Testing should be fair but not exclusionary
Regarding Charles Davenport’s May 3 column:
Once, even after black Americans had fought with bravery and honor to gain America’s independence and preserve its unity, blacks were deemed unsuitable to be combat troops.
Once, even after enduring discrimination in recruitment, insults in training, assaults on leave, curses in transport and misguidance by racist officers — after proving that they maintained the honor and bravery of their ancestors — the positive examples of black units’ combat achievements were slighted or ignored.
Once, Jews were stereotyped as avaricious profiteers unwilling to defend America.
Once, women were deemed incapable of defending themselves or exercising political rights.
These stereotypes were all misconceptions that endured only because our society minimized opportunities to create contrary examples. Today, residual discrimination and reactionary attitudes still minimize these opportunities wherever possible.
Insensitivity to, or sympathy with, such stereotyping leads some Americans to question the need for members of public safety organizations to reflect their community’s composition. The claim that making entry tests fair for all lowers standards ignores that those tests once served specifically to prevent some capable Americans from attaining public safety positions and that some of the most exclusionary standards still have nothing to do with performing valuable safety services.
Christopher C. Tew
Greensboro
Comments (7)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
The letter writer makes a good point concerning residual discrimination. Overt racism and sexism may have largely disappeared, but its effects still linger. Old habits die hard, right?
Tests should appreciate the differences between different groups of people. Women, for instance, are, on average, less strong than men but have higher capacities for other things. This should be reflected in standards when relevant.
Davenport does have a good point though. Diversity for simply for diversity's sake hasn't been proven beneficial, especially in many of the professions he discusses in his column such as police and firefighting.
Separate from this, we have education. Diversity in education and educational institutions should be valued and encouraged. Ensuring that student populations are diverse serves well in discrediting stereotypes and will aid in further eliminating the previously mentioned residual discrimination.
Posted on May 8, 2009 11:17 AM
When the NBA rosters become only 15% black in order to "reflect their community's composition", we can then move next to the fire department.
Until then, get over it.
Posted on May 8, 2009 1:13 PM
I can't imagine how the tests discriminate for one race or the other.
Maybe they require applicants to be able to distinguish the between the correct usage of the words "is" and "are" in a sentence.
Posted on May 8, 2009 1:16 PM
Defending...even promoting, mediocrity for the sake of pc diversity bs...pitiful.
Posted on May 8, 2009 2:39 PM
If I need to be dragged out of a burning building and I weigh 100 pounds, I sure hope I don't get a firefighter who only had to drag 50 pounds because the test was adjusted to make it "fair." I want a firefighter who has the knowledge and the stamina and the strength to rescue people and put out fires. I don't see how race or anything else is relevant--only the ability to perform specifically-defined firefighting tasks and to make decisions based on modern firefighting strategies and technologies.
Posted on May 8, 2009 3:51 PM
mama, that's a very old and tired argument.
Truth is, most women can perform the same physical tasks as men with sufficient physical training--which they often do not get.
The military bases its physical fitness standards on generalizations intended to maintain overall fitness, not fit specific MOS.
Most tasks done by men can be done by women who are sufficiently physically fit . . . or can be done better and safer than was previously done by advances in technique and technology.
Women have been firefighters since the early 1800's. In WWII, women replaced men who were going off to war, just like they did in the factories.
Opposition to women as firefighters is based on myths and the determination of some (not all) men to preserve firefighting as a "last bastion" of all male culture.
Posted on May 8, 2009 9:49 PM
When did I say a woman could not drag 100 pounds? My point was that standards must be based on objective measures related to the job. A calculus teacher needs to know calculus. A firefighter needs a certain level of physical fitness. That's all I said.
Posted on May 8, 2009 10:49 PM