Race in college admissions is back in front of the Supreme Court Oral Argument on Oct. 31 (Monday)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the Asian parents in this thread, at the end of the day, all your child's hard and admirable work to get into Harvard will be for nought when your child graduates and experiences the cold reality that anti-Asian racism will always trump that Harvard degree. The same white people who are clamouring to dismantle AA and are touting "meritocracy" will also be the ones promoting unqualified white males and females above your over-qualified Asian child. Don't fool yourself into thinking that meritocracy exists in this country. You too will be cast aside when you've served your purpose as tools of conservative white men. The SFAA case is not for you, is for white men.

Uh yes, thats why asians have the highest average incomes of any race. Higher than whites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the Asian parents in this thread, at the end of the day, all your child's hard and admirable work to get into Harvard will be for nought when your child graduates and experiences the cold reality that anti-Asian racism will always trump that Harvard degree. The same white people who are clamouring to dismantle AA and are touting "meritocracy" will also be the ones promoting unqualified white males and females above your over-qualified Asian child. Don't fool yourself into thinking that meritocracy exists in this country. You too will be cast aside when you've served your purpose as tools of conservative white men. The SFAA case is not for you, is for white men.

Thanks for your very condescending post! I can think for myself, thanks!!

- Asian Harvard alum who has been in the workforce for 20 yrs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the Asian parents in this thread, at the end of the day, all your child's hard and admirable work to get into Harvard will be for nought when your child graduates and experiences the cold reality that anti-Asian racism will always trump that Harvard degree. The same white people who are clamouring to dismantle AA and are touting "meritocracy" will also be the ones promoting unqualified white males and females above your over-qualified Asian child. Don't fool yourself into thinking that meritocracy exists in this country. You too will be cast aside when you've served your purpose as tools of conservative white men. The SFAA case is not for you, is for white men.

+1000

Voting rights is the next SFFA target.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the Asian parents in this thread, at the end of the day, all your child's hard and admirable work to get into Harvard will be for nought when your child graduates and experiences the cold reality that anti-Asian racism will always trump that Harvard degree. The same white people who are clamouring to dismantle AA and are touting "meritocracy" will also be the ones promoting unqualified white males and females above your over-qualified Asian child. Don't fool yourself into thinking that meritocracy exists in this country. You too will be cast aside when you've served your purpose as tools of conservative white men. The SFAA case is not for you, is for white men.

Uh yes, thats why asians have the highest average incomes of any race. Higher than whites.

So no anti-Asian racism then? Good to know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the Asian parents in this thread, at the end of the day, all your child's hard and admirable work to get into Harvard will be for nought when your child graduates and experiences the cold reality that anti-Asian racism will always trump that Harvard degree. The same white people who are clamouring to dismantle AA and are touting "meritocracy" will also be the ones promoting unqualified white males and females above your over-qualified Asian child. Don't fool yourself into thinking that meritocracy exists in this country. You too will be cast aside when you've served your purpose as tools of conservative white men. The SFAA case is not for you, is for white men.

+1000

Voting rights is the next SFFA target.

The same guy, Blum, who brought the SFAA lawsuit has spent years doing his very best to gut the Voting Rights Act. Good luck out there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the Asian parents in this thread, at the end of the day, all your child's hard and admirable work to get into Harvard will be for nought when your child graduates and experiences the cold reality that anti-Asian racism will always trump that Harvard degree. The same white people who are clamouring to dismantle AA and are touting "meritocracy" will also be the ones promoting unqualified white males and females above your over-qualified Asian child. Don't fool yourself into thinking that meritocracy exists in this country. You too will be cast aside when you've served your purpose as tools of conservative white men. The SFAA case is not for you, is for white men.

Uh yes, thats why asians have the highest average incomes of any race. Higher than whites.

So no anti-Asian racism then? Good to know.

