PhD/PsyD PhD/PsyD App Requesting Diversity Statement?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

procrastin8r

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
76
Reaction score
100
Hi, Everyone

The diversity committee in my department would like to give future doctoral applicants the opportunity to comment on their contributions to diversity. We would like to update next year's grad app to include a. an optional, supplemental diversity statement; OR b. an option to include a paragraph within their personal statement.

We've had trouble picking one, so my questions are: a. if you've encountered a diversity statement option in your app experiences, was it separate or integrated withing your personal statement? as a potential applicant, which option would you prefer and why?

Thanks in advance for your input!

Members don't see this ad.
 
I think they need to start by defining "contribution to diversity" and maybe that would help answer the question.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
We haven't finalized the language of the statement yet, but I imagine this would be something along these lines:

The Graduate School at Y University considers having a diverse student population a key element to the educational experience of its graduate students. Diversity presents itself in many different forms such as: socio-economic status, race or ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, nationality or place of origin, disability, unique work or life experience, etc. We invite you to use this space to tell us how you may contribute to the diversification of, The Graduate School, your program and Y University. (The submission of this statement is optional for all applicants.)

The X Graduate School is strongly committed to attracting qualified students of diverse backgrounds to its community of scholars. Applicants are invited, if they wish, to include with their application, a statement on how their background and life experience would contribute to diversity within the Graduate School community and to the School's commitment to training individuals in an increasingly diverse society.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
Diversity statements are always tricky. I'm working off the assumption that your program want to attract individuals that will demonstrate their valuing of diversity in their scholarship, clinical work, and interactions within the department- not just individuals whose demographic characteristics "make" them diverse. This may not be a fair assumption, but if that's what you're actually going for, I would have the prompt ask about the role they see diversity playing in their own research, clinical work, campus climate, etc. I find that separate essays that ask about the way they are diverse pull for people to write an essay about all the ways they are not a white, able-bodied, middle class, heterosexual, male (and leave the white, able-bodied, middle class, heterosexual, males feeling like they're at a distinct disadvantage). Additionally, such an essay may actually be MORE work for the individuals you want to attract who value diversity, as that will already be incorporated and reflected in their personal statements- it will be there when they talk about why they want to come to your graduate school, why they're passionate about psychology, and how that shapes their career aspirations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Coming from someone who would be considered "diverse" and having applied this season, most of what you list in the examples were included in my SOP. It may be a bit repetitive to have to write a separate essay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Coming from someone who would be considered "diverse" and having applied this season, most of what you list in the examples were included in my SOP. It may be a bit repetitive to have to write a separate essay.

I do agree with that, but I'm wondering if what the OP suggests is becoming the norm?

For several universities when I applied (Fall 2014 app cycle for Fall 2015 entrance) had me write three essays: a statement of purpose [researchy], personal statement [lifey/researchy], and a diversity statement [researchy/clinical-ly/lifey]. It did feel a bit redundant, but as a ~non-traditional~ Ph.D. student (1st gen and low-income), I liked the opportunity to address my dedication to diversity in a professional capacity, outside of what I may have personally included in a personal statement, or spoken about very narrowly on a statement of purpose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
As a heterosexual male with European ancestry, I feel put on the defensive and that I have to try to justify myself when asked about my commitment to or personal experience with diversity. Does anyone really care that my great grandfather was one of the illiterate immigrants at Ellis island who could have been labeled as a ***** by the IQ testing that was being done at the time? Does it even matter to my current commitment to psychology? Am I more likely to be sensitive to inappropriate use of testing materials than others who don't have this particular tie to the issue. My last name ends in a vowel and sounds like an Italian food, does that qualify me as an oppressed class? I also qualify as belonging to another type of discriminated class, but less likely to meet with acceptance from doctoral programs so I tend to keep that one on the down low. Should I put on the application that several of my friends disclosed their homosexuality to me before anyone else or does that sound like I am trying to defend or justify myself again? I didn't put that down at all and rarely tell people, but I am personally proud of the fact that people who knew me saw me as accepting even during a time that was much less accepting. I would advise leaving off the extra attention to "diversity" and let the applicant just tell their own story.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
As a heterosexual male with European ancestry, I feel put on the defensive and that I have to try to justify myself when asked about my commitment to or personal experience with diversity. Does anyone really care that my great grandfather was one of the illiterate immigrants at Ellis island who could have been labeled as a ***** by the IQ testing that was being done at the time? Does it even matter to my current commitment to psychology? Am I more likely to be sensitive to inappropriate use of testing materials than others who don't have this particular tie to the issue. My last name ends in a vowel and sounds like an Italian food, does that qualify me as an oppressed class? I also qualify as belonging to another type of discriminated class, but less likely to meet with acceptance from doctoral programs so I tend to keep that one on the down low. Should I put on the application that several of my friends disclosed their homosexuality to me before anyone else or does that sound like I am trying to defend or justify myself again? I didn't put that down at all and rarely tell people, but I am personally proud of the fact that people who knew me saw me as accepting even during a time that was much less accepting. I would advise leaving off the extra attention to "diversity" and let the applicant just tell their own story.

