Writer
Miguel
A. De La Torre
Associate Professor of Social Ethics at Iliff School of Theology
and Director of the Justice and Peace Institute
Contributor
Ellen
T. Armour
Rhodes College
From the
first day a student of color makes the conscious effort to do scholarship from
the perspective of marginalized communities, her or his work will be viewed
with suspicion. Most of the time, the scholarship done from marginalized
perspectives is seen as being too subjective, lacking the Eurocentric call for
objectivity. Yet, as we all know, what Euro-Americans normalized and
legitimized as objective is in truth their own masked subjectivity.
Nevertheless, because they set the academic canon and serve as gatekeepers into
the academy, scholars of color wishing to ground their work within their own
cultural norms will find that some of their Euro-American colleagues might view
their work as somewhat inferior.
Story: A
certain Euro-American professor of theology at a well-known seminary one day
proclaimed to his class that history will show that the greatest and most
influential theologian of the twentieth century will no doubt be Karl Barth.
When a Hispanic student challenged this assertion, stating that the theologian Gustavo
Gutiérrez’ work has revolutionized theological thought throughout the Americas,
which serves as home for a major portion of the world’s Christian population,
this particular Euro-American theologian confessed he was not familiar with
Gutiérrez’s work. Such an experience is not uncommon.
Story:
During a graduate seminar class at an Ivy League university, a student of color
questioned why there was an absence of scholars of color on the syllabus
reading list. A fellow German student responded by stating, if we include
everyone’s perspective, little time will be left for doing "real"
scholarship. For him, "real" was defined as "Eurocentric."
Unfortunately the class professor remained silent, losing a potent teaching
moment.
Here is
the irony. For students of color to obtain a PhD, not only must they be fluent
in Euro-American theological thought, but they must also be fluent with the
works produced within their own racial/ethnic group. However, Euro-American PhD
candidates only need to know the established white Eurocentric canon to
graduate. While a Asian American student of theology will never receive a
doctorate without having a proficiency in Karl Barth, Euro-Americans need never
hear about Kosuke Koyama or Choan-Seng Song. But yet, it is the Euro-American
student who is usually considered as more knowledgeable due to the persistent
myth which assumes that all scholars of color only have expertise in
"minority-related" issues and activities. Hence, they are mostly
hired for those areas and are deemed incapable of handling the so-called
scholastic rigor associated with "real" theology, understood as
Eurocentric theology.
But why
would a student of color entering the academic profession be considered to be
less scholarly than their Euro-American counterpart, even though they usually
have a wider grasp of the available material, due to them having to know both
the dominant culture’s canon in addition to their own? Because
institutionalized racism and ethnic discrimination is specifically designed to
reinforce feelings of inadequacy among the marginalized so as to justify their
disenfranchisement. Therefore, as a scholar of color, you will have to deal
with all sorts of harassments, even at the most "liberal"
institutions in the land.
According
to Maria Reyes and John Halcon’s 1988 Harvard Educational Review essay,
"Racism in Academia: The Old Wolf Revisited," faculty of color deal
with racism in very specific ways:
- Some
acquiesce to the demands to assimilate. They strive to purge themselves of
the public manifestations of their culture.
- Some
give up trying to fight the prevailing racist structures. They are usually
"burned-out" because they have used up all their energy
combating every wrong they encounter.
- Some
count the cost of the fight and determine the struggle is not worth it.
They usually move to another academic institution that better appreciates
them and their work.
- Some
continue the struggle, attempting to balance the temptation to bring about
change with the importance of succeeding within the system.
- And
finally, some fight back, challenging every offense and racist act,
regardless of the consequences.
Dealing
with Harassment Issues
Sexual
Whenever a
person is made to feel uncomfortable or worse in their place of employment or
in the classroom due to unwanted sexual attention, she (seldom he) is being
sexually harassed. At times the incident is reported to a superior, only to
have the situation ignored by the institution. However, sexual harassment is a
form of sexual discrimination, prohibited by federal laws. Specifically, the
federal statutes Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX of the
Education Amendment of 1972 are used when charges of sexual harassment against
higher education institutions and their employees are filed. The Civil Rights
Act of 1991 provides additional rights and remedies to sexual harassment
complainants.
Sexual
harassment occurs when sexual favors are demanded to insure professional gain,
or when refusing to provide sexual favors threatens one’s professional security.
