U Penn Teacher: In Class, I Always Call on People of Color First, Then White Women, and Then, If I Feel Like It, Maybe one White Male

U. Penn history teacher explains what 'social justice' really means in university classes. pic.twitter.com/mx0gDfPQRe — Geoffrey Miller (@primalpoly) October 20, 2017



This woman is a "Queer disabled feminst," according to her own description (and yes, she gives her credentials as "Queer disabled feminist" before mentioning her professional credentials of being a grad student in History at U Penn. Her identity comes first -- and let's face it, her identity is her actual credential.

She teaches classes as a teaching assistant, as many grad students do but I'm told this "progressive stack" is a very common thing in education. Indeed, her defense of her admitted, blatant discrimination is that it was taught to her from a professor.

In subsequent post, McKellop explains that the tactic - called progressive stacking - was one learned from a professor in undergrad. 'In normal life, who has the easiest time speaking, most opportunities? Flip it,' they added. 'The classroom is the place YOU get to control social setting.' McKellop would continue to tweet about the reaction they were receiving for teaching the method and added: 'Penn thinks I'm racist and discriminatory towards my students for using a very well worn pedagogical tactic which includes calling on [people of color].'



The fact that it's "well worn" makes this worse, not better -- it's one thing to find out that a single girl was molested by her uncle. It's another thing entirely to find out that half the girls in a town were molested by their family members, and that it's an accepted, "well worn" tradition in the town.

Bret Weinstein, the former Evergreen professor, a liberal mugged by leftist reality, discusses this in this twitter thread, noting that there are great "extra-legal" penalties imposed on professors and students who attempt to tell the outside world about the New Jim Crow.



A friend was telling me he saw a comment on this story at some news site. Not only does this professor do this, but it's a common enough thing to do that it is considered sound practice and even has a name -- "progressive stacking." You work down through the stack -- female persons of color, male persons of color, white women, and lastly, obviously, white men -- moving from the Coalition of the Ascendant to the Deplorables.

Legal Insurrection discusses the "progressive stack," and notes that the last time it made big news was during Occupy Wall Street, where minorities were told to "step up" (to the front of the crowd) and white men were told to "step back." "Step up, step back" with a very detailed chart of racial/sexual value -- see the chart at the link.

By the way, sometimes Jewish people wonder where they are on "the stack."

As I keep telling my Jewish friends -- you're just plain ol' white, and therefore to be discriminated against. Congratulations, I guess?

In the progressive movement, Jews are considered privileged and "white," putting them low on the progressive stack spectrum. Standard anti-Zionist polemics portray Israel as a white-supremacist state, even though most Israeli Jews are refugees from or descendants of refugees from Arab countries. Israel also has rescued Jewish communities from non-white regions such as Ethiopia. Jamie Palmer, writing at The Tower in April 2016, astutely points out the ugly side of the progressive stack, and how it is used against Jews: A lot has been written in recent months about the unwelcome resurgence of political correctness and identity politics and the exasperating doctrines of the social justice Left. I will simply make the curt observation that the progressive stack--an organizing principle designed to foreground the voices of those deemed to be "marginalized"-- has not been kind to Jews. This is partly because those in charge of arranging ethnicities into a hierarchy of oppression are still trying to decide whether or not Jews should to be considered "white" and therefore "privileged," and, as such, undeserving of the social protections from racism afforded to other minority groups (as though it were within their rights to define the Jews in the first place). This problem is, of course, exacerbated by the Livingstone Formulation. But there is a further problem with the way racism is conceived and understood as a structural problem by social justice activists. According to the precepts of critical race theory, racism only results from a combination of prejudice and power. Since anti-Semitism is a conspiracy theory about the malign influence of a powerful and mendacious world Jewry, it essentially holds that the Jews are experiencing hatred on account of the power they hold. Anti-Semitism, therefore, is not racism at all, but something more akin to resistance.

A comment my friend read said that this term is used all the time in education circles. At teacher union meetings, for example, it is expected and demanded that the "stack" be followed in order, and if I white male dares to stand to speak before allowing those higher in the "stack" to speak first, jeering starts and people shout "Don't break the stack!"

So: An explicit racial/sexual pecking order. Jim Crow is back again, just with a different ordering.

By the way, this person claims that her pronouns are "they/them." What a surprise that she has vanity pronouns!

(That article, from the Chronicle of Higher Ed, is maddening, and maybe worth a hate-read if you want to get your blood pressure up -- it is fully supportive of discriminating against whites and men as a valid exercise in... non-discriminatory teaching.)