Hermenuetics

Comments

OF COURSE Wheaton should simply select the best qualified individual! Discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, or sex is not only illegal, but morally wrong. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." Galatians 3:28.

Posted By: Roger Clegg, Ctr for Equal Opportunity | November 2, 2009 12:44 PM

As a Wheaton alum, I would love to see the Presidential Selection Committee seek out qualified candidates who are female or minorities. I certainly think that when it comes down to it they should choose the most qualified candidate, but often the best-qualified candidates don't apply, perhaps because they are unaware of the opportunity, or because they do not feel they will be seriously considered. When there are so few examples of women and minorities obtaining and succeeding in such positions, who can blame them? This petition seems to merely encourage the committee to seek out such candidates and encourage them to apply, which would certainly be a step in the right direction.

Posted By: Laura Leonard | November 2, 2009 3:11 PM

What do we mean when we say "the most qualified candidate?" Sometimes the standard of determining this is weighted in favor of men -- as is the case in considering the number of years of experience in a given field -- many women take time off to raise their children -- should they therefore be considered LESS qualified, or MORE qualified -- considering all the wisdom and skills gained in childrearing, and the demonstration of Christian character in sacrificing income, prestige, personal fulfillment, etc., in order to raise children. So you see, the definition of "most qualified" reveals one's values.

I personally would be perfectly happy if they would say, "we think it's time for a woman" and took a careful look at the female population, including the 21 percent of secular college presidents who are women -- evidently there are a few who are qualified!

I am also a wheaton alum ('92) and think it's great that Ariah has raised this issue. I would also be extremely confident in placing a bet that the next wheaton president will be male; don't know about white.

Posted By: amy | November 2, 2009 3:55 PM

This is silliness. And it's a classic example of what happens when people ignore the Pendulum of Truth (which I learned about from Dr. Lyle Dorsett at Wheaton).

Has there been discrimination against women for jobs like this in past centuries? Absolutely. The pendulum has been pulled toward white men for leadership roles in and out of the church for a variety of reasons, which has often resulted in the exclusion of more qualified women and minority candidates.

Does that mean we can solve the problem by an extreme swing of the pendulum in the opposite direction? Absolutely not. Specifically focusing on women and minority candidates (at the exclusion of white men) just creates another problem.

As a white man myself, I resent the idea that a white man is incapable of fostering a culture of ethnic and gender diversity. Does having a male president of a college somehow hinder "half the world" from attending that college and flourishing to advance God's Kingdom? It certainly did not hinder my female classmates who are working diligently for the Kingdom as I write this.

The petitioners would be better served to pray for the Holy Spirit's intercession for Wheaton and its selection committee. God knows the best leader for every institution, whether male or female. Best if we keep the choice in the best hands possible.

Posted By: Sam O'Neal | November 2, 2009 4:30 PM

Yes, Wheaton MOST DEFINITELY needs a female president, a female chaplain, and a female wrestling team. After all, wouldn't a former director of faculty enrichment who feels specifically called to ensure greater female leadership at CCCU schools know what she is talking about? You have got to be kidding me. Only in academia and government are such bogus voices funded and stroked. I feel specifically called to buy something with a pink ribbon emblem and then go wretch. What are the odds Barnard voted for Obama?

Posted By: Anonymous | November 2, 2009 9:28 PM

I'm a recent Wheaton graduate and have signed this letter. Having just come from Wheaton, I think it would be very beneficial to have a woman or minority as president. Unfortunately, many Christian schools have a much more difficult time addressing the needs of women and minorities than do many secular schools. Sociologically, institutions who have women and minorities in positions of leadership generally have healthier environments of diversity. Not to say that a white man could not foster this kind of environment and raise awareness. But I believe it's a widely accepted fact that having a woman leader improves an organization's environment for women. This is very much needed. I'm a little bit shocked that this letter hasn't received more favorable comments, but I think that's probably a reflection of Christian subculture and a further example of why this would be beneficial.

Posted By: Rachel Neftzer | November 2, 2009 10:35 PM

I graduated from Wheaton in 98. I am an african american male and I know Dr. Litfin personally. I would have to say that while it would be nice and undoubtedly beneficial in many ways for Wheaton to have a female or minority President, that would in no way ensure that the plight of minorities and women will be heard or their cause championed any better. The school should be looking for the person who will most effectivly guide the school with biblical principal. Perhaps the committee should entertain more female and minority applications that usual. I do not think, however, that they should be set on finding a female or minority president. It is very likely that in doing that, they may end up with someone that will lead the school in a very dangerous direction.