Additionally, sexual harassment is present whenever a hostile environment
exists in the classroom or workplace that makes women feel threatened and/or
disempowered. Unfortunately, some who have been harassed have resigned from
their jobs or dropped out of required courses in order to preserve their own
self-respect.
Unlike
sexual harassment within corporate America, sexual harassment within academia
focuses upon the professor’s position of power and authority. According to Sexual
Harassment: A Report on the Sexual Harassment of Students (1980), F. J.
Tilly defines sexual harassment in academia to be "the use of authority to
emphasize the sexuality or sexual identity of a student in a manner which
prevents or impairs the student’s full enjoyment of educational benefits,
climate, or opportunities." Tilly identifies five levels of sexual
harassment within academia. They are:
- Gender
harassment: generalized sexist remarks and behavior.
- Seductive
behavior: inappropriate and offensive, but essentially sanction-free,
sexual advances.
- Sexual
bribery: solicitations of sexual activity or other sex-linked behavior by
promise of rewards.
- Sexual
coercion: coercion of sexual activity by threat of punishment.
- Sexual
assault: gross sexual imposition or assault.
Most colleges
and universities have programs in place which are set up to deal with sexual
harassment. They should include:
- A
carefully drafted set of definitions elaborating upon what constitutes
sexual harassment, with clear policies prohibiting such actions
- An
accessible grievance procedure understood by the academic community
- Continuous
education concerning the nature of sexual harassment
Anyone who
believes they have been sexually harassed should report the incident to the
proper authorities within the school. You should first obtain a copy of your
institution’s policy on sexual harassment, if one exists. The policy should
spell out the necessary procedures for filing a grievance and identifying the
person(s) responsible for implementing the policy. You should also check for
any information pamphlets offered by your state or municipality concerning
sexual harassment. These should explain your rights and the expected
liabilities for those who harassed you. If you are being sexually harassed,
begin to document in writing everything that is occurring (who, what, when, and
where). Be sure to document all incidents of harassment on a spiral notebook so
that you cannot be accused of adding or removing papers.
Contact
the affirmative action officer or another appropriate university official. For
most harassment cases you will need to demonstrate that you first wrote a
letter to the harasser and then to his/her immediate supervisors and received
either an insufficient response, or no response at all. As you move up the ladder,
your letters should be specific on what happened, showing how the response, or
lack thereof, failed to adequately address your concerns. Also provide the
letter recipient the opportunity to correct the situation by specifically
spelling-out what form of redress you would find satisfactory.
And
finally, seek out legal advice immediately. Don’t just say, "I’m going to
sue." Instead, consider something more like, "I’m sure the college
wants to maintain its fine reputation for supporting the work of scholars of
color, so it is critical that you address this issue by sending a reprimand to
the offending party, prohibit her/him from attending meetings when I am there,
and instituting a sexual harassment sensitivity session for the department. The
problem will not go away until you begin to publicly deal with it. If the
situation is ignored, you may want to consider taking legal action, although
such a course of action (as discussed below) may have its own hidden dangers.
While
victims of sexual harassment are not at fault for having unwanted advances
forced upon them, still there are some defensive steps that can be taken. They
are:
- Keep
relationships with fellow colleagues professional. Do not engage in
personal conversations, specifically one’s sex life, marital problems, or
physical "turn ons" or "turn-offs."
- If you
are from a culture that uses hugs as a form of greeting, employ the
leaning forward shoulder hug, not the full body, pelvis to pelvis hug.
- When
meeting with anyone in your office (even if they are of the same gender)
keep your office door open.
- If you
have any concerns about the intentions of who you are meeting with, then
schedule your gathering at a public place, e.g. the school cafeteria.
- While at
a conference, never agree to meet a colleague or student in your hotel
room.
- Never
conduct an employment interview, or go to one, at the conference hotel
room.
Race
and Ethnicity
"Oh,
you’ll have no problem getting a position once you graduate," is what I
constantly heard from Euro-Americans during my graduate studies. Yet, scholars
of color can expect, due to institutional racism which can manifest itself in
strange ways, even more hurdles to jump than their Euro-American colleagues.