Yeah, that's not what that means though. I'm super white but would have no problem writing about my commitment to diversity. You can talk about the importance of cultural competence or why we should incorporate diverse perspectives into the curriculum. You can write about how you've considered diversity within your research questions or clinical experiences. It's doesn't have to be a check list of every demographic box and you definitely don't have to disclose something you're not comfortable sharing. I 100% want applicants who have at least thought about these issues and I've definitely asked related questions during interview days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Yeah, that's not what that means though. I'm super white but would have no problem writing about my commitment to diversity. You can talk about the importance of cultural competence or why we should incorporate diverse perspectives into the curriculum. You can write about how you've considered diversity within your research questions or clinical experiences. It's doesn't have to be a check list of every demographic box and you definitely don't have to disclose something you're not comfortable sharing. I 100% want applicants who have at least thought about these issues and I've definitely asked related questions during interview days.
I also have disagreements with many of the cultural constructs that people are using to talk about much of this. For example, the concept of super white is problematic in my mind. I have a tough time answering some of these questions because I often don't even agree with the premises and also I feel that there is a right answer and a wrong answer and that those answers are more culturally bound than anything else. My thinking on some of these issues at times diverges from others in the field. For instance, I think that if we focus too much on some of these variables, that can also lead to problems. My dissertation committee was made up of people (almost by chance) who were both a psychologist and a member of a minority group. We had some thought provoking discussions about this dynamic that were complex and they brought to my awareness the challenge of being in these multiple roles. We encounter discrimination from both groups, but also are often held up as exemplar representatives of the minority group and held to a higher standard. I love to address some of these issues, but the truth is that I don't often feel safe talking about or exploring my own feelings, beliefs, and experiences around this topic for fear that I will be misunderstood and inappropriately labelled by some of the very same people who talk a lot about how much they embrace diversity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
I've seen the question asked both ways. During internship applications a few years ago, diversity was asked about as a stand-alone essay question. Here is the text:

"Please describe your experience and training in work with diverse populations. Your discussion should display explicitly the manner in which multicultural/diversity issues influence your clinical practice and case conceptualization."

On the faculty job market last year I can't remember being asked to write a separate diversity statement, however, most teaching philosophy statements asked about diversity and it was included in my cover letter. On the other hand, I've read accounts on the Chronicle of Higher Ed boards of faculty applicants being asked to provide a diversity statement.

Although I wasn't asked to write a diversity statement, it always came up in interviews. I think it's an important topic to be able to comfortably address, and one that certainly has a learning curve.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
I've seen the question asked both ways. During internship applications a few years ago, diversity was asked about as a stand-alone essay question. Here is the text:

"Please describe your experience and training in work with diverse populations. Your discussion should display explicitly the manner in which multicultural/diversity issues influence your clinical practice and case conceptualization."

On the faculty job market last year I can't remember being asked to write a separate diversity statement, however, most teaching philosophy statements asked about diversity and it was included in my cover letter. On the other hand, I've read accounts on the Chronicle of Higher Ed boards of faculty applicants being asked to provide a diversity statement.

Although I wasn't asked to write a diversity statement, it always came up in interviews. I think it's an important topic to be able to comfortably address, and one that certainly has a learning curve.
+1 Exactly my experience and my conclusion during internship and faculty search.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Thanks for your input, everyone! It sounds like the themes are:
1. Grad programs are more likely to ask for a separate "diversity" statement in their apps

2. Such statements are typically:
a. Redundant for applicants who are already committed to diversity/multicultural competency in ways that come through in their personal statement
b. Worded in a way that encouraged applicants to disclose their less privileged identities, instead of asking to reflect on multicultural competency in research/clinical work

3. An option that would assess multicultural competency more effectively could be something like:
"University of X is rated as the Nth most diverse university in the US, with clinical practica serving an incredibly diverse Y metropolitan area community. As such, multicultural competency is an integral component of U of X's research and clinical training. What roles do diversity, inclusion, and privilege play within your professional identity?"

