Bridgewater State University is the subject of a novel lawsuit after it asked Donna Johnston, a white applicant for one of three open positions in the School of Social Work, to, according to the Boston Globe, “defend her whiteness” in a job interview. The university said that she “missed the target” in answering how she could overcome her “white privilege.”
According to The Boston Globe article, Johnston was one of ten applicants and felt that she was highly qualified for the one-year assistant professorship after teaching at Southern New Hampshire University and Virginia Commonwealth University. She is a licensed social worker from Plainfield, Connecticut with extensive clinical experience.
She said that she was shocked in the interview when a professor asked her to defend “your white privilege.” Johnston says that she was told that “Black students may not be able to relate to you because of your white privilege.” Johnston reportedly acknowledged her white privilege but failed to adequately answer how she would address it.
The university is quoted as acknowledging the question but insisting that it was meant to give Johnston an “opportunity to show … how she would use her experience and teaching skills to overcome a common obstacle as a social worker and teacher.” It added that her answer “missed the target.”
It is not clear what that target is. Johnson’s lawyer is quoted as saying “If somebody had said to a Black applicant, let’s talk about your blackness, or how does your blackness affect something, there’d be outrage.”
Yet, there are challenges in the lawsuit. First, two white applicants were hired. Second, the university is citing the lack of classroom experience as one of the non-racial factors leading to Johnson’s rejection.
It is clear, however, that Johnson’s race was interjected into the interview process. The school is likely to argue that such questions arise with social workers and that they wanted to see how Johnston would respond.
Boston-based lawyer Rebecca Pontikes told the paper that the remarks did not sound “profoundly racist” since they could be interpreted “two ways.” However, the test is likely not to be whether something is profoundly or simply racist. The question is whether an applicant can be subject to added scrutiny because of her race.
I certainly agree that this will be a tough case in light of the fact that two of the three successful applicants were white. There is also a credible claim that the interview process was meant to test an applicant in her response to expected questions in the classroom.
However, it could raise equally tough countervailing questions for a court on whether minority applicants could be asked to defend or respond to their race in such interviews. The court could conclude that a black applicant could legitimately be challenged on how she would respond to race-based comments or criticisms. Yet, that would run counter to prior cases where the interjection of race in interviews was viewed as creating a hostile or discriminatory environment for applicants.
The EEOC lays out limited purposes for asking about race in applicants and confines them to tracking non-discriminatory diversity goals:
Can an employer ask about an applicant’s race on an application form?
Employers may legitimately need information about their employees or applicants race for affirmative action purposes and/or to track applicant flow. One way to obtain racial information and simultaneously guard against discriminatory selection is for employers to use separate forms or otherwise keep the information about an applicant’s race separate from the application. In that way, the employer can capture the information it needs but ensure that it is not used in the selection decision.
Unless the information is for such a legitimate purpose, pre-employment questions about race can suggest that race will be used as a basis for making selection decisions. If the information is used in the selection decision and members of particular racial groups are excluded from employment, the inquiries can constitute evidence of discrimination.
However, the EEOC also says that such questions should be avoided in job interviews:
We recommend that you avoid asking applicants about personal characteristics that are protected by law, such as race, color, religion, sex, national origin or age. These types of questions may discourage some individuals from applying, may be viewed suspiciously by some applicants, and may be considered evidence of intent to discriminate by the EEOC. If you do not have this information when you decide who to hire, it may be easier for you to defend your business against a hiring discrimination complaint.
Facebook was recently sued by black applicants who objected to being told about the desire to find applicants who are a “cultural fit” with the company.
Recently, a white executive was awarded $10 million after he successfully argued that he was fired because Novant Health wanted to achieve diversity goals.
It would be interesting to know how the two white applicants who were hired answered the white privilege question. Their groveling must have been more sincere. They must have been more completely controlled by the woke propagandist. They must have gotten a good grade on the derriere kissing part of the interview. “Fathers please forgive my sin because I have been a racist since the doctor pulled me from my mothers body and I am so in need of your absolution.” The Fathers replied, “You are indeed a racist but if you repeat this incantation1,000,000 times we may allow you into our club. Be aware however, that we are watching you and any transgression back to your racist ways will be met with a harsh excommunication. Sign here and your response will be entered into the record. Liberal pats on the head will be forthcoming. Such a cute little fella.”