One well published light-skinned Latino was denied employment because he was
told that he was not "Latino enough." The school’s administration
thought his skin lacked sufficient brown pigmentation. These forms of
politically correct bigotry contribute to a hostile work environment. The
mythology perpetuated is that non-white skin is an opportunity for employment,
because as the argument goes, a prevailing politically correct environment
which is hostile to whites permeates academia. What appears as a compliment is
really a voicing of resentment that you will get a job over "better"
qualified white candidates. However, the truth of the matter is that racism and
ethnic discrimination is as rampant on U.S. campuses of higher education as in
any other sphere of American life. Like in the rest of society, not possessing
white skin is detrimental during the hiring process. And even if you are hired
because you have out-published all your white competitors, or you have a
greater span of the academic discourse, you will be made to feel that you do
not, and in reality, do not deserve the position. The zero-sum rule assumes
that all faculty positions belong to white colleagues, and any position given
to a person of color is a position being taken away from a more
deserving white candidate.
But even
after being hired, you will still have to deal with issues of harassment,
whether they be unconscious, subtle, obvious faux pas, or downright hostile.
Story: At
one college, a new Hispanic faculty member was warmly welcomed by her
colleagues, who would proclaim over and over, "We’re so glad they hired
one of your kind of people, because of all the pressure." Though a bit
surprised, she naturally assumed they were referring to her area of
specialization, and proudly said she was glad to contribute in this way.
"Ha, ha, that’s very funny," they laughed. "You know what we
mean - your kind of people - Hispanics!
A scholar
we will name Manuel, was serving on a search committee for a new faculty
position. After much deliberation, the committee narrowed the search to several
candidates. One of the candidates was a person of color. While Manuel was a
Latino, this particular candidate was an Asian American woman. Manuel felt that
she would enhance the present curriculum by brining a new and much needed
perspective. As Manuel was making his case for the consideration of this
person, one of his white colleagues literally said, "But Manuel, we
already have you doing these marginalized perspectives, why would we need
another?" The assumption in this case was that the department already had
its token minority to prove they were not racist , so there was no need to hire
another one, particularly with similar leanings. Like most departments
throughout academia, Manuel’s department suffers from the
"one-minority-per-pot syndrome." Manuel tried to passionately explain
that bringing in someone else from a different gender and ethnicity would only
strengthen the program. Yet another white colleague shot back, "We are a
small department of eight, so while the ideal may be great, the reality is that
minority issues are already covered. What is needed now was someone who would
cover another aspect of Euro-American religious thought."
Manny felt
outnumbered, a lone voice in the wilderness. What Manny began to realize was
that he would never win an argument of any significant importance because he
was always outgunned. As he related his experience to his outside support
system, he realized that during his tenure with this school, he was never
invited to eat at an Euro-American colleague’s home. Others from his department
would comment about having enjoyed a meal with the Provost or the President,
but Manny never met with them within a relaxed setting. He knew that other
faculty members routinely socialized, but with the exception of department
parties where everyone was invited, Manny was routinely excluded.
Whether
consciously or unconsciously, Manny’s exclusion prevented him from
participating in the informal give and take that usually takes place when
decisions concerning his department were made. That is why whenever major decisions
were made, e.g. a new hire, Manny realized that all of his Euro-American
colleagues operated from similar talking points. White privilege means that one
is invited to the golf course, gym, or basketball game where most decisions are
really made. Absence from these locations of power only further marginalizes
those whose race and ethnicity already disenfranchises them.
So what
can be done if one finds themselves in an situation where their voice in
effectively silenced?
- Organize.
Find other persons of color within your institution, whether in your
department or in other departments. Propose meeting on a regular basis to
discuss possible strategies for advancing your interests. As mentioned
above, white colleagues are probably informally meeting already - and
usually to your disadvantage. For you not to be part of your own group
undermines your effectiveness. But note, do not assume that just because a
colleague is a person of color her or his political views are congruent
with yours. Many great organizing efforts have ended badly because a
person of color in the team essentially acted as a spy for the
administration or otherwise undermined the groups efforts so as to advance
their individual careers.
If there
are not sufficient persons of color, slowly and carefully expand your base.
Members of color within the administration might prove to be crucial allies.
But remember, they represent the same administration with whom faculty of color
might be at odds. Even if they are invited to participate in your group, use
caution. There may be some meetings when it would be wiser not to include them
because it might put them in the uncomfortable position of choosing between
loyalties. Also, you may at times include those white colleagues who through
words and deed have been willing to stand in solidarity on issues crucial to
faculty of color. But again, use caution, because as Euro-Americans they
benefit from the very structures you are questioning and hoping to debunk. Like
administrators, their loyalties may be divided or conflicted.
- Report.