Further feedback is much appreciated =)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
I'll speak for myself and a handful of people I've had this conversation with that it feels insulting to be asked a question that is essentially, "what boxes can we check if we bring you on?" The first proposed version sounds like that to me. The last one you posted makes more sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Members don't see this ad :)
I also have disagreements with many of the cultural constructs that people are using to talk about much of this. For example, the concept of super white is problematic in my mind. I have a tough time answering some of these questions because I often don't even agree with the premises and also I feel that there is a right answer and a wrong answer and that those answers are more culturally bound than anything else. My thinking on some of these issues at times diverges from others in the field. For instance, I think that if we focus too much on some of these variables, that can also lead to problems. My dissertation committee was made up of people (almost by chance) who were both a psychologist and a member of a minority group. We had some thought provoking discussions about this dynamic that were complex and they brought to my awareness the challenge of being in these multiple roles. We encounter discrimination from both groups, but also are often held up as exemplar representatives of the minority group and held to a higher standard. I love to address some of these issues, but the truth is that I don't often feel safe talking about or exploring my own feelings, beliefs, and experiences around this topic for fear that I will be misunderstood and inappropriately labelled by some of the very same people who talk a lot about how much they embrace diversity.

I debated responding to this or not for a bit because I don't post here much, but the thought of not responding didn't sit well with me. I think part of what some of these diversity statements are aiming to get at is assessing peoples ability and willingness to have some of those difficult and uncomfortable conversations. It's never easy and I think people are often misunderstood and fearful of being mislabeled. But it is also an injustice to not have conversations about race, class, ethnicity, privilege, oppression, and other sorts of identities. I'm not saying that this is a conversation that only pertains to those in marginalized classes, but a conversation that belongs in most programs as it relates to research and clinical work. Many people (fellow students, research participants, clients) don't have the option to stay out of the conversation or sit back on addressing these issues because they are confronted with them everyday. They are misunderstood and mislabeled constantly. They are forced to confront the complex dynamics continuously. Many people simply don't have the luxury of not addressing these issues. So while I may be totally off base, I do wonder how much diversity statements like this are meant to see how open and ready prospective students are to confronting these difficult issues that so many people fear talking about as opposed to seeing how many "diversity" boxes a prospective student can check off. I have met many a white student who don't check many of those boxes yet are able to critically reflect on diversity in their own lives and the lives of others and then apply that to the various work they engage in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 users
Basically, a lack of cultural competence in assuming things like, "black people are louder," or "black people like more physical content, so I'd physically engage them more," or "Hispanic people strongly identify with other hispanic people and would be better off with a culturally matched therapist," or "I speak Spanish and therefore I am able to identify with anyone from the myriad Spanish speaking countries that exist. All assumptions I've seen by people that would write a nice "privilege" statement.

Heh. What's funny is that your examples of incompetence are what I see purported sometimes as examples of being culturally sensitive. The ends of the horseshoe bend ever nearer.

I like the "please describe" question. Much less check-the-boxy. Doesn't assume that anyone with a Latinx-sounding name speaks Spanish, that White people don't speak other languages, that gay people can't be bi/transphobes etc. Although since the OP asked about doctoral applications, the "influences clinical practice and case conceptualization" bit would need to be altered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Basically, a lack of cultural competence in assuming things like, "black people are louder," or "black people like more physical content, so I'd physically engage them more," or "Hispanic people strongly identify with other hispanic people and would be better off with a culturally matched therapist," or "I speak Spanish and therefore I am able to identify with anyone from the myriad Spanish speaking countries that exist. All assumptions I've seen by people that would write a nice "privilege" statement.

That reminds of a story someone told me about a candidate who failed the oral examination in my state, after "demonstrating" the communication approach he would use with an African American client.

Please describe your experience and training in work with people from cultures and backgrounds different than your own. Your discussions.

Yes, this. I'd rather have an honest discussion about actual experiences than a monologue from someone who might have read a lot but never applied what they learned to a face-to-face encounter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I debated responding to this or not for a bit because I don't post here much, but the thought of not responding didn't sit well with me. I think part of what some of these diversity statements are aiming to get at is assessing peoples ability and willingness to have some of those difficult and uncomfortable conversations. It's never easy and I think people are often misunderstood and fearful of being mislabeled. But it is also an injustice to not have conversations about race, class, ethnicity, privilege, oppression, and other sorts of identities. I'm not saying that this is a conversation that only pertains to those in marginalized classes, but a conversation that belongs in most programs as it relates to research and clinical work. Many people (fellow students, research participants, clients) don't have the option to stay out of the conversation or sit back on addressing these issues because they are confronted with them everyday. They are misunderstood and mislabeled constantly. They are forced to confront the complex dynamics continuously. Many people simply don't have the luxury of not addressing these issues. So while I may be totally off base, I do wonder how much diversity statements like this are meant to see how open and ready prospective students are to confronting these difficult issues that so many people fear talking about as opposed to seeing how many "diversity" boxes a prospective student can check off. I have met many a white student who don't check many of those boxes yet are able to critically reflect on diversity in their own lives and the lives of others and then apply that to the various work they engage in.

