Admitting you are Asian (college apps)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My D is Asian. She’s doing fine at an Ivy living her dream.

your dream

Now we know your kids didn’t make it, it’s my kid’s dream.

My kids are in kindergarten. Is it when you started to tell them what their dream is?

If your kids’ dream isn’t your dream also, you are starting off on the wrong foot already. Sounds like you got your kids just by monkeying around.

Your own parents must be disappointed with their own dream dashed.

This is not how healthy American parents think. Just so you know. It is a cultural perspective that is not shared widely in the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My D is Asian. She’s doing fine at an Ivy living her dream.

your dream

Now we know your kids didn’t make it, it’s my kid’s dream.

My kids are in kindergarten. Is it when you started to tell them what their dream is?

If your kids’ dream isn’t your dream also, you are starting off on the wrong foot already. Sounds like you got your kids just by monkeying around.

Your own parents must be disappointed with their own dream dashed.

This is not how healthy American parents think. Just so you know. It is a cultural perspective that is not shared widely in the US.

Culturally different /= unhealthy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My D is Asian. She’s doing fine at an Ivy living her dream.

your dream

Now we know your kids didn’t make it, it’s my kid’s dream.

My kids are in kindergarten. Is it when you started to tell them what their dream is?

If your kids’ dream isn’t your dream also, you are starting off on the wrong foot already. Sounds like you got your kids just by monkeying around.

Your own parents must be disappointed with their own dream dashed.

This is not how healthy American parents think. Just so you know. It is a cultural perspective that is not shared widely in the US.

Ok, now we know you didn’t make it to Ivy. Move along.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s so sad that an Asian kid feels the need to hide identity because of discrimination. I’m white and I’m very empathetic to this. I’m sorry OP.

There is nothing inherently wrong with discrimination. When you choose a salad as your side, you discriminate against the French fries. That isn’t the issue.

I have no problem with colleges that desire a diverse student body effectively putting a cap on how many students of a similar background they will accept.

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Just about every job I have had operated this way. They literally have diversity committees to ensure a diverse workforce. So, yes, if you have two equally qualified candidates you favor the one that brings a perspective that is not well represented in your workplace. This is not some radical extreme that you dreamed up to make your point.

I think that people should stop trying to educate you because...your biases are so deeply ingrained.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

+1
For admissions purposes, many non-US universities rely on difficult exams focused on the topic you wish to study. The SAT and ACT ain't that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My D is Asian. She’s doing fine at an Ivy living her dream.

your dream

Now we know your kids didn’t make it, it’s my kid’s dream.

My kids are in kindergarten. Is it when you started to tell them what their dream is?

If your kids’ dream isn’t your dream also, you are starting off on the wrong foot already. Sounds like you got your kids just by monkeying around.

Your own parents must be disappointed with their own dream dashed.

This is not how healthy American parents think. Just so you know. It is a cultural perspective that is not shared widely in the US.

Just so you know, not all Americans think alike. Some think like you, which is fine - but this country bigger than you imagine. Not everyone has to think like you to be considered “healthy,” or whatever.


Culturally different /= unhealthy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My D is Asian. She’s doing fine at an Ivy living her dream.

your dream

Now we know your kids didn’t make it, it’s my kid’s dream.

My kids are in kindergarten. Is it when you started to tell them what their dream is?

If your kids’ dream isn’t your dream also, you are starting off on the wrong foot already. Sounds like you got your kids just by monkeying around.

Your own parents must be disappointed with their own dream dashed.

This is not how healthy American parents think. Just so you know. It is a cultural perspective that is not shared widely in the US.

Culturally different /= unhealthy

Just so you know, not all Americans think alike. Some think like you, which is fine - but this country bigger than you imagine. Not everyone has to think like you to be considered “healthy,” or whatever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

Lol, my kid’s doing just fine, thank you.

[Anonymous]

How about this: "Among equally qualified candidate, preference should be given to those belonging to underrepresented groups." There's only a "quota" insofar as you get a bonus to your application until the numbers of your group are no longer underrepresented. In current conditions, Asian and Jewish applicants wouldn't get a boost but Hispanic and Black candidates would.

Does this really seem crazy to you?

But the real questions are not among candidates who are in all ways equal. The question is how much of a boost slightly less qualified (but still capable) candidates who are URM should get. And if, once a group is "overrepresented", their applications should be given a penalty.

I'd say no. So Asians should compete equally against whites and other not-underrepresented groups, but would be at a slight competitive disadvantage with underrepresented groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

It’s a fact that URMs with H degrees don’t have the same life outcome as whites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

To be more concrete, let’s say 1 is a Jew and 1 Indian American (or Black, or Hispanic...) Because 2% Jews are are already over represented at Harvard, you would pick against the Jewish student.

If all else is equal, then yes, you should choose the one from the underrepresented group. Was this question supposed to be some kind of a gotcha? -a Jewish person

Who said “all else being equal?” The H lawsuit presupposes Asians with superior stats.

Stats aren’t everything. That’s the thing. And where the Tiger mommies go wrong.

Stats aren’t everything cuz it’s “holistic.” That’s where H goes wrong. All their URM grads are holding less than perfect sheepskin cuz stats aren’t everything. It’s “holistic” where the society at large evaluate their URM graduates who can’t perform as well as UCLA or UC Berkeley grads.

Well, your behavior in this thread and the demonstration of the poor way in which you think is a big clue why your child would be passed over, assuming your child exhibits similar characteristics and tendencies. You, simply, are not elite college material. Your child probably is not, either.

Lol, my kid’s doing just fine, thank you.

I don’t believe you. Your seething resentment and raging inferiority complex suggests otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My D is Asian. She’s doing fine at an Ivy living her dream.

your dream

Now we know your kids didn’t make it, it’s my kid’s dream.

My kids are in kindergarten. Is it when you started to tell them what their dream is?

If your kids’ dream isn’t your dream also, you are starting off on the wrong foot already. Sounds like you got your kids just by monkeying around.

Your own parents must be disappointed with their own dream dashed.

This is not how healthy American parents think. Just so you know. It is a cultural perspective that is not shared widely in the US.

Culturally different /= unhealthy

Some things are psychologically unhealthy for developing humans, yet they are still practiced in other cultures (such as corporal punishment ). It's a fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My D is Asian. She’s doing fine at an Ivy living her dream.

your dream

Now we know your kids didn’t make it, it’s my kid’s dream.

My kids are in kindergarten. Is it when you started to tell them what their dream is?

If your kids’ dream isn’t your dream also, you are starting off on the wrong foot already. Sounds like you got your kids just by monkeying around.

Your own parents must be disappointed with their own dream dashed.

This is not how healthy American parents think. Just so you know. It is a cultural perspective that is not shared widely in the US.

Culturally different /= unhealthy

Just so you know, not all Americans think alike. Some think like you, which is fine - but this country bigger than you imagine. Not everyone has to think like you to be considered “healthy,” or whatever.

Right, the poster said "not widely practiced." Some people abuse their children. They might still be Americans, but their parental practices are frowned upon.

I am exhausted trying to get through to you. All of my sympathies go to your poor poor children.