If you find your work environment too hostile to your race or ethnicity,
politely yet firmly discuss the situation with senior faculty members,
your department chairperson, and/or dean. You may also consider obtaining
advice from the university’s diversity committee if your institution has
such a group. If this fails to bring about a desired change, consider
talking to either the institution’s ombudsman or the affirmative action
officer. First check if any such conversation commits you to lodging a
formal written complaint. You may not want to do this depending on the
seriousness of your complaint and its potential backlash. Be forewarned
that an informal requirement for tenure is based on whether your
colleagues find you to be collegial, meaning, do they really like you. You
may be deemed too confrontational if your colleagues believe you are
accusing them of unconscious racism, no matter how valid your experience
may be.
- Legal
action. Unlike sexual harassment, most schools and universities do not
have a specific policy regarding racial harassment. Still, if you have
experienced racial or cultural harassment (herein understood as any
behavior that any reasonable person of color would find offensive), you
should follow the same strategies as those victimized by sexual
harassment, specifically to document in detail the experience and seek
advice from university officials and/or an attorney.
Homophobia
Homophobia
is a complex phenomenon for minorities because of the intertwined elements of
race/ethnicity, sex, and gender within racism and heterosexism. Whites may
inaccurately perceive an African American man as gay, for example, because
racist stereotypes both oversexualize and undermasculinize black men. An Asian
American lesbian may encounter a distinctive form of homophobia. Since Asian
women are perceived by whites as being extra-feminine (read
"passive") sexually, some may find it impossible to believe that she
is lesbian (read "active" sexually and "mannish"). Handling
a colleague’s casual homophobia can be tricky; academics are easily embarrassed
by charges of bias of any sort. Sometimes, a light hearted response that names
the stereotype in play without blaming the colleague is sufficient, since
professionally we do claim to be experts at reading between the lines. If the
message didn’t sink in, it may become necessary to involve a mediator. Many
colleges and universities offer mediation as a way of handling intra-faculty
conflict. If this is not available, seek advice from your human resources
office.
Homophobia
can escalate into sexual harassment. Working up the courage to report such
harassment can be especially difficult for minority and/or GLBT faculty members
but is important nonetheless. Chances are that the harasser has either harassed
before or will harass again unless he or she is stopped. All faculty members
and students should acquaint themselves with the college or university policies
on discrimination and harassment. Even if your college’s or university’s policy
does not explicitly include harassment on the basis of perceived sexual
orientation, you should still explore pursuing a complaint under the umbrella
of sexual harassment. You will want to know to whom you should go to discuss
whether you should register a complaint. Good policies will have established a
route for discussing and reporting possible harassment that allows you to
bypass those who supervise you and assures your confidentiality. The human
resources department can be very helpful in this regard. Its staff members are
likely to have more training in this area than department chairs or academic
administrators. As with any form of harassment, you will need to document
specific instances of troubling encounters by keeping a journal recording the
date, time, place, and any witnesses, along with a detailed description of what
happened. Take steps to avoid being alone with the harasser. Do not agree to
meeting behind closed doors. While it will feel important to seek support from
friends or colleagues, remember that you risk having your concerns become the
subject of campus gossip. That can hurt you as easily as it can the harasser.
You will be best served by going through the proper channels to report the
problem and seeking solace and counsel only from friends whom you can trust to
preserve your confidentiality.
Crimes
Incidents
of hate crimes have multiplied on colleges and universities throughout the
United States. Such incidents include, but are not limited to: hate mail,
racist graffiti, and verbal abuse. Many institutions would prefer to keep hate
crimes and rape an internal affair. Most schools strive hard to avoid the
publicity associated with hate crimes and rape. But rape and hate crimes are
first and foremost crimes that are serious, potentially deadly, and punishable
by law. Yes, notify your campus security, but also notify the local police.
File the necessary reports with the proper authorities. Insist on having these
crimes investigated. By publicizing such crimes, it provides public notice that
a grave problem exists. Some schools have a "Take Back the Night"
rally that hosts on-campus vigils at sites where women were raped or otherwise
attacked. Support such initiatives as one that all your students and community
members should attend (not just the women), for this calls attention to a
problem that destroys lives.