Yes, yes, yes. Where were you the past 5 years of my professional life??? I held off responding to this for fear of sounding like an angry (you fill in the blank), but I absolutely resent the whole, "If we stopped emphasizing our differences then they wouldn't be such a problem" position, or any position that excuses psychologists from critically reflecting on how their identities, their clients' identities, and systemic contexts all transact in complex ways that are usually more problematic for some groups of people than others. A psychologist who is too defensive about being White/privileged/etc. to have a critical, uncomfortable conversation or at least THOUGHT process about this needs to do a LOT more work before they are "ready" to serve what often is a non-White/privileged/etc., marginalized client base. I wish programs did the harder work of assessing this at the outset of admission and then provided for intense, held discussions around these complex topics. Diversity is not a psychological specialization, it is a core component of professional ethical identity. Remember, if you can choose to "sit out" of these conversations, then you are in fact privileged to some degree, because people with marginalized identities de facto cannot choose to "sit out" of diversity issues. That is not to say that any given marginalized identity is particularly salient for a client, but what a disservice it is to those clients who are ready and willing to have someone be comfortable with holding and talking about something that affects their everyday life.

As for the diversity statement, I had several grad applications ask for a separate statement. I agree with other posters that I felt least comfortable with those programs that were eager to have me in order to check off some boxes. A particular program actually made a huge mistake of having a fellow Native American student show me around campus, the only other person of color who would be in the program beside me. She right off the bat warned me about coming to the program because of how she had been treated and how awkward she felt. Another program had unexplained asterisks printed next to certain applicants' names in the interview grid they handed out to us on interview day, and it was pretty obvious that every person with an asterisk next to them was a person of color, so it made me feel awkward about my asterisk. Please don't provide any room for "diverse" applicants or their peers to doubt why they were offered admission and/or funding. Many of us are already susceptible to second-guess accomplishments, whereas "non-diverse" applicants never have to worry or think about whether they earned something based on merit.

Think hard about your intention for requesting such a statement. Is it to assess an applicant's willingness to discuss difficult diversity topics? Is it to check off diversity boxes? Is it to assess how applicants approach clients? I really like the second option that was stated, basically asking about how these pieces are part of one's professional identity. I believe it is important to talk about personal identity not to check off boxes but to also see that applicants are aware of how their identities may transact with the clients', etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
This thread is making me recall one of my recent grad school interviews and my POI asked, "how would I cope with being a (insert race here) male in this program?" In fact, a couple of my recent interviews had similar questions. I don't know if programs are shifting to be more diverse --this is my first cycle applying-- but I do get quite a few questions surrounding my race and how it'll impact my graduate training, practice, and future.

I still don't know how to answer the question, but I feel like everyone is expecting me to say I'll hop on my white horse and rescue every kid "like me" from the projects. Slightly off topic, but thought I'd share my recent experience being a diverse applicant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
This thread is making me recall one of my recent grad school interviews and my POI asked, "how would I cope with being a (insert race here) male in this program?" In fact, a couple of my recent interviews had similar questions. I don't know if programs are shifting to be more diverse --this is my first cycle applying-- but I do get quite a few questions surrounding my race and how it'll impact my graduate training, practice, and future.

I still don't know how to answer the question, but I feel like everyone is expecting me to say I'll hop on my white horse and rescue every kid "like me" from the projects. Slightly off topic, but thought I'd share my recent experience being a diverse applicant.
In the course of your professional development I hope that you get the chance to talk with other professionals to talk about multiple roles of being a psychologist and a _____. I have found that it is much more than just about race (which is an inaccurate social construct anyway) or ethnicity or gender or mental illness or _______ and that the process can be invalidating as they try to reduce an individuals experience or perspective to a group. "So what is your opinion about_____ (insert group you belong to in here). As someone who is a psychologist and a _____ , I find that I experience difficulty with both groups and that awareness of this has been essential to my own professional development.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
As a heterosexual male with European ancestry, I feel put on the defensive and that I have to try to justify myself when asked about my commitment to or personal experience with diversity. Does anyone really care that my great grandfather was one of the illiterate immigrants at Ellis island who could have been labeled as a ***** by the IQ testing that was being done at the time? Does it even matter to my current commitment to psychology? Am I more likely to be sensitive to inappropriate use of testing materials than others who don't have this particular tie to the issue. My last name ends in a vowel and sounds like an Italian food, does that qualify me as an oppressed class? I also qualify as belonging to another type of discriminated class, but less likely to meet with acceptance from doctoral programs so I tend to keep that one on the down low. Should I put on the application that several of my friends disclosed their homosexuality to me before anyone else or does that sound like I am trying to defend or justify myself again? I didn't put that down at all and rarely tell people, but I am personally proud of the fact that people who knew me saw me as accepting even during a time that was much less accepting. I would advise leaving off the extra attention to "diversity" and let the applicant just tell their own story.