If I were asked to “defend my (fill in race)”, I would come back “Defend from what?” (and probe deep for what kind of attack the interviewer set up with the question). The reason I take this tack is that I don’t want to answer a question that is too vague. I don’t want to guess (incorrectly) what the interviewer is getting at. So, I stop and ask for clarification — nicely. It might lead to a deeper discussion of race and the difference between immutables and actionables, and how the difference between these two kinds of factors is essential to social work and social progress.
Or, my question could scare the interviewer into backing down with that question.
Johnston herself didn’t allege that she was asked “to defend ‘your white privilege.’” That’s Turley’s mistaken description.
Turley wasn’t mistaken. The Boston Globe’s headline read “Faculty applicant sues Bridgewater State, saying she was asked to defend her ‘whiteness” it even appears in the url to the article
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/03/09/metro/faculty-applicant-sues-bridgewater-state-saying-she-was-asked-defend-her-whiteness/?event=event1
I already pointed out in my first comment (at 10:45am) that that’s what the Boston Globe said. But it’s not what Johnston said. The Boston Globe writer misrepresented it, and Turley repeated their misrepresentation, presumably because Turley hadn’t bothered to read the actual suit. Either that, or Turley was knowingly misrepresenting the suit after reading it.
So yes, Turley is mistaken. So is the Boston Globe.
Anonymous, please provide a link to substantiate your claim. You don’t have one? Just as I thought.
Oh Inattentive One, I quoted from the complaint she filed in court in my very first comment.
The MA Court case system creates strange URLs, and they don’t seem to be permalinks, so I’ll give you instructions to find the document substantiating my claim:
1) go to https://www.masscourts.org,
2) click where it says “click here,”
3) choose “The Superior Court” in the Court Dept. pulldown, choose “Plymouth County” in the Court Division pulldown, and enter Bridgewater State University for the Company Name,
4) click Search
5) choose case 2283CV00143
6) choose the image in the line labelled “Complaint electronically filed.”
Voila, you will see the copy of her complaint, showing that SHE never alleged that she was asked “defend” her white privilege.
Anonymous, the complaint that was filed only has to be for discrimination. The evidence concerning the white privilege will be brought forth during the trial. The complaint does not have to be specific as to how the discrimination came about. Her explanation was a quote in the Globe. You know the process.
All of which is irrelevant to my correct claim that Johnston herself didn’t allege that she was asked “to defend ‘your white privilege.’” That’s Turley’s mistaken description.
Anonymous, in the Boston Globe story there is a direct quote from Johnstone stating that she was asked to address her white privilege. Please leave your lack of mental acuteness at home and don’t ask the rest of use to be subject to your prevarications.
Prevaricator, I quoted what she actually alleged in my very first comment, at 10:45am.
“address” (the word you just used) is not a synonym for “defend” (the word that Turley repeatedly used, which she did not allege). We all know that you’re weak when it comes to details.
PeterK, Anonymous just makes things up in it’s head. You’ll get used to it but don’t stop pointing it out when she has a fit of fantasy. Welcome to La La Land.
“Jew privilege” under Diversity (i.e. color judgment, class-based bigotry), Inequity, and Exclusion, is a Nazi era blood libel, religious dogma, and doctrine that socially justified progress. One step forward, two steps backward. A wicked solution, a final solution. #HateLovesAbortion
You’re obsessed with abortion. This case is not about abortion. The Nazi genocide also wasn’t about abortion.
Anonymous, were their pregnant Jewish women who were thrown into the ovens. Just like the American abortionist the oven stokers considered the babies in the Jewish mothers body to be only an inconvenience. Abortion by cremation or a scalpel whats the difference?