Several
organizations lead by women of color exist that address hate crimes and sexual
violence from an intersectional race/gender perspective. They include:
- Incite! Women of Color Against Violence
- Audre Lorde Project
- Northwest Network of Bi, Trans, Gay and Lesbian Survivors of Abuse
Harassment
Within One’s Community of Color
Just
because you are a person of color, do not assume you will automatically receive
the help, support, or encouragement of your community of color. Unfortunately,
politics are just as prevalent within minority groups as they are within the
dominant culture. Consider the following example. A graduate student of color,
whom we will name Mirta, applied for a dissertation grant from an organization
whose deciding board comprised of members from her own ethnic community. The
thesis of her dissertation dealt with a topic which questioned the presumptions
and rhetoric of her ethnic community. In fact, she was critical of one of the
concepts advanced by one of the senior scholars who happen to be sitting on the
grant deciding board, and has written articles propounding this particular
view. Much heated discussion took place over Mirta’s grant request. At the end,
the board voted not to provide funding. Financially strapped, Mirta seriously
considered dropping out of the PhD program. After all, if her own ethnic
community refused to support her work, maybe her work lacked scholastic rigor.
Fortunately,
she received a letter from one of the board members. A senior scholar, he
encouraged her to continue with her studies and explained that the decision to
not fund her project was due more to politics and her boldness to critically
analyze the work of senior members of the community through the use of
methodologies that the community usually views with suspicion. In protest, this
senior scholar resigned from the organization. Encouraged that her work did
have enough merit to prompt this particular senior scholar to stand up in her
defense, Mirta finished her dissertation. Within a year, her dissertation was
published into two books, each by different university presses. Since then, she
has published more books than most of those on the board who originally
questioned her scholarship.
Mirta’s
experience leads us to some strategies when one is harassed by one’s own
community of color. Specifically: Do not give up. At times, rejection from
one’s community may indeed be caused by a lack of scholarship. To be sure, seek
out senior scholars from within and outside your community to provide critical
feedback on your work. If they see some major flaws, spend time learning how to
correct these flaws and tighten your argument. If however you receive overall
positive feedback, then other causes for your rejection may be at play. In
Mirta’s case, she was challenging, albeit indirectly, the work of senior
members of her community. Her rejection was not due to the quality of her work
but the implication her work would have on the way the discipline is
constructed. Fortunately, she was able to move beyond the rejection by
fostering alliances outside her community, and her eventual success refuted and
exposed the board’s political machinations for what they were.
Restricting
Academic Freedom
Many
faculty of color are usually very engaged with their community. At times they
find themselves serving as a representative for their group - a community
Voice. Speaking against societal structures of oppression can easily put you at
odds with your college or university who, many times, are economically
interconnected with these oppressive social structures. Take the example of
Michael, who taught at a conservative Christian college. When one of the
nation’s leading evangelical leaders of the political Religious Right made some
bigoted homophobic remarks, Michael felt compelled to hold the evangelical
leader accountable and wrote an op-ed column in his local newspaper. Within a
week, the evangelical leader responded in the same newspaper, ending his
diatribe with thanksgiving that his children were not enrolled in the college
where Michael taught. Before the day ended, both the provost and president
called Michael into their separate offices to voice their displeasure.
Within a
month, the college president wrote Michael a letter questioning his
scholarship, and holding him accountable for lost donations based on Michael’s
op-ed writings. Even though Michael published three books that academic year,
the president also took Michael’s name off the list of scholars that were to
receive merit pay raises that year. Michael later discovered that at least two
individuals who sat on the Board of the Directors for the evangelical leader he
criticized were also trustees at his college, and at least one of them
publically announced that he was considering withholding donations until
Michael was appropriately dealt with.
This story
is repeated to emphasize the fact that the work many scholars of color engage
in is detrimental to their employment. As long as the scholar of color keeps
his or her discourse abstract, he or she will be tolerated. However, if such a
scholar is serious about the importance of praxis, and actively engages in
changing social structures which secure white privilege, there is a real
possibility that there will be a backlash. It behooves the scholar of color to
first count the cost. Social and political activism carries a price, and that
price may very well be unemployment. Whether one chooses to be a
scholar-activist or not totally depends on the individual. But for those who
choose activism as a form of their pedagogy, the following should be
considered:
- Be as
wise as serpents but gentle as doves. Definitely hold those who benefit
from injustices accountable, but do so in such a way that it does not
appear like a personal attack.
- Be
accurate in your critique, always mindful that the color of your skin or
your ethnicity will justify in the dominant culture’s mind your supposed
lack of academic rigor.
