Support NeoGAF

[Madness]

They'll be forced to do away with affirmative action eventually. Even if it is used to right historical wrongs and promote fairness, it is in essence unfair, and this is what happens when you have strict laws and egalitarianism. Just watch, almost everything introduced or announced since the 60's will eventually be challenged under the guise of "fairness".

 

[Hasphat'sAnts]

I'm Asian. I was lucky enough to get accepted to a pretty prestigious university. And I say unequivocally that White/Asian/South Asian are over-represented at the top colleges. All of them brilliant, but when everybody comes from the same background, there's very little room for diversity of thought. Something an institute of higher learning is supposed to foster.

 

[909er]

Goddammit I'm already fucked
Fuck 9th grade

Asian-GAF here

Don't worry. Asian alumni of University of Chinese Rejects here, it's actually gone up quite a bit in terms of prestige lately.

More to the point, your school doesn't really matter unless you went to a really good one or really bad one, even for grad school.

Also, don't do what many Asians such as myself did. Don't apply as a Biology major. From what I was told, each department can admit x number of students and many Asians with vague dreams if being a doctor apply in HUGE numbers for Bio. So your higher grade and GPA means less since you're competing in a smaller more qualified group. Pick something relatively serious but not too popular, maybe a entomology or linguistics. You can always change your major.

For the record, I had a 3.71 GPA, 1380 SAT (back when it was out of 1600), was in Key club and played Football and Tennis and worked briefly as an EMT (licensed when I turned 18 and a somewhat shady event company hired me).

Not the best candidate, but definitely up there.

 

[Boom Boom Pow]

I'm Asian. I was lucky enough to get accepted to a pretty prestigious university. And I say unequivocally that White/Asian/South Asian are over-represented at the top colleges. All of them brilliant, but when everybody comes from the same background, there's very little room for diversity of thought. Something an institute of higher learning is supposed to foster.

so if you had been rejected from your school because of this "diversity" quota, how would you have felt? And that you had to be relegated to a 2nd/3rd tier school? Even after all your studying?

You appear to be more of "I gots mine so now I can actually not care about the rest"

Don't worry. Asian alumni of University of Chinese Rejects here, it's actually gone up quite a bit in terms of prestige lately.
Pick something relatively serious but not too popular, maybe a entomology or linguistics. You can always change your major.
.

Please don't give this advice so easily because it is an extremely bad advice. There are majors that are "impacted" which means you cannot change into them after you get into the school, regardless of how you try. If it was that easy, everyone would apply to be an English major and then change into engineering or bio.

 

[mugwhump]

And let's not forget that affirmative action aids white women the most of any group

Interesting, why's that? I wouldn't think being white would help them, and I thought female uni enrollment had slightly surpassed male enrollment?

 

[alstein]

I'm sorry, since when did Asian Americans not become a minority anymore? so we're going to end racism against black people by having racism against asian people?

They voted more for Republicans than Democrats in 2014. Good sign you're no longer a minority. ^_^

That said, to be a bit more serious- there's a huge difference between different groups of Asians. Japanese have it better than say, Hmong or Filipinos.

This is another reason why I favor socioeconomic-based over race-based. Race is just too crude a measurement, and I think socioeconomic has a higher correlation, and socioeconomic is less likely to create resentment.

 

[Boom Boom Pow]

They voted more for Republicans than Democrats in 2014. Good sign you're no longer a minority. ^_^

That said, to be a bit more serious- there's a huge difference between different groups of Asians. Japanese have it better than say, Hmong or Filipinos.

This is another reason why I favor socioeconomic-based over race-based. Race is just too crude a measurement, and I think socioeconomic has a higher correlation, and socioeconomic is less likely to create resentment.

which shows you the fucked up the Democrats did considering they overwhelmingly voted for OBama and the Dems in 2012

 

[Ikael]

I've already said it before, but the overemphasis of race over economic status in regards of priorities when distributing social services does a disservice to minorities rather than helping them. I firmly believe that a big part of the racial discrimination and tensions in race relationships is a consequence of economic marginalization and inequality, not vice versa. The article put it best than I could:

The lawsuits conclude that "race neutral" policies -- such as giving greater consideration to a prospective student's socio-economic background and boosting financial aid, scholarships and minority candidate recruitment efforts -- can promote diversity better than affirmative action.

The problem is that this would mean to abbandon the racial struggle narrative in order to embrace and put focus into -gasp- class warfare narrative, something that both left and right wing American political classes would despise and avoid at all costs, even if they hate it for very different reasons.

 

[2real4tv]

Is this the part where you imply that Asian-American students aren't well-rounded or something?

Sorry, not trying to be snarky, but as an Asian-American student, that is one of the top stereotypes I hear.

