Sandra Bruneau’s article "Whither Jill? A Reply to Andrew Irvine on Affirmative Action" (1997 SWC Supplement) contains a careless and unfair accusation about Professor Irvine which deserves a response. I am in a good position to provide one. Specifically, Dr. Bruneau asserts that

"Men, Irvine assumes, meet and will continue to meet criteria for merit. Why? Apparently because they are men and for no other material significant reason."

This sort of unfounded gratuitous charge of sexism is unworthy of a publication such as the CAUT Bulletin. It is most certainly uncalled for in the case of Dr. Irvine. There is absolutely no evidence that Irvine holds men to be inherently better qualified than women or that he holds sexist or chauvinist attitudes of any kind, as Dr. Bruneau’s remarks imply. Moreover his behavior in this department on all matters related to fairness and equity has been beyond reproach.

Professor Irvine is owed an apology. It would be foolish to suppose that remarks such as those of Dr. Bruneau do not have some effect on a person’s reputation and standing among his or her peers, especially when they are published under the auspices of an organization like the CAUT and will be read by people most of whom are unfamiliar with Irvine or his work. Bruneau may disagree with Irvine’s views about affirmative action, but in this case she has strayed from the relevant issues, and your readers should be so informed. Her ad hominem remarks are without foundation and do a disservice both to her colleague and to the debate itself.

Earl Winkler
Head, Philosophy, University of British Columbia