To meet “diversity” quotas, publishers plop able-bodied child models in wheelchairs and pass off Hispanic kids as Native American or Asian-Americans as Hispanic, observes Jeff Jacoby in the Boston Globe, citing a Wall Street Journal story by Daniel Golden.
At least three-fourths of the children portrayed as disabled in Houghton Mifflin textbooks actually aren’t, (a photographer) told Golden. In fact, publishers have to keep track of all the models they use for such pictures, so that a child posing as disabled in one chapter isn’t shown running or climbing a tree in another.
Stereotypical portrays are banned.
For example, McGraw-Hill’s guidelines specify that Asians not be portrayed wearing glasses or as intellectuals and that publishers avoid showing Mexican men in ponchos or sombreros. “One major publisher vetoed a photo of a barefoot child in an African village,” Golden writes, “on the grounds that the lack of footwear reinforced the stereotype of poverty on that continent.” Grinding poverty is in fact a daily reality for hundreds of millions of Africans. But when reality conflicts with political correctness, reality gets the boot.
Diversity is skin deep, Jacoby complains.
By reducing “diversity” to something as shallow and meaningless as appearance, they reinforce the most dehumanizing stereotypes of all — those that treat people first and foremost as members of racial, ethnic, or social groups. Far from acknowledging the genuine complexity and variety of human life, the diversity dogmatists deny it.
See Discriminations for more.
“Diversity” seems to be out as a buzzword in the University of California system: Berkeley’s chancellor will create a vice chancellor for equity and inclusion, who will be paid between $182,000 and $282,000 a year with an office budget of more than $4 million, report San Francisco Chronicle columnists Matier and Ross.
The goal isn’t so much to recruit more minorities but rather to ensure students, faculty and staff are “fully respected for their individuality and what they represent,” Birgeneau said.
Birgeneau said the aim is “to prize our diversity and learn from it and to appreciate people for being part of the whole but also for what they as individuals bring to Berkeley.”
. . . The creation of the new post comes at a time when the university system is already under fire over executive pay — and for having so many high-level positions.
Yes, but a vice chancellor for respecting the individuality of people representing groups is priceless.