This is an extract from the article but it contains everything she is supposed to have said:
"When the Duchess of Sussex visited City University in London on one of her first outings as patron of the Association of Commonwealth Universities (ACU) this month, her enthusiasm for change became clear. After hearing a presentation from Meera Sabaratnam, who is leading a push to decolonise the curriculum at the School of Oriental and African Studies (Soas), the duchess responded animatedly.
'Just open up that conversation so we are talking about it as opposed to continuing with that daily rote ... sometimes that approach can be really antiquated and needs an update,' she said.
On the same visit she was visibly surprised to learn about the lack of black and female professors in British universities. She reportedly said 'Oh my God' when she was shown a sheet of data showing that UK professors were overwhelmingly white men."
------------------------
The article sounds like a storm in a teacup to me but it's yet another thing she must be on her guard against because any political comments she makes will be jumped on.
I wouldn't characterize the way Meghan is championing diversity and openness in education surrounding curriculum and faculty as necessarily aggressively 'political.' It strikes me as her taking a practical and forward-thinking approach to advocating for inclusivity and student awareness and involvement in all aspects of their higher education. Why is that positive stance by Meghan being marginalized and targeted as controversial and/or political?
... Regarding the Times story about ACU: Meghan's comment and her having Amy take a pic of the diversity stats were reported at the time of the engagement...so why is the Times re-reporting it again now? And not just that, but with a LOT of editorializing at that...
If Meghan is, or will be, championing this issue, I am very excited! When I was attending uni in the UK, I was shocked by the lack of diversity in faculty, curriculums and student body---even compared to my not IMO very diverse school in the US.I remember student organizing at the time on campus around the issue, as a matter of fact. I am glad to see this conversation being elevated and its a great issue for Meghan especially to speak about given her own experiences and background.
ITA. I'm very glad to see Meghan taking a stand on issues she is passionate about that really have to do with encouraging intellectual curiosity, while leaving no stone unturned in the pursuit to better oneself and also contribute to one's community.
Meghan naturally and gracefully taking a stand in this way reminds me of the imperatives expressed by writer and educator, bell hooks [aka Gloria Watkins]. In a critical study of hooks' writings, Cornell West contends:
"bell hooks' unique contribution to intellectual life, American letters and 'Black' thought ... proposes a singular human struggle to be candid about one's self and contestatory toward dehumanizing forces in the world..."
At the same time, hooks herself suggests the importance of dissecting and filtering standardized academic texts that have been
"used as instruments of domination, elitism, and classism..." e.g., hooks has said that she
"takes what is nurturing from the work of educator and philosopher, Paulo Freire, [while] choosing to overlook the sexist elements in his writing." In turn
"hooks' own writings express the struggle for survival in a racist, sexist, and classist society. The pain of hooks' marginality and oppression of spirit echoes the pain of any who have dared to claim an identity beyond cultural designations... hooks advocates communities of solidarity in the struggle toward mutual growth, [and] a recognition of differences as opposed to the suppression of dissenting voices..." -- Namulundah Florence in
bell hooks' Engaged Pedagogy: A Transgressive Education for Critical Consciousness (1998).
Indeed, the bolded descriptions above are what I think Meghan is doing in a natural, unaffected way. That the negative, slanted reporting in
The Times fails to see these transparent, inclusive and positive qualities in Meghan, is sadly to their own detriment.
The Times is rather very much on the defensive truly. And that headline they created, 'male, pale, stale,' simply reeks of their own
false, presumptuous sense of threatened superiority and entitlement. Yet, as Meghan wrote in the letter to her father:
"… a lie can't live forever.” And as
@Osipi noted,
“… the truth will win out in the end.”