does it do?"
Virtue signaling and consciense-soothing.
Since certain members of the Court don't know what a woman is - we're looking at you, Kentanji - how will anyone know that the elimination of AA will adversely effect women?
What every white woman in a position of authority must do is resign. Then all of their positions can be filled with a minority. Only then can they adequately repent for their lifetimes of privilege.
Ann Althouse said...
"'Finally, white women are called on to "stand alongside communities of color." What is that? What good does it do?'
It feels embarrassing to me. What are white women imagined to be thinking of ourselves that it's such a benefit if we stand next to you.
It makes me think of this song."
Actually, it makes me think of this song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNIZofPB8ZM
Wokeism is her religion. It doesn't have to make sense. This is entirely about faith.
There is nothing more racist than judging people based on their race. There is nothing more sexist than judging people based on their sex. Yet, she will do that constantly and think everyone else has the problem.
The color of your skin is a low information attribute. Your sex has value in context, which is notably limited, albeit consequential, in scope.
There is nothing more sexist than judging people based on their sex
Woman, wife, mother... president, judge, scientist, chef, .... Life is not so short.
"and stand alongside communities of color"
Sure, I'll do the necessary standing so long as there's a bunch of food trucks nearby offering a variety of foods.
Blogger rightguy said...
Everyone is colored or else you couldn't see them.
--
The horribly disenfranchised Trans-parent.
This subject is awfully tiresome especially when presented by college misadministrators like Sheindlin. So yes what EXACTLY does she mean by "access." She obviously does not respect the will of the people. Polls consistently show Americans want to move on from AA. California had our fiftieth or so referendum on "restoring affirmative action" to college admissions in 2020 and the voters of this liberal state with minority-majority voting populace rejected race as as an admission factor. Again. That "no" vote got more ballots than Joe did in California. The people keep rejecting this stupid scheme and progressives keep shoving it down our throats. Even Black Americans reject AA in college admissions more than AWFLs (affluent white female liberals). In fact the ONLY majority who support it are AWFLs. Also is there a better acronym in all of politics than AWFL?
Well, that's mighty white of her!
If you improved public schools, you might not need affirmative action. But when teachers give minority students a "pass" when they should have been made to study, you have a problem. (something I saw with my Hispanic sons).
And letting students with a poor academic background compete with those who come from better schools, or who have "tiger mothers" and actually studied, you can see the real problem-
For once, you nailed it, Althouse, by calling out a virtue-signaling wymynz. Props to you.
"As a successful white woman..."
Trying to imagine the NYT reaction to a man who said "As a successful white man..."
Drawing a blank.
My mother was the first woman county bar association president. When a reporter asked her how she felt about it, she said it was her turn. She was very annoyed about the first woman thing.
Ethnic—based preferences - and all its offshoots - affirmative action, diversity, equity, hate speech, quotas, etc. - are incompatible with meritocracy. We've been trying to square that circle for sixty years. It can't be done.
These days meritocracy isn't even given lip service by our elites.
And thus we return to barbarism.
These days meritocracy isn't even given lip service by our elites.
It's worse than that. In their opinion meritocracy is a tool used by White patriarchal oppressors to keep everyone else down.
The phrase "stand alongside communities of color" is code for "obey the instructions of the left".
I feel it is incumbent upon me and other white women in my generation to reaffirm the policies that helped us secure our positions
Now do slaveholders.
Post a Comment