Negative, Not Affirmative, Action
Let’s be honest: We’ve all realized that so-called “affirmative action” was never meant to be an objectively applied tool ensuring proportional representation; it’s always been a weapon for use against white men. But it’s still going to be interesting to watch the intellectual contortions as elite society’s war on masculinity tips scales in the other direction. In an article about the increasing over-representation of females on college campuses:
Alerted by media reports that some admissions officers may be accepting less-qualified male students over female applicants, the Civil Rights Commission is investigating whether women are being discriminated against in college admissions.
“Everybody should feel very uncomfortable by the notion that it is more difficult for a woman to get into a college than a man,” Heriot said in an interview.
Heretofore, it has never been an accepted argument against affirmative action that the dominating demographic on campus (or wherever) just happened to be more likely to be included. Rather, it was always taken to be evidence of a vague “institutional” ism in their favor. Now that there is institutional feminism in our system of education — not just adapting schools’ methods to serve both male and female communities, but changing their structure to coincide more significantly with girls’ learning styles than boys’ — it’s becoming victimization to adjust for discrepancies.