I attended graduate school and internship prior to the required question about diversity.

If I had to apply today, my answer to the 'what would your contribution to diversity' question would probably be:

"I consider myself the least victimized person on the planet."

And leave it at that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The pressure to focus on ethnic minority issues if one is an ethnic minority is not due to the emphasizing of difference. It's due to many things, among them, the relative lack of studies exploring phenomena central to the lives of ethnic minorities, the historical lack of ethnic minority scholars available to conduct such research, and greater empowerment/resources/mentorship for scholars of color. Furthermore, to suggest focusing of difference, especially in psychology, is something new lacks context and may be naive. White psychologists 100+ years ago were studying Africans and US Negros to prove inferiority. See Guthire, particularly chapters 1+2 for a primer (https://www.pearsonhighered.com/pro...n-Classics-Edition-2nd-Edition/PGM257303.html).

Talking about racial identity is ok, healthy in fact. The KKK certainly did not approach the topic from a strength-based perspective. The melting pot/minimizing differences approach is also known as "colorblind racial ideology." We've been trying it in this country for a few decades, it's not really working.

And although "race" is a social construct, real differences do exist by skin tone/ethnicity/heritage. See:
Smedley, A., & Smedley, B. D. (2005). Race as biology is fiction, racism as a social problem is real: Anthropological and historical perspectives on the social construction of race. American Psychologist, 60(1), 16.

Also, especially in the US, distinctions are made because of one's skin color. See years of data collected by Harvard's IAT (https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html).

In addition to skin color, distinctions are also made based on one's name and perceived heritage. Google something like "job name discrimination studies" and you'll find a body of literature.
(https://scholar.google.com/scholar?...ved=0ahUKEwjQo_2sp4jSAhVKqVQKHdyvCx8QgQMIGjAA)

You can also find literature documenting systemic differences in health care, schooling, home ownership, and several other categories. What contributes to these systemic differences?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I find this topic fascinating since I feel very strongly that judging people based on various group memberships such as class, skin color, ethnicity, gender to be completely abhorrent yet I don't always agree with the approach or mindset of many who talk about what we should do about it. Sometimes I feel that the thinking is along the lines of "discrimination is wrong so anything we do that we say is against it is right". Then if someone disagrees with the approach to addressing discrimination, they are accused of saying discrimination is okay. The research on groups is pretty clear that different groups tend to become more opposed to each other even if they are completely arbitrary distinctions such as red team vs blue team. The best way to combat this is to find common goals to work toward in order to eliminate this inherent animosity between groups. How do we accomplish that? Because from my view the current political climate is fostering divisiveness on all sides of the equation. Each side can blame the other, but just like in marital therapy, as long as they keep trying to convince the other as opposed to trying to understand the other and recognize that they are in it together, there will be no end to the fighting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
A colorblind racial ideology is where we need to be.

We're going to disagree on this, at least for now. Differences do exist. To pretend not to see them, or that they don't exist, or that they don't matter, is imo, naive. As scientists we are trained to look for differences, to search for small variations, to investigate difference. It's what we do.

And yes I concede, things have gotten better for racial minorities, "great strides" even, and I hope others will concede the bar was set extremely low (i.e. chattel slavery).

For more in depth reading about why colorblind racial ideology is not the goal, one could start here:
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2010). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in the United States. Rowman & Littlefield.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
The issue is what value do we place on those things? What do we use to make in group and out group distinctions? Eye color? Height? Hand size? Skin tone? Hair color? Glasses? Etc. what the color blind approach says is that these things should not be our grouping criteria.

What should happen and what does happen are different conversations. Evidence suggests people currently do make judgments and place value on many of the categories listed with the most common judgments being negative appraisals of racial and ethnic minorities. Again, I cite the IAT and related studies.

So some questions might be, Can we teach people not to make judgments? Can we teach people to be more aware of and question their initial judgments? Can we teach people their initial judgments are often faulty?

