From Rachel Toor
Still March, still plenty of madness in our house. It's the women's games that have brought balm in Gilead, a welcome respite from the regular news.
Before IHE was even a twinkle in the eyes of its founding fathers, I wrote a piece that posited, “In some ways, I think, collegiate women’s basketball—both its athletes and its fans—represents an imagined future."
We've come a long way, baby.
Except. A year ago Doug and I had dinner with a dozen college leaders. One president said she’d just started a women’s wrestling team. The reaction from some of the other leaders: laughter and yelps of incredulity. A mention of the fastest growing sport was apparently, for some reason, hilarious.
I heard someone quip that Poor Things was the first movie Barbie should see as a real woman. It’s because that is a representation of women as subjects, rather than objects, of sexuality.
We’ve still got a long way to go, baby.
***
Everyone likes to tell themselves that they deserved to be admitted to the fancy-pants school from which they earned their degree.
Even when we strongly suspect our fat envelope was an admissions error (me!), the result of generational legacy (Doug!), now long gone athletic prowess, geographical distribution, or flat-out bribery a history of parental giving, there is still a benefit in getting a degree from a school to which, for whatever reason, you were fortunate to be admitted. Because, as most of us understand, the industry of higher ed is a caste system.
So many leaders these days are able to say that they were "firsts." It's wonderful and inspiring for many to see pathways open for groups that have been traditionally disadvantaged.
For leaders who come from first-gen low-income backgrounds, and others who are the "firsts," however, there's still a whole bunch of stuff—things often unacknowledged even by those who we think should know better.
The problem with implicit bias is that it's, well, not explicit.