The conventional wisdom now seems to be that groups, whether ethnic, racial, gender, ideological, deserve to have representation in every walk of life that matches their presence in society.
For example, I've noted articles on the dwindling presence of American blacks in major league baseball; the absence of blacks in management positions in the NFL, the lack of conservative professors in higher education, etc
My first reaction is to go slowly--the first consideration is whether there are legal barriers to such representation. Those I presume are almost always wrong.
A second consideration is that under-representation of one group necessarily means over-representation of other group(s). For example, the over-representation of Asian students in top educational institutions (i.e., Harvard, Thomas Jefferson High School) is the other side of the under-representation of other minorities.
A third consideration is the under-representation of a group in one area means the over-representation in other area(s). For example, the over-representation of blacks in pro football and basketball seems to be the counterpart to their under-representation in pro baseball.
A fourth consideration is trajectory through history. For example, blacks seem to have created and still dominate areas of music (about which I know nothing), like hip hop and rap. Jews seem to be prominent in Hollywood and the entertainment industry.
A final consideration (some would put it first) is whether the differential representation indicates a barrier to advancement of some kind. One rule of advancement is usually--it depends on who you know--meaning the greater the representation the easier it is to advance.
No comments:
Post a Comment