Good conversation. Unfortunately I have to check out for the rest of the day...departmental retreat before classes resume Monday.
 
Exactly. There's a lot of pressure both within and without, if you are a minority, to address minority issues in your work, to join minority advocate groups, to act as a minority mentor, to represent a minority position in discussions (as if any of us speaks for our race). It has to be incredibly exhausting if it isn't your interest. Why can't you just be a person who is interested in understanding the brain?

I'm not nearly qualified to speak on the rest of this discussion, but I will say the above is VERY frustrating. I'm proud of my race and who I am; I even look forward to helping people of my race and providing quality research and care. That being said, it is a bit disheartening when my fellow applicants get to spend their interview talking about their previous research, fit, and future goals. However, I get an hour of speaking about my race. Imposter syndrome is already in full force, but now I spend the next hour wondering if you think I'm a competitive applicant or a competitive (race) applicant. The two aren't mutually exclusive -- i know -- but when we spend most of my interview time talking about minority resources and scholarships, it sure feels like it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
That's great, maybe in a few years they will just ask you to indicate your political affiliation on your application and if you indicate that you are a conservative you can just be barred from psychology permanently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
The opponents of a color blind approach often use strawman arguments and their positions are laced with privilege rhetoric. That's not science. It's progressive liberal politics disguised as science. External locus of control = government intervention = redistribution of wealth, etc .... politics. Not science.

This is not true. There have been number of empirical studies comparing colorblindness to other intergroup orientation. These studies are generally the basis for not viewing colorblindness as the optimal intergroup approach. Start with Rosenthal and Levy (2010) then keep reading.
 
That's great, maybe in a few years they will just ask you to indicate your political affiliation on your application and if you indicate that you are a conservative you can just be barred from psychology permanently.

Given the psychological correlates to political conservatism, this might not be such a bad idea.
 
Given the psychological correlates to political conservatism, this might not be such a bad idea.

This is a textbook example of what @Jon Snow is talking about and something that has become increasingly clear and disgusting to me. Thought policing, right? Don't believe in some of the lock-step liberal views/opinions, you must be flawed/racist/psychological ignorant, etc. The advantages of "diversity" only applies to skin color, right? You really want a world where we use psychology/psychiatry in this way?

Barring dissenting views of the world from an entire profession. Awesome idea. Very "progressive."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
This is a textbook example of what @Jon Snow is talking about and something that has become increasingly clear and disgusting to me. Thought policing, right? Don't believe in some of the lock-step liberal views/opinions, you must be flawed/racist/psychological ignorant, etc. The advantages of "diversity" only applies to skin color, right? You really want a world where we use psychology/psychiatry in this way?

Barring dissenting views of the world from an entire profession. Awesome idea. Very "progressive."

Oh please, I was clearly responding outrageously to an outrageous hypothetical. But sure, please say more about what else is increasingly clear and disgusting to you. While my comment was meant to be facetious, let's not pretend there aren't values that the profession tries to uphold, and these values often intersect with politics. FYI, I do not believe that the advantages of "diversity" only applies to skin color nor do I believe not endorsing liberal views makes you flawed/racist/psychological ignorant--nice try though. Research does indicate that political conservatism is characterized by resistance to change and acceptance of inequality. I might benefit you to consider what may be threatening about the changes you are noticing in the field in the discourse around social issues. Also, no one is policing your thoughts, you can think whatever you want but people get to disagree with you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Oh please, I was clearly responding outrageously to an outrageous hypothetical. But sure, please say more about what else is increasingly clear and disgusting to you. While my comment was meant to be facetious, let's not pretend there aren't values that the profession tries to uphold, and these values often intersect with politics. FYI, I do not believe that the advantages of "diversity" only applies to skin color nor do I believe not endorsing liberal views makes you flawed/racist/psychological ignorant--nice try though. Research does indicate that political conservatism is characterized by resistance to change and acceptance of inequality. I might benefit you to consider what may be threatening about the changes you are noticing in the field in the discourse around social issues. Also, no one is policing your thoughts, you can think whatever you want but people get disagree with you.

Ok. You do sound awfully angry though.

However sarcastic you were being, you still seem to be suggesting that liberalism really needs to be the default approach/view if one wants to be a competent psychologist? This is simply not true.

Not sure what you mean by "acceptance of inequality?" Of course I accept inequality. Don't you? To not accept the inevitability of inequality flies in the face of statistics and everything we know about human physical and psychological development.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Also, no one is policing your thoughts, you can think whatever you want but people get to disagree with you.

