1.When women were first entering the engineering, professional schools, & other areas of commerce (and I trust the Service Academies), it wasn't unusual for them to be the subject of further scrutiny when they convened to dialogue about their experience. It must be part of our DNA to begin to suspect the worse and disparage the intentions when we are not part of the discussion.
2.Some of our greatest innovations come from the diversity/intersection/convergence of ideas. You remember the Einstein quote, "We can't solve the problems of today with the same type of thinking that helped to get us here." It's been shown increased performance when their is diversity. So why wouldn't we not only want to recruit but also retain a diverse talent pool?
3.Do you really think the Holy Grail is being disseminated in a short program right before R-DAY? THINK.
4.But an interesting thing happened in this discussion. It slowly transformed from announcement of the class composition and diversity initiatives to a dialogue incorporating "double standards", "reverse discrimination", "dumb down", " not fair", special needs, etc. Reminds me of 40 years ago. Notice the associations and assumptions that were made in your comments. You've already made those attributions (to those participants) which only reflects why such programs are necessary. Shame on you! Now I really think LineInTheSand was very skillful in crafting this subterfuge; I just wouldn't want to be in a crowded theater with you--Would you be the one screaming "Fire"?
5. At the risk of protesting to much, I really think we must practice some of that critical thinking we aspire to impart on our young cadets.
In response to:
1) The example you provided with respect to women dealt with stereotypes, prejudices, and societal forces in general. I do not think this applies to our conversation here. What we are discussing is the new program the academy has made available to minority students, what its purpose is, and whether it is fair to other cadets in the Class of 2015 if it gives other cadets an advantage.
2) I don't think any of us are questioning the value of diversity in our society today. We are discussing whether the program created for minority swabs is fair to the rest of the constituent class. I'll assume you got a bit off track from your argument here and didn't mean to presume that we do not value diversity.
3) No, I don't think the 'holy grail' is at stake here, but the ethics of the program and its purpose is worth further discussion. John Mill was a great proponent of sharing opinions in the public forum, even if those opinions are determined to be wrong, for they will eventually help to reveal the truth.
4) As far as I have seen in this thread, most if not all of the arguments made were of logical construction and none were hateful or targeted to 'put-down' minorities. I don't know where you got the idea that LITS started some kind of war on minorities, he even said:
LineInTheSand said:
And don't get me wrong, I'm fine with diversity. I just didn't see classmates by race. Does the new policy affect the way they will look at classmates? I like to think my classmates and I made it through, all together, going through the same less than fun experiences together. We can look each other in the eyes and know that.
In essence, I perceive the main claim here is that achieving a greater minority enrollment or retention
for its own sake should not be a concern in forming a class. All that should matter is creating a class of the best-qualified individuals, regardless of racial background (equality principle). The number of minorities or majorities shouldn't matter. What matters is that there is a diversity of sorts, that they are the best qualified for being further developed into leaders of character and later as commissioned officers in the United States Coast Guard. They have to work toward their goals, and they have to work toward them together.
I personally don't think this program should be a huge concern, and it's the Reauthorization bill at work. Let's hope it works for the betterment of the Coast Guard.
-Andrew