- Choose
your battles. Not a day goes by when you will not be reminded that you do
not really belong because of your race or ethnicity. No one person
possesses all the energy to fight every single insult. So wait for the
right battle. Don’t let others choose for you the battleground. It is you
who should choose the time of engagement and the battlefield.
- At times
your personal integrity leaves you no choice but to risk it all for the
cause of justice. If this is the case, then move forward boldly. If the
risks are too high, then it might be best to tone down the rhetoric. All
talk and no action hurts all scholars of colors.
In the
case study above, Michael was forced to resign. Fortunately for him, scholars
elsewhere were impressed with how he merges praxis with theory. He quickly
found new employment, in an atmosphere where his work is most welcomed and
appreciated.
A Final
Note
When
dealing with issues of harassment it is important to remember:
- Avoid
self blame. For most scholars of color, who are already isolated within
their predominately Euro-American institution and who have had their work
constantly questioned as to scholastic rigor, it is easy to believe that
the harassment faced is somehow their fault. Do not forget that the
systemic racism within the institution’s structures have been historically
designed to privilege the dominant culture at your expense. Don’t fall
into the mental trap of blame that "everything is all your
fault." Mind you, in a few cases you might have contributed to your
situation, but the majority of the incidents you face would have been
experienced by whichever scholar of color happened to fill your position.
If you can begin by realizing that you are probably not to blame, then you
can look at the situation a bit more clearly to see what are really the
causing factors.
- Avoid
self-doubt. Any form of harassment, regardless as to how self-confident
you may be, will cause most people to doubt their abilities. Try to
remember that in most cases it is not about you - it is about your skin
color, ethnicity, gender, orientation, manner of speech, or any or all of
these at once. If you allow self-doubt to creep into your deliberations as
to what course of action to take, you may find yourself arriving at false
conclusions, contributing to incorrect actions to be taken.
- Be
realistic. As you analyze your situation, realize that you may lack the
power, energy, or resources to bring about complete change. At times it
might be best to cut your losses and move on. At other times, you may need
to have to compromise in order to survive. Still, at other times, you
might have to keep fighting the good fight. Whichever course you take, be
realistic as to what you can accomplish and what would be the possible
repercussions. Count the cost and move forward if you are willing to pay
the price. It is always best if you can divorce yourself from your
emotions, least you are tempted to act too hastily.
Living
Through Bigoted Statements
Most
scholars of color, no matter how gifted they may be as a teacher, no matter how
prolific they may be as a scholar, no matter how active they may be within the
academic community, must live with the perception that they lack the scholastic
rigor to have been hired on their own merits. Not only do their colleagues
assume that they were hired as a result of affirmative action, but many of
their students also buy into this presupposition.
Kim, who
has published more than his entire department combined, and whose student
teaching evaluations were among the highest on campus, constantly heard very
bigoted comments as he walked into group meetings on campus. For example, he
once struck up a conversation with another colleague of the same ethnicity in
their native Korean during a college reception, and was quickly approached by a
Euro-American colleague to remind him that he was now in America and should be
speaking in English. Another time, while speaking to the dean about obtaining
more financial assistance for his travel based on the number of book contracts
he had, he was dismissed by the dean with the reply "Anyone can get a book
contract." Once, the newly installed provost stopped by Kim’s office for a
visit because he was concerned that one of the students in class was offended
by Kim’s critique of Euro-American power structures. Regardless of the fact
that the majority of the students highly evaluated Kim’s teaching skills, the
provost felt the need to warn him that his tenure review was rapidly
approaching, and that the administration felt that "many" on campus believed
Kim was not a positive influence for the college due to his views. Kim
constantly overheard his white colleagues remark that it was impossible
nowadays for a white man to get a teaching position. Such comments ignored the
reality that faculty of color are still disproportionately unrepresented within
academia. John, an adjunct professor who shared an office next door surprised
Kim one day with this statement: "They hired you instead of me because you
are a minority and I’m just a white male." Kim remained silent, but
thought about the difference in their track record: John had not published
anything since he joined the department ten years ago, while Kim had published
several books.
The list
of bigoted remarks Kim continued to hear can fill an entire chapter. The
question then is, what should he do about this? Regularly challenging such
remarks can lead to a denial of tenure, as the provost warned him. But to say
nothing is to provide credence to the bigoted comments made. If you are hearing
as many bigoted comments as did Kim, think seriously about your "fit"
in this school. Constant bigoted comments from your colleagues clearly
indicates that, in their mind, your presence at the institution serves as a
token of diversity, not as a representation of scholarship. It is unlikely that
your work will be appreciated or supported. You are probably better off finding
employment elsewhere. Kim chose to leave this particular college and is now
working at a university where his scholarship is recognized and appreciated.
