Racial equality is a hot topic these days on scales as large as the challenge to the University of Michigan's admissions policies to as small as The Spectrum's foray into the dating world.
As you can see from the picture to the left, I am an average white girl - nothing special, not hideous, but not a supermodel. I have brown eyes, brown hair and am nearly average height.
I applied to UB (and other colleges) during my senior year of high school, filled out the Federal Application for Student Aid and waited for an acceptance letter (and financial aid package) like my peers.
When the acceptance letters came, I knew they were based on my high school performance and the information on my application, and in some cases, the oh-so-important essay. They were not, however, based on the color of my eyes, hair or skin, as some of my friends' were.
Frustrated that someone who was my intellectual equal and belongs to a minority ethnic group was accepted to Cornell while I did not get into my top-choice college, I packed up and headed to UB.
Thankfully, the current uproar surrounding the race-based admissions policy at the University of Michigan has finally brought affirmative action, a policy that long ago became outdated and unfair, into question, forcing institutions of higher education to reevaluate their admissions criteria.
Though many organizations, colleges and companies have sided with the University of Michigan to preserve the policy, some have come out in agreement with the white students who filed the claim against the school.
The 1978 Regents of the University of California versus Bakke case, in which Alan Bakke challenged the admissions policy of the Davis Medical School - which reserved 16 of 100 available seats for minorities - initiated the downfall of the affirmative action, but it did not make much progress.
Since that time, affirmative action has become unnecessary, and has turned into more of a reverse discrimination strategy than a helpful program. It is time for race and ethnicity to be celebrated and used as a learning tool instead of a crutch.
Originally viewed as compensation for slavery, according to an article in the Washington Post (Feb 11.), affirmative action is continually used as a guilt trip on middle-class white Americans.
While we can all agree that slavery was a detestable practice that we wish hadn't occurred, it did. It also ended - over one hundred years ago. Like other things that have ended - Japanese internment during World War II, inequality between men and women - slavery must be put behind us.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, proportionate numbers of black and white 3- and 4-year-old children were enrolled in nursery school in 1995, meaning that these toddlers started their academic careers on level ground. To claim that slavery has prohibited black children today from getting into college is ridiculous.
The businesses siding with U-Mich claim that affirmative action aids in "the development of citizens who are comfortable with diversity," which are "pragmatically necessary in a country that must make its way in a global economy," stated the Washington Post.
In reality, however, it is easier for companies like General Motors (siding with U-Mich) to stand behind a policy that will not label them as insensitive than to stand up against it as Texaco did in 1996. The gasoline company was victim to a boycott led by Jesse Jackson and settled a class action suit for $176 million for alleged insensitivity to minorities, according to the Washington Post. This time around, Texaco is siding with the university, proving that popularity and profits are more valuable than making a point through an unpopular stance.
The problem, however, runs deeper than affirmative action; it is a problem of racial equality and perceived differences between races. A policy that skews the playing field cannot be considered equitable. Continuously, there are allegations that minorities are not (but should be) treated as equal to whites, making supporters of affirmative action hypocrites because they believe allowances should be given to minorities.
Instead of focusing on skin color, we should be looking at what people can offer the university community and the work force. Despite the controversy over affirmative action, I think a lot of people, particularly college students, have already come to that realization.
It seems to me - though I am sure there will be people who say I cannot possibly have a valid opinion on the subject - that race has, for the most part, ceased to be an issue. When The Spectrum began its Experiment in Romance series, contestants were selected based on who came into our office to fill out an application. It just so happened that only white students applied to be included in the contest. Were all students given an equal opportunity to apply? Yes. Several editors, including myself, posted fliers in the Student Union and the residence halls to attract students.
When the Buffalo News pointed out that all contestants were white, I couldn't help but get angry that race was brought into something that was purely a fun attempt at building readership. Why make a mountain out of a molehill? Did The Spectrum purposefully exclude UB's black community - 15 percent of the student population - from its contest? No.
I am not debating the fact that affirmative action and racial awareness was an imperative part of integrating colleges and promoting acceptance among races, which has only benefited those who have been exposed to cultures different from their own. But the need for admitting students into college based even partially on race has long passed. Instead of relying on race to further their careers, people should begin to depend on their merits.
