[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

s/he/she/they/it/RACE

At the eastern div CEDA student-rep meeting in Binghamton, Ryan
Pitterson (URochester) asked what was being done and could be done to
increase the # of minorities in [CEDA] debate. One of the only two
meaningful responses was given by Prof. Corsack (sp?; Cornell), who
suggested that while the division may or may not be dysfunctional, it's
done more/is better off than the other divisions.

Certainly Ryan's question ought to be explored more fully. I personally
don't know much about minority representation in CEDA or any other
debate org. and know that others are curious about the community's
views...and I hope that the lack of in depth discussion at the meeting
was due to time constraints rather than a fear of persecution in this PC
culture. If such a thread has occurred recently, I apologize.

In opening this discussion, I will abstain from answering Ryan, and hope
that others will also abstain until some preliminary questions/issues
are first addressed in an intellectual manner:

1) The number/% of minorities in the various divisions is irrelevant.
Until a discussion of demographics takes place, there is no use trying
to compare divisions or any particular division with the college
population at large. It doesn't sound unreasonable to me that the
east/southeast divisions would have a higher % of minorities
(particularly blacks) in their schools, and thus no *prima facie*
superior representation. Does anyone out there have such comprehensive
stats on CEDA schools?

2) Subpopulations in our society commonly have common sets of beliefs
(bear with me, I know I'm stating the obvious), whether or not those
beliefs are widespread and encompassing enough to define a subculture.
While subcultures cannot be defined (arbitrary & lacks sufficient
statistical data), components can and should be recognized. For example,
70% of race x in eastern CEDA-sanctioning colleges may wear similarly
convoluted pants, 65% may smoke Thai cigarettes, 60% may only associate
with other race x'ers, and 80% may smoke crack (for this discussion, it
doesn't matter that Thai, Inc. exclusively markets to race x -- we're
CEDA, not the Savior).
  
My point is this: if 65% of race x shared some cultural belief --
whether determined by marketing, common history, common socio-economic
status, etc -- that gives rise to a tendency to NOT want to engage in
CEDA debate (perfectly feasible, esp. if behaviorism is correct), then
.35*(%x in a particular division's schools) is pretty much the max %
that will join CEDA in that division based on school
advertising/publicity alone. And when restricting itself to such
recruitment means, a school ought to acknowledge and accept this
fact/possibility. 

Further, the question must then be asked: Is it justifyable to use more
resources on the 65% disinterested race x'ers, than on the disinterested
members of other races, to try to convince them that they OUGHT to
debate? Wouldn't that be a bit pretentious and tokenist (this point also
mentioned in the meeting)?


If this thread takes off, PLEASE don't resort to personal insults or
petty (in so much as it side-tracks the discussion) bickering over
semantics!

-- 
<----------------------------------------->
| Randal Pittelli, Lab Engineer           |
| Dept of Environmental Medicine          |
| Univ of Rochester Medical Center        |
| Rochester, NY 14642                     |
|                                         |
| TEL: (716) 275-0797                     |
| FAX: (716) 256-2591                     |
| pittelli@envmed.rochester.edu           |
| http://www.envmed.rochester.edu/wwwrlp/ |
| --------------------------------------- |
|  "Love only a god that dances" - F.N.   |
<----------------------------------------->
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page