ASIANS ARE ONLY GOOD AT STUDYING LOLOLOL.



lol @ the "well-rounded." Do you mean, racially diverse? Or do you mean something else?

Here you go.

Also here:

Asian-Americans make up 5% of the entire US population.

Even if every single one of us applied, which for the record, I didn't even bother, it would still be pretty unbelievable and unlikely that there's "more" of us applying.

The ratio between black males to females physicians compared to other races is interesting. Us black males need to step it up.

 

[keuja]

In the western world, AA based on race is probably unique to US. Can't think of any countries in Europe where this would be legal. Quotas based on socio economics exist but never on ethnic origins.

 

[onken]

Is this minority student the only one that you exceeded academics wise? Why are you ignoring the shitty legacy student who got in? Or the crew/lacross recruits who got in? Or the numerous other people who you were more qualified than, but who got in for other reasons? This is why targeting only AA is laughable. People get in for a ton of other reasons, but when a minority gets in, OUTRAGE.

But I see you address that with your last statement. The problem with that, as has been stated numerous times in this thread is that, a merit based admission process would still disproportionately screw over minority students

Though I agree that AA is still needed, bolded is a dumb strawman that needs to die. No-one here is advocating the end of AA but continuing other dumb shit like legacy entries.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

In the western world, AA based on race is probably unique to US. Can't think of any countries in Europe where this would be legal. Quotas based on socio economics exist but never on ethnic origins.

America was born holding the International Racism Association title belt

 

[Lime]

In the western world, AA based on race is probably unique to US. Can't think of any countries in Europe where this would be legal. Quotas based on socio economics exist but never on ethnic origins.

Plenty of instances in European countries where AA have been invoked. A simple Wikipedia search would tell you as much.

E.g. in the EU research projects I've worked on, clauses and criteria on ethnic & gender diversity have had to be fulfilled, explained, or justified, especially in research applications.

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

Though I agree that AA is still needed, bolded is a dumb strawman that needs to die. No-one here is advocating the end of AA but continuing other dumb shit like legacy entries.

Well you're free to link to others detailing similar lawsuits for those other practices if you can...because there have been multiple high profile cases concerning AA yet I can't think of any concerning other admissions practices, practices that predate AA by probably almost a century considering how old the Ivy League schools are

 

[Kill3r7]

Though I agree that AA is still needed, bolded is a dumb strawman that needs to die. No-one here is advocating the end of AA but continuing other dumb shit like legacy entries.

Legacy and athlete admissions are hard to stop as schools can show a clear interest in wanting to promote athletics (lots of large donations from former alumni) and typically legacies have the benefit of lifelong donations by their families to the University. It really comes down to money (ie donations). Some Universities, such as MIT, do not do legacy but even so a legacy application is usually given a "full read".

 

[Hasphat'sAnts]

so if you had been rejected from your school because of this "diversity" quota, how would you have felt? And that you had to be relegated to a 2nd/3rd tier school? Even after all your studying?

You appear to be more of "I gots mine so now I can actually not care about the rest"

This will probably come across as condescending (actually it definitely will be), but I don't think you really have much to complain about if your socioeconomic background afforded you the opportunity to apply to most top 15 colleges, and you didn't get in to any one of them.

I was rejected from my first, second, and third choice colleges, but the fact I was able to get into ones that are in the same ballpark on the selectiveness scale means I was a strong enough candidate for most, if not all of the ones I applied to, but just wasn't exceptional enough to guarantee making the cut.

Harvard rejects thousands upon thousands of valedictorians a year. It's a huge stretch and rather insulting for me to say, "well if only I were black, I would've made it there."

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

Though I agree that AA is still needed, bolded is a dumb strawman that needs to die. No-one here is advocating the end of AA but continuing other dumb shit like legacy entries.

Uh huh. You must not be familiar with AA at all. Strawman lol.

"... They rally behind Jennifer Gratz as the supposed victim of reverse discrimination because the year she was rejected there were about 85 students of color who got into [The University of] Michigan despite having lower scores and lower grades ... but they say nothing about the 1400 white students, let me repeat, 1400 white students with lower scores and lower grades than Jennifer Gratz who got in. You see, less qualified white people are no problem, but less qualified people of color ... my goodness ... we can't have that.

They say nothing about the study from 6 weeks ago which found that for every one student of color that receives any benefit from affirmative action in college there are at least two whites, for every person of color, two whites who also don't meet the requirements but got in because daddy wrote a check or mama made a phone call or someone pulled some strings and got them in -- But affirmative action for rich white people is never a problem ..."

The ratio between black males to females physicians compared to other races is interesting. Us black males need to step it up.

