The “Director” of Inclusion and Diversity: The notion of “sexual minorites” in U.S. Catholic higher education…


In their unbridled lust to prove to the world they are inclusive and diverse institutions not parochial and doctrinaire institutions, many of the nation’s Catholic universities and colleges are “putting the money where their mouths are” and “walking the talk.” How so? By imitating their secular counterparts and expanding the already bloated number of high-ranking administrators to include the position of “Director of Inclusion and Diversity.”

When all’s said, done, and hired, that’s probably a $150-200k/year additional personnel expense, excluding associated operating expenses, all for the bragging rights to claim: “[We strive] to be an inclusive and diverse community that educates and cares for the whole person.” A quick calculation suggests that’s about 4 fully-paid tuitions at many Catholic institutions of higher education.

The most recent Catholic institution seeking to fill this position is St. Joseph’s University in Philadelphia. As advertised, the individual holding this position:

  • is responsible for providing institutional leadership to create and sustain a culture that embraces and promotes diversity and inclusion in their broadest meanings; and,
  • defines, assesses, and nurtures diversity and inclusion as institutional resources that support and enhance the mission of Saint Joseph’s University.

What possibly might that mean?

Actually, there’s no need to hazard a guess. The position description states this individual will evidence a “nuanced, broad, and sophisticated understanding of diversity and inclusion issues.” In addition, this individual will “be culturally sensitive to racial/religious/cultural/sexual minorities that present themselves as part of the campus community.”

While The Motley Monk “gets” the notions of racial/religious/cultural minorities that present themselves as part of a campus community in the broadest sense, what’s this notion of “sexual minorities”? Demographically, there’s one sexual minority globally. It’s the male sex.

Adam and Eve in garden

The Douay Rheims version of Genesis 5:2 states:

He created them male and female; and blessed them: and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.

Perhaps something got lost in the translation…of the word Catholic, as in “As Philadelphia’s Jesuit Catholic University….”




To read the job posting, click on  the following link:

To read the mission of Philadelphia’s Jesuit Catholic University, click on the following link:

To read The Motley Monk’s daily blog, Omnibus, click on the following link:


More to explorer


  1. Diversity is a growth industry! Race, ethnicity, gender, disabilities, lesbian, gay, bisexual transgender… all in need of for special rights and protections. That would be a good thing to major in at college- could have quite a long career ahead with a degree in Diversity and Inclusion!

  2. Better to give kids $40,000 in cash and let them travel the world for a year…than to waste (worse than waste) 4years or more at a leftist indoctrination center.

    They’ll get a much better education and you’ll save a ton of money.

  3. All the best Catholic high schools have a diversity director nowadays.

    If nothing else, the demand for participation in league sports will make it impossible for Catholic high schools to hold out with anything other than nondiscrimination policies written to meet or exceed public schools policy statements. A diversity director shows off your heart is really in it!

    It’s been over ten years since our local public school districts adopted non-discrimination policies that listed “gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression”. At the time, how could anyone object? There were no ramifications, yet. At most, people felt regret when a child was confused about his or her sexual orientation; gay marriage had been defeated in a statewide referendum; nobody had seen an episode of Will and Grace; Lady Gaga had not yet performed “Born This Way”; and accommodations for transgender kindergarteners were still nowhere in sight. Objecting to the policy change then would have seemed mean-spirited and excessive.

  4. The American concern with “diversity” and “inclusion,” is almost unintelligible to Europeans.

    The French approach, for example, is to draw a rigid distinction between « l’éspace public », the domain of the state, its agencies and its citizens and « l’éspace privé » the domain of civil society, private individuals and organizations, between « la personne » the bearer of rights and duties and « l’individu » the private individual.

    Individual differences, whether of race, religion, culture, gender or the like, are relegated to « l’éspace privé » , not in order to restrict them, but in order to exclude their intervention in, or impact on, the relations between the citizen and the public authorities. This excludes discrimination on the one hand and special accommodation on the other, for, if special rules are applied to different classes or categories of citizens, on the basis of such distinctions, how then is the republic one and indivisible?

    The debates around « l’affaire du voile » [the headscarf business] and the oft-expressed concerns in the media over « communautarisme », by which they mean ethnic or religious solidarities and allegiances that threaten to override republican unity, as the fruitful source of all social ills are very instructive, as Googling (is that a word?) these two expressions will reveal.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: