<p>
</p>
<p>The term discrimination has a legal meaning as well as an everyday meaning. I am sure that W&M is not guilty of illegal discrimination. But might they be discriminating in the everyday sense of the word? They may well be, according to my dictionary. Many people view discrimination as the act of harming members of a group because of animus, but I find that too circumscribed a definition. When a senior citizen buys a movie ticket for 50% of what you pay, the theater is engaging in price discrimination (charging different people different prices for the same good). The theater owner has nothing against the other patrons, but I still say that he or she is discriminating. When you treat people differently because of some characteristic you are discriminating. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I do not see this analogy. There are male roles and there are female roles. While there is some scope for females taking male roles, and the total number of actors needed is somewhat variable, the play itself sets the approximate ratio of males to females. A particular male-female ratio may be desirable in a student body, but this is not exogenously given as it is in a play. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I believe that this issue has caused some of us to rethink our positions. I suspect that some people who have criticized affirmative action programs are now extolling the virtues of a campus that is diverse and representative. Conversely, there are probably longtime supporters of affirmative action who do not see a diverse and representative (by sex) student body as a paramount goal. I know I have learned a few things as I read and thought about these issues, and I thank novaparent for inducing me to waste so much time on it :)</p>