I suppose we can’t, unless there’s grant money involved!

Throw in the related agencies and the financial linkages where some money is donated but the recipient has to match it, or has to meet some conditions, and there is quite a bit of political power here.

I suggest all to take a look at the fax number, highlighted in yellow, at the end of the announcement — and the open statement of where that number is located — the “Disability Resource Center.”

And a hunch combined with simple Boolean logic gives us this:

http://drc.arizona.edu/about/staff_directory#student_fac_res

Yes, Barb Borich is an “Access Consultant” for students with a disability.
The university has 11 people serving individuals with disabilities, 10 of whom are female
which is 91%.

Students with disabilities are disproportionately male and for two reasons. First, learning disabilities and such are inherited and like other inherited things (e.g. hemophilia) tend to show up far more often in male children. Depending on which disability and which “expert” you listen to, it ranges from 3:1 to 10:1 male and while things like ADHD tend to be underdiagnosed in K-12 girls (who aren;t referred to SPED because they aren’t disrupting the classroom and hence aren’t a threat to the female classroom teacher), absolutely everybody with a title says that these disabilities are disproportionately male.

Second, which gender is disproportionately being injured in combat — and then coming into K-12 with everything from missing limbs to PTSD? The female disabled veteran is the exception, not the rule.

So you have a vastly VASTLY disproportionately male cadre being served by a staff that is only 0.9% male. Notwithstanding the immediate question of why OCR’s interpretation of TItle IX doesn’t apply here as well, I don’t have an immediate problem with it anymore than I do with a police department that is 90% male — we live in a country where people can pursue their interests and do what they hopefully are good at. There is also that little thing Dr. King said about content of character and not physical characteristics…. (And we won’t even get into what got Larry Sommers into trouble…)

Nor do I have any problem with someone doing something on her own time, with her own resources, and making it very clear that there is a “wall of separation” between her political activities and her employment ones. You don’t use the “Disability Resource Center” fax machine, you use the Women’s Center one. (Or you at least don’t say where the number goes to.) Otherwise, you are creating a hostile environment for male students — who are the majority of your potential clients (even if they elect not to seek your assistance).

But it is worse here.

Note this line in the goals: “To increase leadership and advancement opportunities for women and underrepresented minorities.”

Women and minorities. Not just women. And note that the word “disability” is not included — YOU HAVE A WOMAN WHOSE JOB IS TO HELP PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES WHO IS IGNORING THE VERY GROUP OF PEOPLE WHOSE JOB IT IS TO HELP!!!!

Maybe I am wrong, maybe Ms. Borich is such a tireless advocate for disabled white male students and is so respected by absolutely everyone as such that she was considered the only person objective enough to administer this program and someone twisted her arm and talked her into doing it. Yes, maybe, and I remember once hearing about snow in Death Valley…

I’ve never been to Arizona, let alone to this university — I am just looking at the objective facts. The Census reports Arizona to be 73% white (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/04000.html) and let’s say that the cadre of students with a disability is 75% male (I would argue it is higher that that). They are assisted by a cadre of people who are 91% female and at least one of whom is running this grant for women and minorities out of the disability services office…

An office that is supposed to be friendly to a cadre of students that is 73% white and 75% male….

Do I really need to add the next three paragraphs????