All kinds of "anti-name your whatever" in the world. Get over it and live your life. The world is a tough place and your best advocate is you and your family. No one else gives a shit about you, get used to it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the Asian parents in this thread, at the end of the day, all your child's hard and admirable work to get into Harvard will be for nought when your child graduates and experiences the cold reality that anti-Asian racism will always trump that Harvard degree. The same white people who are clamouring to dismantle AA and are touting "meritocracy" will also be the ones promoting unqualified white males and females above your over-qualified Asian child. Don't fool yourself into thinking that meritocracy exists in this country. You too will be cast aside when you've served your purpose as tools of conservative white men. The SFAA case is not for you, is for white men.

Uh yes, thats why asians have the highest average incomes of any race. Higher than whites.

So no anti-Asian racism then? Good to know.

All kinds of "anti-name your whatever" in the world. Get over it and live your life. The world is a tough place and your best advocate is you and your family. No one else gives a shit about you, get used to it.

Sure lots of anti asian racism but only one that was legally sanctioned by the government and openly practiced at all the top universities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the Asian parents in this thread, at the end of the day, all your child's hard and admirable work to get into Harvard will be for nought when your child graduates and experiences the cold reality that anti-Asian racism will always trump that Harvard degree. The same white people who are clamouring to dismantle AA and are touting "meritocracy" will also be the ones promoting unqualified white males and females above your over-qualified Asian child. Don't fool yourself into thinking that meritocracy exists in this country. You too will be cast aside when you've served your purpose as tools of conservative white men. The SFAA case is not for you, is for white men.

Uh yes, thats why asians have the highest average incomes of any race. Higher than whites.

So no anti-Asian racism then? Good to know.

All kinds of "anti-name your whatever" in the world. Get over it and live your life. The world is a tough place and your best advocate is you and your family. No one else gives a shit about you, get used to it.

Sure lots of anti asian racism but only one that was legally sanctioned by the government and openly practiced at all the top universities.

LOL

You're funny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the Asian parents in this thread, at the end of the day, all your child's hard and admirable work to get into Harvard will be for nought when your child graduates and experiences the cold reality that anti-Asian racism will always trump that Harvard degree. The same white people who are clamouring to dismantle AA and are touting "meritocracy" will also be the ones promoting unqualified white males and females above your over-qualified Asian child. Don't fool yourself into thinking that meritocracy exists in this country. You too will be cast aside when you've served your purpose as tools of conservative white men. The SFAA case is not for you, is for white men.

+1000

Voting rights is the next SFFA target.

The same guy, Blum, who brought the SFAA lawsuit has spent years doing his very best to gut the Voting Rights Act. Good luck out there.

Thank goodness I can distinguish between these two things in my own brain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:wow this is crazy, you can be the 4th lowest decile aa and still be way above asians. crazy no wonder asians feel discriminated

Standardized tests are culturally biased and we're originally implemented by a racist.

If the index was normalized for tests, this alleged disparity ( SFFA is the source of this massaged data) would be much lower.

Anyways, the SAT / ACT impact will continue to diminish over time.

What are Asians and Whites in common but so much different for Blacks? culturally

What biase are we talking about?

What?

DP.. apparently, SATs are culturally bias, hence Black people score lower on SATs. But since Asian Americans score higher on SATs that must mean that they have more in common with white people.

That's the argument. And yes, it's laughable and ignorant.

Then what is your reason for AA people scoring lower?

Go ahead, say it out loud. I dare you. You know you think it. Have some courage and show everyone what you really think.

And that, right there, ladies and gents, is why colleges have the current policy.

How would anyone other than the kid know why they score lower?

I'll ask you this: how does an admission office who has never met the student give that student a low "personality" score even as the interviewer gave that student a high personality score.

Go ahead, say it out loud. I dare you. You know you think it. Have some courage and show everyone what you really think.

The argument that black kids don't do as well on SATs compared to Asian kids must mean that the SAT is culturally bias is a dumb argument, as if an Asian American is culturally closer to white America than a black kid whose ancestors have probably lived in the US for many generations.

