Elsevier

Race and Society

Volume 2, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 25-50
Race and Society

Articles
Defending the white race: White male faculty opposition to a “white racism” course

https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-9524(00)00003-6 Get rights and content

Abstract

The structures and processes of curriculum censorship are a microcosm of the racial organization and dynamics of America and other modern societies. They offer valuable insights into how the issue of systemic white racism is kept off organizational agendas. Whether successful or unsuccessful, censorship efforts typically become visible only in those rare instances when they are challenged publicly. In this paper arguments made against and for an intensely opposed “White Racism” course are examined to delineate the relationship between power, voice, and social change. This curriculum conflict is the analytical vehicle through which we explore the role of race-defensive denial in the persistence of systemic white racism. This case study also reveals effective ways of overcoming such denial and placing white racism at the center of social discourse.

Section snippets

Teaching about racism: Its broader social context

Teaching about racism is neither a structure nor a process that somehow miraculously begins the moment well-prepared instructors and their well-read students enter the college classroom. Indeed, the most profound teaching about racism issues reach far beyond the internal dynamics of classroom pedagogy. Such issues are as likely to involve institutional transactions (e.g., among higher education, politics, and the economy) as they are teacher-student interaction Apple and Weiss 1983, Mills 1959,

Analytical approach

Two approaches were considered for the analysis of the case study material used in this paper. One method would have entailed an exploration of the strategies and tactics used in opposing the course and those successfully employed to secure its approval. However, given that the lead author, Noel A. Cazenave, was also the author and chief proponent of the course proposal, that approach may have enhanced bias through necessary interpretations of the intentions and motives guiding the actions of

Who opposed the course?

Before focusing on statements made in opposition to the course, it is imperative to discuss the social characteristics of those who opposed the course. All of the published campus criticisms of the course came from white male faculty or students. This statement is not meant to imply that all, or even most, European American men at the University of Connecticut (UConn) opposed the course. As will become clear later, considerable support for the course came from European American males. European

Overview of case study narrative

In May 1995, the sociology department of UConn approved what faculty commonly regarded as a perfunctory, one-page course proposal form. The title of the proposed course was “White Racism.” That proposal was prepared for a course to be taught during the fall semester of 1996.4 It soon became clear, however, that the approval of the course would be anything but routine.

The opposition to the White Racism special topics course proposal first became known to its author toward the end of October,

Statements critical of the course

As Table 2 shows, there are nine categories of criticisms of the White Racism course. Criticism of the course did not necessarily mean opposition to it, however. There were, indeed, critics/supporters who made both critical statements (primarily about its title) and supportive statements about the course. The number of statements categorized in the table (N = 68) is greater than the total number of critical statements made (N = 45). This is because some statements fit more than one category of

Responses to statements critical of the course

Many of the statements made in support of the course were specifically targeted at criticisms of the course. Here, the discussion will be limited to responses to the three major, specific categories of criticisms of the course. These responses to criticisms of the White Racism course will be discussed before examining other arguments made in support of the course.

Again, the most frequently articulated criticism of the course, especially by the faculty members of the college curriculum committee

Statements supportive of the course not specific to course criticisms

Not only did the proponents of the course respond to the arguments of those who made critical statements, but as Table 3 shows, the course supporters presented an additional and much larger set of reasons for teaching the course. Overall, there are 45 documented statements critical of the course, but more than twice as many (97) statements support the course. As was true for the critical statements, many of the supportive statements fit multiple categories. Thus, there are a total of 187

Support for course more important than an exclusive focus on “arguments ” implies

We have shown that there were early waves of opposition to the course. Momentum in support of the course came more slowly. Much of that support for the course was in response to what the supporters apparently saw as the excesses of the course’s critics. Supporters of the course rejected the critics’ claims that the course was racially offensive and racially inflammatory. There was also a backlash to what many saw as personal attacks on the course’s chief proponent. Course supporters saw white

Post-conflict developments

The institutionalization of a course on White Racism at the University of Connecticut has had positive consequences. The course—one of the most ethnically diverse classes taught at UConn—provides a structured “free social space” (Boyte, 1980, pp. 36–37) where students feel secure and supported in discussing a topic they may not normally be comfortable talking about. This free space is also an organizational base from which students cannot only learn about, and discuss, but if they choose to,

Discussion

White racism exists. It is a significant social phenomenon and a major social problem that has devastating consequences for many people in modern societies. Neither the structure nor the dynamics of those societies can be understood without understanding white racism. Given these facts, why would there be opposition to the teaching of a sociology course called White Racism? The answer is, of course, complex. However, if that reply had to summed-up in a one phrase explanation, that phrase could

Conclusion

A curriculum conflict at the University of Connecticut over the permissible conceptual language and approach that could be used in teaching about white racial privilege illustrates that the microlevel phenomenon of classroom teaching cannot be separated from the macrolevel social forces in the larger society. This case study shows the influence of societal forces on what is taught in the classroom, by whom, and how.