Those figures are 2004. These are a tiny bit more recent. I'm curious to see what the numbers are for 2013-14

Three out of four physicians identified themselves as white, non-Hispanic, while 3.8 percent were black, non-Hispanic, 5.3 percent were Hispanic, and 17.2 percent were Asian or other races. However, among physicians under age 40, about two-thirds were white and 33 percent were minority—black (4%), Hispanic (5.4%), and Asian or other race (24%) (findings not shown).

 

[Cagey]

I'm Asian. I was lucky enough to get accepted to a pretty prestigious university. And I say unequivocally that White/Asian/South Asian are over-represented at the top colleges. All of them brilliant, but when everybody comes from the same background, there's very little room for diversity of thought. Something an institute of higher learning is supposed to foster.

A nebulous, intangible, undefined, impossible to define concept. "People that look different physically" as a proxy for increasing the purported "diversity of thought" is a superficial, nonsensical legal fiction drummed up as some paramount argument for continuing affirmative action. It's the equivalent of the "student athlete" justification for not paying college sports athletes: it's true because it must be, because if it's not, the house of cards collapses.

Intelligent men devised this fiction and sold it to other intelligent men (on the SCOTUS at the time of Bakke) as a moralist side-step on the formalist legal arguments that otherwise threatened affirmative action.

Here, the "house of cards" is the problem of formalist legal arguments that would prohibit any sort of contemplation of a person's race, ethnicity, national origin or other classification that arises to "protected class". People who understand the necessity of affirmative action but understand the legal troubles of outright saying "we need to favor black people in college admissions, even slightly, because of a million reasons owing to the historical vestiges of slavery, Jim Crow, institutional racism, etc." successfully couch their argument in the "diversity is a goal of college" language. The argument in favor of AA is right morally, but it's troublesome in a legal formalist sense. Thus, change the characterization.

"Diversity of thought" as the mission of colleges, though, is a totally meaningless fucking concept.

EDIT: "Diversity on campus" plays so well for colleges because they get to imagine themselves as the curator-demigods of a mini-ecosystem, where the students are the plants and animals, and they get to pluck and stem and plant different varietals and introduce some "exotic" species (we have one kid from Idaho!) and watch them intermingle and interact, all in the name of elevating the lives of all involved. For those who fully buy into the mission, it's self-congratulating masturbatory god-complex bullshit. For the rest, it's a necessary justification for a badly needed program to help, in whatever big or small way possible, alleviate the problems facing poor minorities in America.

I should state, at the end, that I'm not saying diversity on campus is no better/worse than a homogenous campus. It's better. It's importance, however, is overblown to holy hell because it just sounds so good.

 

[Kill3r7]

A nebulous, intangible, undefined, impossible to define concept. "People that look different physically" as a proxy for increasing the purported "diversity of thought" is a superficial, nonsensical legal fiction drummed up as some paramount argument for continuing affirmative action. It's the equivalent of the "student athlete" justification for not paying college sports athletes: it's true because it must be, because if it's not, the house of cards collapses.

Intelligent men devised this fiction and sold it to other intelligent men (on the SCOTUS at the time of Bakke) as a moralist side-step on the formalist legal arguments that otherwise threatened affirmative action.

Here, the "house of cards" is the problem of formalist legal arguments that would prohibit any sort of contemplation of a person's race, ethnicity, national origin or other classification that arises to "protected class". People who understand the necessity of affirmative action but understand the legal troubles of outright saying "we need to favor black people in college admissions, even slightly, because of a million reasons owing to the historical vestiges of slavery, Jim Crow, institutional racism, etc." successfully couch their argument in the "diversity is a goal of college" language. The argument in favor of AA is right morally, but it's troublesome in a legal formalist sense. Thus, change the characterization.

"Diversity of thought" as the mission of colleges, though, is a totally meaningless fucking concept.

No it's not. Folks from different backgrounds and walks of life bring new ideas and experiences to class discussions which everyone benefits from. Diversity of ideas in the work force, education and life in general is a positive thing.

 

[Valhelm]

No it's not. Folks from different backgrounds and walks of life bring new ideas and experiences to class discussions which everyone benefits from. Diversity of ideas in the work force, education and life in general is a positive thing.

Yep. Diversity is not just about filling a quota to look progressive.

 

[Hasphat'sAnts]

I should state, at the end, that I'm not saying diversity on campus is no better/worse than a homogenous campus. It's better. It's importance, however, is overblown to holy hell because it just sounds so good.

Have you ever sat in a class room full of would-be Wall Street bankers and MBB consultants?

Diversity of thought is not overblown to holy hell because it is fundamental to the way elite universities educate their students. When the student to faculty ratio is less than 10, there has to be dialogue, there has to be an exchange.