Representing Diversity in the Profession: How So? Which Ones?

The APA Board of Officers recently approved a new Standing Committee on Inclusiveness in the Profession. In the words of the APA Board, this committee is 'charged with increasing the inclusiveness of the profession' of philosophy. It is charged with doing so by 'assessing and reporting on the status of underrepresented groups in the profession,' making recommendations to the Board, undertaking diversity projects of its own, and working with the existing diversity committees (Alcoff 2000, 61-62, emphases added). As a reminder: there are currently six diversity committees in the APA and they represent the following groups of people: (1) American Indians; (2) Blacks; (3) Hispanics and Latinos; (4) Women; (5) Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender People; and (6) Asians and Asian-Americans. The APA's diversity committees have attracted some controversy. The recent APA report known familiarly as the 'Hanson Committee Report,' named after committee chair Karen Hanson, revealed that, although there was wide support for the diversity committees and the emphasis on diversity, there were also a 'fair number of members' who 'expressed irritation at the organization's apparent embrace of diversity' and offered 'heated criticism' of the diversity committees (Hanson, et al. 2002, Structural Issues-Section 2). This controversy prompted the APA Committee on the Status of Women in the Profession to organize a session on diversity at the 2001 Pacific APA meetings, a session which in turn gave rise to the group of papers on diversity included in this issue of the Newsletter on Feminism and Philosophy