I wish this were true. The Horseshoe Theory seems to be out in force for this past election cycle, and those of us not near the tips (technically called "heel") are left with a lot of frustration. Compounding the frustration is being labeled as priviledged and ultimately discounted from the discussion.

(To clarify, I'm not saying posters on here are discounting my point of view, it has been surprisingly civil and productive. I'm commenting about the large conversation that is happening on the news, social media, etc.)
 
Last edited:
Ok. You do sound awfully angry though.

However sarcastic you were being, you still seem to be suggesting that liberalism really needs to be the default approach/view if one wants to be a competent psychologist? This is simply not true.

Not sure what you mean by "acceptance of inequality?" Of course I accept inequality. Don't you? To not accept the inevitability of inequality flies in the face of statistics and everything we know about human physical and psychological development.

On the contrary, I just found your outrage troubling but not surprising. I acknowledge that talking about these issues can feel contentious and bring about a range of emotions, including irritation, defensiveness, and feelings of marginalization (0n both sides). These are absolutely common, normal reactions.

Of course there are many ways to be a competent psychologist but it is also in our best interest to continue to explore how our personal attributes as helpers impact those we help. No one is saying being conservative or not endorsing multiculturalism makes you a bad psychologist. Nevertheless, there is a wealth of research on the implications of these value orientations that you might want to look into.
 
Why is my outrage (which was really just frustration) "troubling?"
 
I wish this were true. The Horseshoe Theory seems to be out in force for this past election cycle, and those of us not near the tips (technically called "heel") are left with a lot of frustration. Compounding the frustration is being labeled as priviledged and ultimately discounted from the discussion.

(To clarify, I'm not saying posters on here are discounting my point of view, it has been surprisingly civil and productive. I'm commenting about the large conversation that is happening on the news, social media, etc.)

I have noticed some of this too. It is counterproductive and can be very hurtful. In doing so, we run the risk of individuals with historically privileged identities feeling marginalized. That said, let's be clear, there is no systemic oppression of white/male/heterosexual/cisgender folks in this country. Yes, people of all social backgrounds struggle and have important unique lived experiences, but folks with historically privileged identities do not struggle on the basis of these identities, it's in spite of it.
 
Why is my outrage (which was really just frustration) "troubling?"

With all due respect, it came across as tone deaf and hysterical and was based on misinformation (e.g., "Don't believe in some of the lock-step liberal views/opinions, you must be flawed/racist/psychological ignorant, etc. The advantages of "diversity" only applies to skin color, right?...Barring dissenting views of the world from an entire profession. Awesome idea. Very "progressive.")
 
With all due respect, it came across as tone deaf and hysterical and was based on misinformation (e.g., "Don't believe in some of the lock-step liberal views/opinions, you must be flawed/racist/psychological ignorant, etc. The advantages of "diversity" only applies to skin color, right?...Barring dissenting views of the world from an entire profession. Awesome idea. Very "progressive.")

it was based on your post, in which you suggested something quite extreme and hysterical...only later suggesting you were being sarcastic.
 
I have noticed some of this too. It is counterproductive and can be very hurtful. In doing so, we run the risk of individuals with historically privileged identities feeling marginalized.
Agreed. I think some of the anger and vitriol from this past election cycle was due to a sub-section of historically privileged people getting blamed, then labeled, then ignored, and ultimately they became (or at least felt) marginalized.

That said, let's be clear, there is no systemic oppression of white/male/heterosexual/cisgender folks in this country. Yes, people of all social backgrounds struggle and have important unique lived experiences, but folks with historically privileged identities do not struggle on the basis of these identities, it's in spite of it.

There is no systemic oppression…mostly agreed. However, I do think that there are groups of historically privileged identities that do struggle on the basis of their identities. White working class men (the cross-section of skilled labor/union/factory jobs) who live in post-industrial towns are the largest group that come to mind. They were ignored for long enough, but were then heard loudly after the election results came in.

(I realized as I started typing more that this is getting off topic, though I do appreciate everyone in this thread who are willing to share their opinions, even if they aren't the popular opinion.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Research does indicate that political conservatism is characterized by resistance to change and acceptance of inequality.
To many people who are not from the US, and some who are, the typical American definitions/categorizations of "liberal" and "conservative" seem bizarre, nonsensical, and far too unitary. What is "political conservatism"? If I say, an independent business should be able to serve whomever they like, and choose not to serve people based on sexual orientation, this is classified as conservativism in the US when it is actually completely in line with foundational Millsian classical liberalism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Agreed. I think some of the anger and vitriol from this past election cycle was due to a sub-section of historically privileged people getting blamed, then labeled, then ignored, and ultimately they became (or at least felt) marginalized.