Posted By: Conal Wright | November 2, 2009 11:02 PM

Personally, I'd be more interested in seeing Wheaton hire a minority president than a woman president. As low as the numbers are for women in such positions, they're even lower for minorities (at least at mainstream evangelical schools like most CCCU members).

Posted By: Anonymous | November 3, 2009 12:42 PM

The sad fallacy of this article is that the school must trade off excellence in favor of diversity. That's just nonsense. Even for a position as prestigious as president of Wheaton College, there will be more than a few candidates who are fully qualified for the position. Each will bring a couple of unique "extras" to the table. One's area of scholarship might be a more currently "hot" topic. One might have exceptional skills in fundraising at a time when that is paramount. One might have exceptional interpersonal skills at a time when faculty reorganization is paramount. One might bring gender or ethnic diversity at a time when that has been lacking.

These things should be considered as bonus points in favor of one candidate or another and one bonus point may be more important one year than another. Given the current abysmal diversity statistics, it seems reasonable that on this go-round, seing gender or ethnic diversity (among candidates who are ALL fully qualified) as a more important bonus does not seem to be any more immoral or unfair than favoring an exceptional fundraiser at another time.

The view that diversity should NEVER be considered is to completely devalue the different voices that non-white-male people bring to any enterprise. Of course white men can teach diversity, but there is a qualitative difference for the student body when the faculty actually reflect what is taught about the worth of ALL of God's children.

Posted By: Christian Lawyer | November 4, 2009 12:26 AM

It is incredibly telling here that so many people are assuming that having a woman or minority president would mean not having a qualified person in the job. Sexism and racism are still alive and well in the Christian world.

There are highly qualified women and minorities out there, but they often just aren't considered for the job because of that remaining sexism and racism. Steps have to be taken to take a stand against such sins and move a place like Wheaton to a healthier place. It has to be deliberate. I am sure people here are fine with making sure the president bring a particular theological perspective to the table, why get all up in arms with those of us who desire silenced voices to finally be heard? Do you want to keep those voices silenced?

Posted By: Julie Clawson | November 4, 2009 9:39 AM

I agree with Amy, Rachel and CL.

The hidden, subtle biases of the selection committee may lead them to believe that a man is automatically the "most qualified" candidate because the default "qualifications" are weighted in favor of white men. There has been, historically, a devaluing of "feminine" qualifications such as intuitiveness, compassion, and collaboration in favor of "rationality," competitiveness, and independence.

Clearly and unarguably, there is discrimination occuring when only 5% of CCCU schools are led by women. The numbers speak for themselves. In such cases, actively seeking minority candidates for positions serves to ease the systemic discrimination that is obviously occuring. It would be nice to say that everyone should be color/gender blind. But the vast majority of people are not. They must actively seek to combat their biases if they truly want to overcome them.

Posted By: Robyn | November 4, 2009 9:45 AM

I've recently begun reading the book Mama, Ph.D and it is clear that there is much sexism and discrimination against women in the academic world. Much more, even, than in business or government.

Posted By: Robyn | November 4, 2009 9:49 AM

I agree that every student should ask that some women and minority candidates be considered, because without being asked, then the likely majority white-male search committee will do what is comfortable for them, which is pick someone who shares their world view and will represent their interests to the subtle or possibly blatant exclusion of others. Like Sonia Sotomeyor pointed out, if you are a white male who thinks that race and gender don't matter, conjure up the image of a Supreme Court made up of all-hispanic and black women, and you will know how the rest of the US feels when faced by the prospect of an overwhelmingly white male Supreme Court.

A quick glance at the news will tell you that a majority of men inherently devalue women. It starts in childhood when they think girls are "gross" (talk to any 7 year old boy) and continues through their lives. Jokes, ridicule, abusive angry blog posts, gang-rapes, military sexual harassment and attacks so rampant that female soldiers (defenders of our country) have to train themselves to hold their urine for 8 hours to avoid having to walk to the port-a-potty for fear of rape by a fellow soldier.

Just look at the news, and you can see the story. When men are solely in charge, women suffer. If women want an equal world, we have to work for it by asking for and accepting positions of authority and responsibility.

