Racial Hypocrisy at Ohio State University: You Don’t Have to Be White to Understand Whiteness

Welcome to Social Justice University. Class is now in session.  In a sociology course at Ohio State University, students are being asked to discuss white privilege and answer the question, “What does it mean to be white in the United States?” According to the syllabus, you don’t have to be white to answer that question, which is a very hypocritical conclusion.  Racial activists are constantly lecturing that it’s not possible to understand the “black experience” unless you are an African-American. But apparently when it comes to understanding what it means to be a white person, any race can do that.  That didn’t sit well with Tiffany To, a student at OSU taking this sociology class online as part of her general education requirement. She contacted TruthRevolt to express her frustrations with the discussion questions and explained how the teacher is blatantly inserting her own biases into the course.  “I think it’s wrong that she shows such obvious bias in what is supposed to be a ‘discussion’ environment,” To said in an email to Truth Revolt. “The part that really upset me was when she said she would not give points if we said being white didn’t matter (I’m an Asian American, but I can still see the unfairness).” She continued:

The teacher asked: “Based on this video, what does it mean to be White (privileged group) in America?” (You will get zero points for saying it doesn’t matter!) (i.e. If we said whiteness doesn’t give privilege in America, we would get zero points.) The reason this upset me is because it was pushing us towards an opinion that the teacher had, and if we didn’t agree with it she expressly told us we would get zero points. She was pretty much asking us to repeat her bias right back at her in order to get full credit.  Also she states the notion that even non-white people can speak for what it is like to be white in the United States. If we replaced “white” with Asian or Black, this would be seen as racist and unacceptable.

Here is a screenshot of the discussion questions she sent to TR:

The second half of the assignment is just as troublesome. To and her peers are asked to discuss “the benefits of raising ungendered children” and to “analyze how creating differences between boys and girls often reinforces gender inequalities.”

Perhaps an appropriate question here would be, “Do I have to be a woman to understand ‘feminist theory?'”

———————————————