Ti T, if you do not understand the difference between genocide and abortion, you are much, much sicker than I assumed.
“A][ professor asked her to defend ‘your white privilege.’”
The question itself is racist.
The Left’s view of racism should be clear: Racism for we, but not for thee.
Turley said “defend,” apparently because a Boston Globe reporter said “defend” and Turley chose not to read the suit himself before commenting on it.
Turley’s claim — “She said that she was shocked in the interview when a professor asked her to defend ‘your white privilege’” — is false. Johnston herself didn’t allege that she was asked “to defend ‘your white privilege.’”
Did Turley really read this or was it someone else. Lately I’ve been getting the impression that most of these columns aren’t really written by Turley. Turley has a knack for legal details and it suggests he pays close attention to the details of the entirety of the case. If he was being this lazy and just parroted a few phrases or points in the Boston globe’s article I don’t think it was Turley who wrote the column. I may be mistaken, but it’s hard to believe Turley could be this sloppy as a professor. I can see a student being this sloppy, but Turley?
Columns written by someone else normally have the author’s name identified, don’t they?
If the subject of the discussion seems to lack a logical explanation, then always follow the money. Environmental, Social and Governance ESG scoring is a great place to start. This is especially true regarding our economy and the issue of oil and gas. It’s not just about leasing, permits and production. It’s primarily about companies avoiding being shutout of the capital markets due to their ESG score. This is all part of The Great Reset.
The fact is – ESG has gone mainstream. Bloomberg tracked almost 300 mentions of ESG on energy company earnings calls in the first quarter of the year. Self-recognition of the role E&P companies play in climate change and other ESG initiatives as well as a more creative perspective on the framework will hasten the process for any size of company. The genie is out of the bottle, and ESG is here to stay for the good of society at large. While the ESG movement may well be a functional and cultural change that seems daunting to tackle on the front end, all that is expected of companies right now is that they embrace the concept and take action.
https://www.womblebonddickinson.com/us/insights/articles-and-briefings/esg-how-it-applies-oil-gas-industry-and-why-it-matters
How many black applicants were there? My guess is they hired the only one.
Why are you guessing that there was only 1 Black applicant?
Blacks are 13% of the population. If the applicant pool is normally distributed and applicants are randomly selected, then you’d expect 1.3 candidates out of 10 to be black.
However, I have not seen the data, but I suspect based on my experience and impressions that the universe of black people with social science Phds and the minimal qualifications to be considered for the position in question is even less than the proportion of blacks in the overall population. If that is that case, then based on raw data and statistical probabilities and a random selection, you would not expect more than one black applicant.
Why do you use an uppercase “B” in the middle of a sentence to describe a black person?
Most of the general US population is not qualified to apply for an instructor position in Social Work, so you’re using the wrong comparison group.
Johnston is a Licensed Clinical Social Worker. As a start, you’d want to look at the racial composition of people with LCSWs and PhDs in Social Work. I don’t know those figures, but here’s a survey of newly licensed social workers, and over 20% of the respondents are Black:
https://www.socialworkers.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=1_j2EXVNspY%3D&portalid=0
OK. Shulte guessed one black person interviewed for the position (out of 10). What was your purpose in questioning is guess?
Also, why do you use an uppercase “B” in places other than the beginning of a sentence to describe black people?
Re: your question about capitalizing “Black,” here’s one discussion: https://apnews.com/article/archive-race-and-ethnicity-9105661462
Many other style guides say something similar.
Ghost writing perhaps?
The university hired 3 people, and 2 of the 3 hires are white. Johnston is going to have a hard time convincing a jury that the School of Social Work is biased against white applicants.