Our voice must be represented in every sphere of endeavor. Thankfully, talented women have dispelled the old myths that women are incapable of leadership and brilliance. Now we just need to keep filling slots in every sphere of productivity, until we take up half the room and half the resources instead of the pittance we were granted when physical strength and brutality reigned in a much darker world.

I like the direction our world is going, I wish it would get there quicker. I look forward to a day when men can envision working side by side with women, without anger or resentment or fear or abuse. I envision a day when men don't feel so angry about not getting enough sex and feeling that women have power over them in that way. Perhaps women can work on that issue by finding ways to deepen their understanding of men and not trigger their hurts and fears.

Posted By: Michelle | November 4, 2009 12:30 PM

One fallacy I see in a lot of the comments above is the assumption that the selection committee isn't aware of this issue already. The committee conducted extensive interviews on campus two years ago when it was still the profiling committee. I can't speak for the faculty, but the question of looking for women and minorities was raised in the student meeting, and the committee was already considering the question of diversity. I vaguely remember one member of the committee answering the student with something like: We know it is important to consider women and minorities for the position, but there are other qualities more essential to the role of president that push that one off the official profile.

That doesn't mean, though, that the committee is unaware of the history of Wheaton's presidency or is going to "do what is comfortable for them, which is pick someone who shares their world view and will represent their interests to the subtle or possibly blatant exclusion of others."

Posted By: RM | November 5, 2009 3:57 PM

I signed the letter. I'm so tired of the false option of Qualified Responsible White-Guy Leader vs. some black woman who's probably less qualified (what? why would you assume this?) but we could make a sacrifice and pick her anyway to throw a bone to the diversity police...

Christian Lawyer is right: There are many qualified people for this job, and some of them aren't white guys. At the very least, there's a great argument for letting diversity be the priority--the "bonus" as CL puts it--among qualified candidates, of which there are many. What's more, it may well be that there's a nonwhite and/or female candidate who also is the best at whatever other area the committee wants to prioritize, fundraising or research or whatever else--someone for whom diversity isn't the only factor that moves his/her CV to the top of the pile. If the committee doesn't believe such people could exist, that's a real big problem. If it does, it should go out of its way to find them.

Posted By: Steve Thorngate | November 5, 2009 4:20 PM

As a second year tenure track professor at a CCCU school, a female, a wheaton graduate, I can assure the audience that the distinct lack of female leadership in Christian collegiate environments is not only tragic, but damaging to the morale and even development of our female and minority students. The lack of minority voices in leadership and the ridiculous percentages of imbalance demonstrate a strong message that these are the percentages the community values. Mentorship is THE best way to grow the future generation, and the modeling of potentials by someone of the same background and demographic is crucial to fostering healthy self-projections for women and minority students. Thus the qualifications of prospective candidates should be weighed in light of the benefits for the students and a priority should absolutely be for a non-white male candidate. I am the first female in my department to teach upper division required courses. What does that say to female students to not have had that before? It can also be inappropriate or ineffective for males to mentor females, so once again, the female students at CCCU schools are not getting there money's worth from their education. Value minority students and say no to another white male prez.

Posted By: Amy | November 5, 2009 8:35 PM

Class of '72, father of two daughters. Startled by Sam O'Neil's comment on November 2. When we identify hiring a woman as "an extreme swing of the pendulum", we realize we've got a looooonnnnngggg way to go, baby.

Posted By: Bob Graham | November 6, 2009 8:13 AM

Wheaton Students Advocate for Woman President is a good thinking i read your whole blog and apppreciate your work.I bless to god and wish that you get success in all you work

Posted By: r4i | November 9, 2009 1:13 AM

"We know it is important to consider women and minorities for the position, BUT there are other qualities more essential to the role of president that push that one off the official profile."

Are you KIDDING me? So the assumption is that a woman or person of color is less likely to have these "essential" qualities. Not only that, but we know that you want us to diversify our search, but we are going to use this as an excuse not to. Unabashed racism and sexism. Reason number 385 I didn't attend an evangelical Christian college.

Posted By: Robyn | November 11, 2009 1:31 PM

With the gender ratio of students in CCCU schools approximately 60/40 females to males, it appears that discrimination is NOT on the male side. Why don't CCCU schools attract more males as students?

Hint: it's NOT because too many schools have white, male presidents.

Posted By: Jarrod | November 17, 2009 8:55 AM