Successful attempts to diversify college curricula should, indeed, make solid

Acknowledgements

We authors are grateful for the helpful suggestions provided by Kenneth J. Neubeck, Ronald L. Taylor, and the anonymous reviewers of Race and Society. We also express our gratitude to Deirdre A. Royster and Elizabeth Mejia for raising the questions as to the role of “race”/gender, and white racial identify, respectively, in the dispute. We would like to acknowledge the useful editorial assistance of Cherie Ann Turpin. We also thank Anita Washington Cazenave and Anika Tene Cazenave for proofing

References (66)

  • Abrahamson, Mark. 1996. Letter to the Editor. The Hartford Courant March, 3, p....
  • Adalberto Aguirre et al.

    Majority and Minority Faculty Perceptions in Academe

    Research in Higher Education

    (1993)
  • Theodore W. Allen

    The Invention of the White RaceVolume I. Racial Oppression and Social Control

    (1995)
  • Amy Elizabeth Ansell

    New Right, New RacismRace and Reaction in the United States and Britain

    (1997)
  • Michael W. Apple et al.

    Ideology and Practice in SchoolingA Political and Conceptual Introduction

  • Valerie Babb

    Whiteness VisibleThe Meaning of Whiteness in American Literature and Culture

    (1998)
  • Robert Blauner

    Racial Oppression in America

    (1972)
  • Susanne Bohmer et al.

    Teaching Privileged Students About Gender, Race and Class Oppression

    Teaching Sociology

    (1991)
  • Eduardo Bonilla-Silva

    Rethinking RacismToward a Structural Interpretation

    American Sociological Review

    (1997)
  • Boyle, Patricia. 1995. Letter to the Editor. The Hartford Courant December, 26, p....
  • Harry C. Boyte

    The Backyard RevolutionUnderstanding the New Citizen Movement

    (1980)
  • Bloom, Larry. 1999. “Connecticut Bloomer Awards.” Northeast, May 30, pp....
  • Leslie G. Carr

    “Color-Blind” Racism

    (1997)
  • Cazenave, Noel A., 1996. “Why I Will Teach a Course on White Racism.” The Hartford Courant. February 18, p....
  • Cazenave, Noel A.1998. “Is America Racist? Yes. America is Racist to its Core.” The Hartford Courant. April 12, p....
  • Cohen, Laurence D. 1996a. “The ‘White Racism’ Professor Has His Own Racial Agenda.” The Hartford Courant February, 25,...
  • Cohen, Laurence D. 1996b. “Keep Those Calls Coming, Fans.” The Hartford Courant July 4, p....
  • Estelle Disch

    The Politics of Curricular ChangeEstablishing a Diversity Requirement at the University of Massachusetts at Boston

  • Philomena Essed

    Understanding Everyday RacismAn Interdisciplinary Theory

    (1991)
  • Farrish, Katherine. 1995. “‘White Racism’ Course Approved. UConn Teacher’s Proposed Class Led to Controversy.” The...
  • Joe R. Feagin et al.

    Living with RacismThe Black Middle Class Experience

    (1994)
  • Joe R. Feagin et al.

    White RacismThe Basics

    (1995)
  • Feeney, Mary K. 1996. “Forum Focuses on UConn ‘White Racism’ Course.” The Hartford Courant January 14, pp. B1,...
  • Fine, Michelle, Lois Weis, Linda C. Powell, and L. Mun Wong (eds.) 1997. Off White: Readings on Race. Power, and...
  • Barbara J. Flagg

    The Transparency Phenomenon, Race-Neutral Decisionmaking, and Discriminatory Intent

  • Paulo Freire et al.

    A DialogueCulture, Language and Race

    Harvard Educational Review

    (1995)
  • Ruth Frankenberg

    White Women, Race MattersThe Social Construction of Whiteness

    (1995)
  • General Catalog, 1994–95 University of Connecticut. Storrs, CT: University of...
  • Thomas F. Gossett

    RaceThe History of an Idea in America

    (1965)
  • Cheryl Harris

    Whiteness as Property

  • Hill, Mike. ed. 1997. Whiteness: A Critical Reader. New York: New York University...
  • Jones, James M. and Robert T. Carter. 1996. “Racism and White Racial Identity.” Pp. 1- 23 in Impacts of Racism on White...
  • Cited by (19)

    • Service providers’ cultural self-awareness and responsible use of racial power when working with ethnic minority victims/survivors of child sexual abuse: Results from a program evaluation study in Australia

      2020, Children and Youth Services Review
      Citation Excerpt :

      Social workers receive education in their curricular on social justice and therefore sociological conceptualisations of racism. Within the discipline of sociology, racism is defined as the combination of prejudice plus power (Cazenave & Maddern, 1999) and therefore does not only discuss prejudicial cognition the way the discipline of psychology does (Allport, 1979). Thus, there is a risk that psychologists miss vital education on understanding ethnic minority clients as ‘ethnic minorities’ (i.e. minoritised) in Australia.

    • Emotions of White Racism

      2020, On Whiteness
    • Joe R. Feagin: The social science voice of systemic racism theory

      2017, Systemic Racism: Making Liberty, Justice, and Democracy Real
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text