I indeed was joking before, but you seem to be serious, so I'll address your
point.
CBI is a perfect example of tokenism. There are a set number of questions
per round on "the first woman to do X" and "the most prominent
African-American Y." In CBI's world, no female, black, or other minority
person can just DO anything in as legitimate a fashion as a white male;
these questions are the equivalent of telling someone she is "pretty
smart...for a girl." ACF, on the other hand, has, by FAR, more questions
than any other tournament on legitimate accomplishments of
minorities/underrepresented groups. The quality of the copious non-western
literature and history in ACF only makes the infinitesimal presence of those
categories in every other format all the more inexcusable. CBI actually had
a history tossup with the answer "Japan" the last time I played, and tried
to *give me an award for knowing it.* That level of superficiality is a slap
in the face to anyone interested in world cultures. NAQT has some required
level of nonwestern content, but it's lower than ACF's, and the quality
varies. Invitationals, as always, can choose to follow any model, but they
are always better served by including underrepresented content in the proper
manner.
Anyone who really thinks that CBI's ridiculously patronizing approach to
minority content, as well as the remnants of the rule separating
historically black colleges and universities from the regular circuit, which
is inexcusable regardless of the reason, are a step in the right direction,
is just plain wrong.