As is often the case, Turley pulls phrases instead of quoting full sentences and doesn’t necessarily make clear who spoke the phrase in question. Turley claims that “Bridgewater State University … asked Donna Johnston, a white applicant for one of three open positions in the School of Social Work, to “defend her whiteness” in a job interview,” without specifying where the phrase “defend her whiteness” comes from. Turns out that it comes from the title of the Boston Globe article, not from Johnston or the university, and Turley omitted the internal quotation marks in what the reporter wrote (the article’s title is “Faculty applicant sues Bridgewater State, saying she was asked to defend her ‘whiteness’”). Turley claims “She said that she was shocked in the interview when a professor asked her to defend ‘your white privilege.'” But Johnston never alleged that the university asked her to defend white privilege. Again, the word “defend” came from the reporter, and it’s not an accurate description of what Johnston actually alleges, so Turley shouldn’t be adopting the reporter’s inapt description.
Turley badly needs a copy editor.
In the suit, Johnston alleges “Prior to asking Johnston about her “whiteness”, Ms. Willison had asked her how she would be able to relate to students who are of lower socio-economic status. Johnston replied: “I was a welfare mother. I understand poverty up close and personal.”” She apparently didn’t find this to be an inappropriate question. She alleges “After Johnston revealed that she had discovered that her family records on her father’s side indicated that she had an ancestor of Native descent, Ms. Willison said: “Regarding your whiteness, I mean, I identify as being white like you do, so how aware are you of your whiteness and your white privilege and how Black students may not be able to relate to you because of your white privilege?”” It’s interesting that Johnston says how she answered the earlier question, but does not say how she answered this question.
Defense of my whiteness, by Hickdead:
My parents are white. Are you too stupid to realize that?
– The End
Ask yourself this. Why was there not any, Any black men, black women qualified enough to be able to apply? I think you know why. Because, there are not many of them. Some years ago I read an article about a well known black principal, that stated in no uncertain terms that to teach black kids, to get there attention and, be able to hold it, it takes a really stern black man, or a black woman.
They hired 3 people: 2 white, 1 Black, so clearly there was at least 1 Black applicant, and there’s no reason for you to assume that the person wasn’t qualified.
Can you imagine how much groveling, self-debasing, flat-out sucking-up, the white person that got hired, allowed themselves to do. If it was a man, which is extremely doubtful, but if it was, talk about “self-neutering”, With an extremely dull jagged emotional knife. Myyyyyyyyy God. And if it was a woman?
Someone else will have to take a shot at trying, Trying to describe the type of woman that would subject themselves to such, to be able to pass muster to get hired. Frankly, I cannot begin to try to figure out what kind of woman would. I can’t begin, to describe her. Because, I’ve never known this, the type that would.
. No way. Absolutely no-way would I ever!!! Absolutely ever tolerate this kind of vile evil garbage for 5 seconds. Thank God I made my career in the Oil&Gas Industry. An industry that men can still be men out on-site on a Rig, or on a pipeline project.
You will never, ever, find such a modern day neutered Self abusing masochist, Leftist Biden voting village-idiot in that line of work.
“”She asserts her qualifications are superior to the three women who were hired for faculty posts in the School of Social Work, and alleges her “whiteness” cost her a job.”
Two of the three people hired were white. She had no classroom experience. She should have been asked about her sense of entitlement which is the basis for her lawsuit.
The comments to this post exceeded my expectations. Cry me a tsunami!
OK, a question about classroom teaching experience is fine during the interview. But, honestly, how would you reply to the interviewer
challenging you to “Defend your blackness.”???
pbinca – the correct answer is “So, what?”
“Defend your whiteness,” was the clickbait newspaper title used as further clickbait by Turley. That question was never asked to the applicant.
Teaching experience is more than a question, it is a job requirement.
enigma – did they ask the black applicant how he/she/it would relate to other races?
We don’t know what they asked the applicants. I could imagine a non offensive question related to the work required on the job that could be asked of Black applicants. Black people have to overcome the assumptions of white people all the time when seeking employment.
Read the comments about all the imagined slights white people, especially white men endure. You’d think they were the most oppressed group in the country, when the opposite is true.
Considering whites pay for the free welfare you get? Those Whites?
You’ll have to be specific about the “free welfare,” I have no clue as to what you’re talking about.
If this is Allan, don’t bother to respond. I’m trying to live a troll-free life.