There is no systemic oppression…mostly agreed. However, I do think that there are groups of historically privileged identities that do struggle on the basis of their identities. White working class men (the cross-section of skilled labor/union/factory jobs) who live in post-industrial towns are the largest group that come to mind. They were ignored for long enough, but were then heard loudly after the election results came in.

(I realized as I started typing more that this is getting off topic, though I do appreciate everyone in this thread who are willing to share their opinions, even if they aren't the popular opinion.)

I would argue that the struggling is not because of their Whiteness, rather, it's because some of these industries are not very sustainable in today's economy. And sadly, many were sold a bag of goods by someone who promised to bring back jobs that aren't coming back. This person also choose to demonized groups of people who were already sequestered to the margins of society to drive the point home (most heartbreaking being refugees fleeing for their lives) This tactic was very effective because it is easy for people to take a zero-sum view, where efforts to improve the lives of those who have been historically marginalized is seen as a direct threat to those who might not be a part of said group. There is room for everyone and we can support social justice efforts without alienating and silencing white/male/heterosexual/cisgender/able bodied etc. folks.
 
That's not an empirical article.

It states,

"Critics have noted theoretical weaknesses with both of these approaches. For instance, critics argue that by asserting that race and ethnicity are irrelevant, superficial, and uninformative bases for judging others, the colorblind approach ignores the rich histories of less dominant groups and also does not recognize that racism still exists, which can justify inaction through denial (e.g., Neville, Lilly, Duran, Lee, & Browne, 2000)."

It's a review of the available research. They discuss a number of empirical studies so feel to peruse their reference list.
 
There is room for everyone and we can support social justice efforts without alienating and silencing white/male/heterosexual/cisgender/able bodied etc. folks.
This is one unintended benefit of the current state of our gov't....many different groups have come together to protest a common opposition. I saw a recent poll recently that found a surprising % of recent protestors were new to it and came from groups not traditionally associated with protesting.
 
Look across the nation. Blocking highways. Stupid marches with chants and silly signs. These things do not spark intelligent discourse. They look raving and illogical to many.

Right? Look at these surly little sh*ts. So disruptive. They don't know how good they have it.

b1ab23954c5628da1a6a224effd56461.jpg


Or these hysterical **tches. Their slogans are too long to be effective.

cc49cfba557a22254255ad826eaca265.jpg


I-R-R-A-T-I-O-N-A-L. What is this supposed to accomplish?

o-MARCH-ON-WASHINGTON-1963-facebook.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
That language is cringe worthy for a large segment of what many would classify even as intellectual elites. College educated. Stem grads. And so on. Social justice. Cisgender. The way it's presented is often as a direct threat. The way it's categorized overtly demonizes one group.

Look at college campuses and the form protest now takes. Blocking doors. Not letting people speak. Lack of civility. Look across the nation. Blocking highways. Stupid marches with chants and silly signs. These things do not spark intelligent discourse. They look raving and illogical to many.

As a white, heterosexual, cisgender male who many would classify as privileged and an intellectual elite, this has not been my experience. Unlike you, I actually find the demonstrations inspiring as they represent a level of coalition building that we haven't seen in a while (perhaps since the Black civil rights movement) But to each his own. To me, it all comes down to perspective taking and listening non-defensively when people speak about social injustice. I choose to believe those who say they have been hurting in our society. I will choose demanding equity for all over civility any day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
"cisgender?" is this an actual thing, or something that has been made up in the past couple years?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Yep. Invoking the fervor of the 60s, chasing ghosts to generate political support. Right to assemble, great!!! Right to stand in the middle of a highway?? ? no. Right to stop people from speaking? No.

Well, to be fair, those three events (child labor protests, the events leading to the 19th amendment, the March on Washington) all happened at different times, but what all three of those events pictured had in common was (1) people carrying signs with silly slogans and (2) a slew of think pieces in the media of their day bemoaning their disruptiveness, irrational basis, etc.

Anyway, you can go back to single punctuation marks. I was just poking fun a bit. I'm good with free speech and free-ish highways. My politics aren't easily classifiable either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
"cisgender?" is this an actual thing, or something that has been made up in the past couple years?
Have you been to an undergrad campus lately? Very popular topic at more liberal leaning campuses.

Check out Wikipedia but I warn you...it's a rabbit hole once you start clicking terms.
 
Compare martin luther king to this professor:


View attachment 214697

Wait, wasn't your first choice of word "*****"? True, it is probably an exaggeration if the person in the picture actually is a professor. But more to the point, is this meant to represent a random angry campus liberal stereotype or is it someone I'm supposed to recognize?
 
Top