But what
if you simply cannot move. What then? Responding to every remark is exhausting,
potentially toxic to your peace of mind, and robs you of the energy needed for
your scholarship and teaching. So pick your battles wisely. Take the example of
a scholar of color we will call Sondra. Sondra was the first of her ethnicity
to be hired by this particular seminary. She never allowed a bigoted remark go
unanswered. She even sued the seminary for discrimination and won. But in the
long run, she lost the war. After leaving the seminary she found it difficult
to find employment. She developed a reputation, unfairly, of being
non-collegial. No school
would hire
her, fearing that with time, she may also end up suing them. It does you little
good to win the battle over a bigoted comment or even constant negative
chatter, when you could inevitably lose the war and never be able to practice
your profession again.
Coming
Out
The
decision to come out is particularly fraught with stress for GLBT people of
color/minority status. Because of the sexualization involved in racism,
minority friends, colleagues, or family members who are straight may view your
sexual orientation as a deliberate betrayal of your race or ethnic group. For
similar reasons, majority friends or colleagues may find it difficult to
believe that minority folk can be GLBT, too. In deciding whether to come out
and to whom, you will want to be aware of your college or university’s
non-discrimination policy. The degree of actual legal protection such policies
offer is not always clear, given variations in state law and its differential
relationship to private vs. public institutions of higher education. But having
such a policy in place is an indication of an expressed commitment to which the
institution should be held accountable. It will not necessarily be a commitment
that all members of the institution share, of course. Given the risks, you will
probably want to come out first to friends and colleagues outside your
institution in order to ensure that you have a network of support when or if
you come out at work. You may also wish to seek out GLBT support groups in your
area (some include support groups specifically for minorities) or online as
well as other "out" faculty members (if there are any) at your institution.
If you seek online support, you may prefer to use a personal ISP account rather
than your work account to ensure your privacy.
Deciding
whether or not to come out to students adds another layer of complication,
especially for minority faculty members in institutions that lack any explicit
commitment to non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The power
dynamics that characterize student/minority teacher relationships put you at
some risk should you decide to come out. (A disgruntled student may try to use
this information as the basis for a complaint, for example.) On the other hand,
those same dynamics mean that choosing to come out can send a positive message
to all students, especially GLBT and/or minority students. The relative risks
and benefits need to be weighed carefully on a case-by-case basis – ideally,
with wise counsel from others who know your institution, its administrators,
and its student body. Student affairs professionals can be very helpful on such
matters. They can also help you identify ways to be supportive of GLBT students
whether or not you decide to come out to students. Consider, for example,
organizing a Safe Zones program on your campus or serving as faculty advisor
for your campus’s GLBT student organization.
Dealing
with Religion and Spirituality
As
professors whose main area of study is religion. It should not be surprising
then that for some, spirituality was the main reason why this particular
discipline was chosen in the first place. How then does one balance their faith
(or lack thereof) with the job of teaching about religion? For those who
conduct their research or base their teaching from a particular faith
tradition, it would be wise to seek employment at either a seminary or a
college with strong ties to your particular faith tradition. For those whose
faith does not affect their teaching or research, or for those who have no
particular faith, then a secular college or a research institution might be the
better fit. This does not mean that scholars of faith should not work at
research universities or secular colleges. Nor does it mean that those who do
not profess a faith or whose faith doesn’t impact their work should not work at
a seminary or a college strongly associated by a faith tradition. However, for
those teaching at such institutions where their own spirituality (or lack
thereof) and the ethos of the school are not well aligned, it would be wise to
be sensitive to what is expected from you and the religious sentiments (or lack
thereof) of the students and institution.
Faith
Within Secular Academy
If one
teaches at a Christian school or seminary, then their work is expected to be
Christiancentric. However, caution should be exercised for those scholars of
faith who work at a secular institution or research university. To work at a
secular institution means that those sitting in your class probably represent a
variety of beliefs, including non-belief. You should expect Jews, Muslims,
Hindus, Christians, Wiccas, and atheists among your students. They are not in
your class to learn the "truths" about your faith, but to
study religion as a discipline. To impose your faith does a disservice to your
institution, your students, and the faith tradition you represent. You must
learn to divorce yourself from your faith upon entering the classroom. For
some, this is impossible. If you are unable to do this, then teaching religion
at a secular institution may not be the best "fit" for you.