Enigma, I saw in the Boston article that there were a total of 10 applicants. I assume all went thru the same interview questions. Only Johnson was shocked about the question of privilege. I suspect it was inexperience and a sense of entitlement than real offense at the interview questions.
I would assume some questions were asked of all applicants yet others might be in response to comments from the interviewee. That Johnson, with no classroom experience, believed he/she was the most qualified suggests visions of grandeur.
Enigma, that’s a more reasonable explanation. Johnson’s complaint has undertones of similar behavior “Karens” are known for. I’m just assuming, but I wouldn’t rule it out.
enigma – when I have gone through a formal hiring process, they ask the same questions of everybody. Shirley all the students are not going to be black, so how is the black applicant going to relate to them?
Used to be the case in federal hiring actions that resumes were presented without any identifying personal information.
BTW, was “Shirley” an Airplane reference?
Of course!!! One can never have too many ‘Airplane’ references.
She doesn’t allege that she was asked to “defend” anything. That’s Turley’s mistaken description, quoting a mistaken description from a Boston Globe reporter. It seems that Turley didn’t bother to read the actual suit.
enigma….I don’t mean to pry, but are you still black? Thanks.
Still Black, thanks.
No, he is not black. He is uppity, though, just like Democrats during LBJ and thereafter stated
“These N….., they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. For if we don’t move at all, then their allies will line up against us and there’ll be no way of stopping them, we’ll lose the filibuster and there’ll be no way of putting a brake on all sorts of wild legislation. It’ll be Reconstruction all over again. [Said to Senator Richard Russell, Jr. (D-GA) regarding the Civil Rights Act of 1957]”
Lazy Bird……….Yep….that was LBJ…I never liked him. He only cleaned up his terminology by saying “Ni-GRA”, If the cameras were rolling. His famous quote, after the Civil Rts Act of 1964…
“We’ll have these n—ers voting for Democrats for the next 200 years.”
He has many famous quotes including that Democrats will lose the South for a generation (he underestimated). If you wonder how I’m not shocked at Democrats and their actions for 200 years, it’s because Republicans have done their best to catch up the last 145 (yes there were a good number of years of overlap). None of the last several Republican Presidents are exempt. Why do you think Trump fought so hard not to have outtakes from The Apprentice released (besides the misogyny)? In today’s climate, if the tapes came out and if they say what is claimed. He’d probably get a bump.
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-n-word-apprentice-1445854
Trump, both Bush’s, Reagan, and Nixon, all used a version of the Southern Strategy so don’t hold them up as examples.
Enigma……..don’t need a tutorial on Democrats, or the South or President Trump from a Yankee who went to private schools, thank you.
I’ve been in the South for almost 50 years. I’ve learned a little something. Seems like you could use a tutorial, but first you’d have to be willing to accept inconvenient facts. BTW, I went to private school for 1 yr in 7th grade when my school then merged with a public school and became public.
Calling a Black man “uppity” must score you bonus points with your crew. To me it just makes clear you are who I think you are.
From the Globe, “She asserts her qualifications are superior to the three women who were hired for faculty posts in the School of Social Work, and alleges her “whiteness” cost her a job.”
The score is Vaginas 3, Penises 0.
We have the worst white male dominated patriarchy in the universe.
Fewer men than women enroll and graduate from college.
On average, women live longer than men.
80% of suicide victims are men.
Workplace deaths disproportionately affect men.
More men than women are on death row.
More men than women are addicted to drugs.
More men than women are homeless.
The number of domestic violence shelters for women > 2000.
The number of domestic violence shelters for men: 1.
More women than men get custody of children after divorce.
Men pay more in child custody than women.
100% of paternity fraud affects men.
0% of women are required to register for Selective Service.
War deaths disproportionately affect men.
Men receive harsher sentences for the same crime than women.
False rape allegations disproportionately affect men.
If you can find ONE issue championed by progressive Democrats that is not marketed based on lies, it will be the first.
How many “penises” applied for the job?
There were a total of 10 applicants. Three were hired. Were all 10 interviewed?
