Mr./Mrs./Ms. kjk:

You just responded publicly.

Maybe I misread your original post, but you said:

"if i'm misreading the original post and the call is to simply
hire based on color, gender, religion, etc.  then i'm completely opposed. any
employee, it seems to me, has to be able to bring something tangible to
the institution."

What do you define as "something tangible?"  Again, you're imposing some
abstract desire to make people who can participate in museums more like
the "standard," whatever the standard is at that particular point in time.

You went on to say:

"that is, if you want to hire minorities or women of specific backgrounds
without prior museum experience, you are going to have to create positions
where being a minority or woman of a specific background IS a field of
expertise in itself. (i.e., as intern/consultants for specific exhibits,
etc.)"

SAY WHAT? "...IS a field of expertise in itself."  Ladies and gentlemen
patronize starts with a "P."  The last thing I want to get into here on
this fine list is into a rhetoric war, just want to bring light to ISSUES
which are IMPORTANT.  My apologies for misrepresenting your comments. A
remedy would be to be concise and clear.  Or not respond at all, if it's not
really that important to you.  It's your call.  I like real food myself.

I quite don't follow you "kjk."  Partly to blame is because we're not
face to face, best characterized by what Robin said a few posts back:

"we are really musing out loud, as it were, except that it is silent via the
computer.  The convenience almost, but not quite, makes up for not being
able to see each other's faces so one could tell if the other meant
something to be funny, or express concern or something else entirely."

I too, miss Los Angeles.  These POSTS are really multi-layed.

Miguel

:)