But even
if you are able to separate yourself from your faith, you still might receive
disapproval from your more secular colleagues. At some institutions, being
spiritual is seen as unscholarly. For those scholars of color who do ground
their work within their faith tradition, serving in non-religious schools may
prove formidable. For this reason, it is important to pay close attention to
the schools to which you will be applying, ensuring that your spirituality (or
lack thereof) fits with the overall institutional ethos.
Misappropriation
for Other Traditions
Every so
often we come across Euro-Americans who consider themselves more black than
African Americans, more Latino than Hispanics, or more Indian than Native
Americans. They (mis)appropriate cultural symbols, setting themselves up as
experts. Native American scholar Tink Tinker asks the question, "Is the
sharing of Indian ceremonial life ultimately helpful to either Indian or
non-Indian people?" Although Tinker’s question should not be limited to
Native Americans, he answers this question by pointing out:
- Cross-cultural
differences make it very difficult for non-Indians to internalize Indian
meanings relating to ceremonial acts. This makes it a necessity for Indian
structures to be remodeled accordingly around non-Indian cultural
structures and ideas in order to include non-Indian
"individuals."
- Culture
and belonging: Along with the communalist/individualist cultural
difference comes another significant difference that is regularly
overlooked. Indian nationality, and hence participation in the ceremonial
spirituality of the community, is not a voluntary act such as joining a
church. Rather, the concept of modality signifies that membership in the
community is a birth right. We are what we are by birth. Andrea Smith
would add that the issue moves beyond simply birth. It is about having
kinship relationship to a specific landbase since Native culture emerged
from relationships to a landbase.
Essentially,
Tinker argues that white participation in Indian community ceremonial actions
contributes to the ongoing destruction of Indian culture, ceremonies and
communities, and constitutes continued colonization in a time that is often
referred to as postcolonial. But as already noted, Tinker’s concerns
about Euro-American appropriation of marginalized cultures is not limited to
the Native American experience. As scholars of color we should hold our
Euro-American colleagues accountable. Rather than standing with us in
solidarity in dismantling power structures designed to ensure their white
privilege, we should not accept them when they are utilizing that privilege to
become us, as though it is somehow chic to be among or like one of the
oppressed. Being marginalized is nothing to romanticize.
The
Problem of "Fit"
The work
done by most scholars of color does not neatly fit into the Euro-American
dichotomy between conservatives and liberals. Many scholars of color would
probably find themselves as being the "liberal" among conservatives
and simultaneously the "conservative" among liberals. Of course it
goes without saying that many people of color do not identify with either the
liberal or conservative dichotomy prevalent within Euro-American culture. Thus,
it becomes somewhat difficult to define oneself using the definitions of the
dominant culture. Still, regardless as to one’s attempt to not to be labeled,
labeled you shall be!
Whichever
way you end up being labeled, consider these points:
- Learn to
speak the "language" of the environment in which you find
yourself. Rather than telling your students and colleagues why they are
wrong, learn to communicate your message using, whenever possible, their
language. By using their language, you subvert it by how you redefine
their terms, and you increase the possibility of being heard. One
liberationist professor of color adopted the evangelical language of the
Religious Right to show how those who are calling themselves evangelicals
are failing to live up to the liberating message of the gospel.
- Some
conservatives refuse to acknowledge that oppressive structures exists, and
that what people of color need to do is to pull themselves by their
bootstraps. Some liberals, on the other hand, simply want to "feel
your pain," by wallowing in guilt. Both extremes are dangerous to
your well being. While the conservative refuses to recognize the plight of
the oppressed, the liberal wishes to concentrate on their shame. Both
extremes have a common goal, the unconscious but deliberate maintenance of
white privilege. True, a few scholars of color might be allowed to be part
of the institution, but unfortunately this is usually to give the
impression of diversity. And to prove the institution’s so-called
commitment to diversity, expect the public relations office to include
photos of you at school events to show some "color" on the
school’s website and/or catalogue. Conservatives may dismisses taking
action because the problems faced by people of color are perceived as
being non-existent. And liberals may dismiss taking action because the
shame of oppression is too overwhelming. But the end result is the same,
action to change power structures will not take place because both sides
of the social Euro-American spectrum is, at the final analysis, more
concerned with protecting the power and privilege they already hold.