“ Johnston had applied for an assistant professorship, a temporary, one-year position, in the School of Social Work. She was one of 10 applicants. She expected questions during her June 30 interview about her clinical practice, field work, and teaching experience at Southern New Hampshire University and Virginia Commonwealth University, not her “whiteness,” she said Monday via Zoom.”
Maybe NOW should step into her defense?
It wasn’t a race test. It was an ideology test. They want people who only think a certain way. The correct answer is “This is American. We don’t have to defend what or who we are.” That kind of courage escapes todays leftist sycophants. Not being hired by those Maoists is the best credential anyone can have though the question is unquestionably racist.
Just use the famous Alan Dershowitz “shoe on the other foot” test. Would a black applicant need to “defend their blackness”? As someone stated above, this comes about because this is a TEACHING COLLEGE and the way to infiltrate (I could say to infest ) the schools with teachers that will surreptitiously inculcate students with CRT.
She wasn’t asked to “defend” anything. Don’t assume that Turley is accurately describing the allegations. He is often sloppy with details, as he is here.
Ok Anonymous, what if the interviewer asked a black woman how she would manage to relate to whites at the school? Seem ok to you? Do you think race should be part of the interview process? It is fine to look at issues from all angles but when you are always the contrarian it shows that you have no friends, have no spouse, have no life and never even went to a prom. It is an awful personality tic that nobody enjoys and it just makes you less and less enjoyable to be around or to be forced to listen to or have to read.
Post your comment and then allow the site to be visited by others instead of having to scroll past all of your moronic diatribes against the host of a great site.
The host of the site is a professor at an R1 university. Having worked as both a professor and a researcher at R1 universities, I expect professors — especially professors at an R1 university — to demonstrate a certain level of academic integrity in their writing. That includes not making false claims because they were either unwilling to look up the primary document they’re discussing or are choosing to misrepresent it.
I don’t think it’s “moronic” to point out substantive errors. You and I clearly disagree about that. You want to run with Turley’s mistake and pretend that it’s accurate. I won’t join you in that.
You don’t like having to scroll past my comments. You could ask Turley to use a different commenting system like Disqus that lets each person choose to block all of someone else’s comments from their view. Then you could block mine.
Anonymous, or you could have the nerve to actually come up with a name so we can know when it is you and we can then just ignore you. I hate to miss many of the other people who are “Anonymous” just to avoid you, Pick a darn name coward.
Barack Obama says he will defend his whiteness. Does he look more white or black? Slightly tan
“are you a member of the Communist or Nazis Party? Answer yes or no!”
McCarthy at least loved America!
Bingo!!! YES HE DID! I read an article yesterday, that stated / showed the”% percentage %”, that said they would flee, FLEE! If our Nation was invaded. They would not stand and fight to even protect themselves or, there family!!! 50 to 54%!!!! Would run! It’s been a long time since something ticked me off that bad.
That set my day up to be tainted, ruined pretty much the rest of the day. Because as my day wore on, I would think back on what-all I read. And get surly, dark mood. My wife asked me around, about, oh I’d say about 10:00 🕙 “what’s wrong dear”. So I told her. Then I showed her.
And she got ticked off to the core. She came up in a time when men, dammit MEN! Protected women! Protected the home front! Helped their neighbors! I may be retired and 64, but I still feel and think, much younger. And not a easy-chair-lay-around type.
Defending your whiteness is a fabricated CRT concept intended to divide and discriminate. In this case I would contend that the indoctrination center needed to be assured that CRT was fully embraced by the applicant given that this school was founded mainly as a teaching college. Also this school is located in a working class suburb I’d wager to say economic and class issues are more common realities among students than racial struggles.
At liberal Massachusetts great. Look at the congressional representation we have. At the state level the legislature was considering removing the state gas tax for a while. To give the citizens a break. Then they came to their senses.
“in light of the fact that two of the three successful applicants were white.” wouldn’t surprise me if those two candidates were woke and were willing to prostrate themselves before the hiring committee over their “whiteness”