I sometimes wonder about whether the term progressive calls up some kind of a stereotype. When people think of progressives, do they have a picture which I would consider reasonably accurate - people who believe in the ardent pursuit of justice, fairness and equity in society, and the breaking down of barriers to those goals? Or do they think of progressives as those who have an automatic, almost Pavlovian reaction against anything that hints even remotely at judgement or the imposition of limitations?
While I regard myself as a progressive in the first sense, the second one leaves me absolutely cold, hinting, as it does, at a kind of uncritical group-think whose tyranny means disagreements from within render one ineligible for membership.
Years ago during my teaching career, I had in one of my classes a lad from the Middle East. While he was generally a congenial enough boy, his cultural conditioning made him think of girls as inferior. This was made clear to me one day when I had a group of students, mainly girls, milling around my desk waiting to ask me questions; the lad interposed himself in front of them, fully expecting that his need for an answer would take precedence over the young ladies. I had to explain to him that in Canada, we wait in line if others are before us, a lesson that I think he found difficult to assimilate when those ahead of him were of the feminine gender.
Which brings me to my case in point. By now you likely will have heard about the situation at York University in Toronto, where an online student asked to be excused from group work with women for religious reasons:
Sociology professor Paul Grayson wanted to deny the student’s request for the online course, but first asked the faculty dean and university’s human rights centre, who said he should grant the request.
In the end — after fellow professors in the department agreed such a move would marginalize females — Grayson denied the request. The student relented and completed the required work with the women in his group.
Even though the situation resolved itself, despite the fecklessness of the institution's 'leaders', the fact that it caused such contention and controversy forces me to ask the question of what constitutes reasonable accommodation in our multi-cultural society. Indeed, should a situation as described above even be an issue in a secular institution such as a university, where openness and inquiry and exposure to new ideas and ways of thinking are its raison d'être?
To explore this further, I would encourage you to read Rosie DiManno's piece in today's Star. Entitled York University cowardly, compliant and blind to common sense, here is but a brief excerpt:
The Star headline got it wrong: “York University student’s request not to work with women poses dilemma.”
There is no dilemma here and only one proper response: No.
No to segregating males and females.
No to religious accommodation of any type at Canadian campuses.
No to the absurdity of human rights departments that turn themselves into black holes of ethical relativism.
No to academic officials who twist themselves into pretzels of gutlessness, rather than take an honorable scholastic and moral stance.
Let me know what you think.
.jpg)
.jpg)
