Another response to Outside the So-Called Ethnic Box:

>> Perhaps I didn't interpret this part of the article clearly. If this was an additional separate ceremony base on their heritage and color, and then they too attended the main school's ceremony, than I don't have an issue with it.

But if not, this is where the issue can arise. <<

I think they attended only the separate ceremony. Let's assume they did. I still don't see how it's a problem. Say you worship at Church A all the time when you could worship at the larger Church B. Aren't you segregating yourself from the mainstream by some arbitrary criterion?

>> Maybe a word to better describe this event is self-imposed segregation. I understand being a minority why they are doing this, but viewing it from a position of a minority, I can also see at the same time they are shooting themselves in the foot by doing this. <<

Only because the majority insists that everyone assimilate for no good reason.

>> You got a point about it being similar to Norah Vincent hanging out with her writer buddies at a coffee shop fro an hour or so. But the one main difference I see is where Norah's group is just a private, personal choice, these commencement ceremonies are a public event or an official ceremony. <<

If you want public events, I'll return to my usual examples of the Irish on St. Patrick's Day and the Italians on Columbus Day. Why do people protest Cinco de Mayo or Kwanzaa but not these equally "divisive" ethnic holidays?

>> Public segregation like this was fought so African Americans don't have to sit on the back of buses or Mexican Americans don't have to eat out in the back of restaurants, separate from the other patrons in small towns of Colorado, self-imposed segregation or not. <<

I think self-imposed segregation (i.e., choice) is different. College alumni associate with each other. So do Rotarians and other business organizations. So do participants in clubs and hobbies. "Segregating" oneself by ethnicity rather than occupation, class, or education is no different.

I wouldn't recommend doing it all or even most of the time. But college alumni and Rotarians usually "segregate" themselves for only an hour or two. So did the kids in the college ceremony. It's an isolated event, not a pattern of segregation.

>> Even though the reasons are different it has a look of regression. Private school or public school I surely wouldn't want my daughter segregated or separated from everyone else, just because others think it's the cool thing to do. <<

I don't think I'd choose it for myself or my hypothetical children either. I'm just saying it's a common instinct, one barely worth mentioning. Vincent made it sound like a threat to civilization.

>> What if white college kids decided to have their own separate main ceremony, separate from all minorities? <<

As I recall, these ethnic ceremonies were open to outsiders, and a couple of people from other ethnic groups chose to join in. But suppose they were exclusive. I'm not sure a separate white ceremony would be a problem as long as the white ceremony weren't the main ceremony.

But you'd get into some tricky logistical problems. If 5% of the people left to attend their own ceremony, that wouldn't affect the main ceremony. But if 70% of the people left, it would. As usual, the minority and majority positions aren't quite symmetrical.

>> If this was done, people would have cried foul so quick, and accused them of bigotry. <<

Probably, and that raises another point of asymmetry. White people don't need a separate ceremony to recognize their heritage or boost their egos because they're already the majority—the people in charge. The main ceremony implicitly celebrates their control of the situation. Minority people don't get the same effect by being a minority in the majority's ceremony. Again, the two positions aren't symmetrical.

>> That is why I don't agree with those minority college kids. It's fine in theory, but it gets more complicated when you want to connect with the real world and not just college campus. <<

I don't necessarily think a separate ceremony is wise, but it's defensible on rational grounds. A St. Patrick's Day parade is defensible even though it's far, far more divisive than one small college ceremony. Claiming these college ceremonies are a sign of moral decay is a grotesque overstatement. I'd basically call it a lie.

Rob

Related links
Highlights of the US report to the UN on racism

Join our Native/pop culture blog and comment   Sign up to receive our FREE newsletter via e-mail   See the latest Native American stereotypes in the media   Political and social developments ripped from the headlines

. . .