I have no idea why they score lower. I was not making a claim to know. PP made a claim what they knew it wasn't.

You understand that difference, right?

And we are not talking about "the kid" taking the test, which is an absurd reference. We're talking about races of people and a policy designed by colleges to ensure they can get the students they want to build the class they need. These questions of why are gigantic academic and intellectual ones which we may never solve in our lifetime. However, we can ensure those reasons - whatever they are - don't continue to hurt people and stop colleges from building the class they want.

The "build the class they want" argument is the same argument that white people used way back to implement holistic admissions to keep out the Jews. It's basically social engineering in favor of one side over the other.

No it is not the same argument. In any way. One was designed to exclude a certain type of people, and the other is done to ensure one type of person is not excluded. This is so obvious and the fact that you deny it shows your bias

They both are designed to exclude qualified applicants in order to admit less qualified applicants. One is already illegal and the other will be once this decision is released.

No they are not. One is designed to not exclude certain people. I’ll keep saying it if you keep denying it.

Because you seem to think there are infinite seats. Something designed to include one group is also necessarily designed to exclude anyone who is not a member of that group

No I do not think there are infinite seats at Harvard. But I do think there are more places than students nationwide, because there are.

One is designed to not exclude certain people. Not. Exclude.

That argument goes both ways. Those seats are available to URMs as well.

If there is something inherently valuable about the Harvard seats, then people will have views on who "should" get them.

Except one means there will be nearly no balance across those seats, excluding certain races, and the other will have a balance representative to the population. Tell me which is worse - not which is worse for any individual kid who is unlikely to get in anyway, but worse for the college and worse for the country.

Why do you think anything should be balanced against the racial breakdown of the country? I can’t imagine a more infantile and idiotic thought. Shall we mandate that every NFL team be 7% Asian? Or that 2% of artists performing at MSG be jewish? Do you event relaid show stupid you are?

You're too logical! I'd like to see the response to this but of course it won't happen. Victim mentality folks only want to choose the arguments benefitting their position.

Stop it, victim mentality is all the rage. We must all bow to the alter of race and atone for our privilege it's the new law, any other opinion is well...we know, it's the big R word, how dare you have an opposite opinion.

We get it. You are perfectly fine with the effects of systemic racism.

LOL, I'm black, successful and self made. You proved my point and brought out the old "R" word just as predicted. Funny thing is I bet you are white as a ball of cotton, thanks for being a Soldier for my people.

Good thing you are “atoning for your privilege”.

I earned my privilege with hard work, how bout you cotton?

I was given many advantages because of my race and SES. My grandfather went from a poor farming kid to professional after WWII with his GI Bill college degree. He went from shack to middle class neighborhood. All of his kids went to decent colleges and one Ivy. I grew up UMC and had it pretty easy. Parents each received modest inheritance. My well-educated mom taught me to read at an early age and I entered school reading at four. Went to great schools, funded by taxes of expensive homes in our 95% white township. Had multiple summer academic opportunities. I didn’t have to get a job, but I did have a cool internship via family friend. Spoke and wrote like an UMC kid. Great essays on my applications. Little bit of SAT prep. Went to top college & grad school. No loans. Had no problem getting interviews/offers. Etc.

Yes, I’m really freaking privileged. So are my kids. I don’t think I was entitled to attend those schools based on some innate abilities; I was just lucky. I’m ok if my kids don’t get all of the same opportunities. They are already ahead, they will be fine. I would love to see kids who weren’t so lucky get some of those golden opportunities that come so easily to others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the Asian parents in this thread, at the end of the day, all your child's hard and admirable work to get into Harvard will be for nought when your child graduates and experiences the cold reality that anti-Asian racism will always trump that Harvard degree. The same white people who are clamouring to dismantle AA and are touting "meritocracy" will also be the ones promoting unqualified white males and females above your over-qualified Asian child. Don't fool yourself into thinking that meritocracy exists in this country. You too will be cast aside when you've served your purpose as tools of conservative white men. The SFAA case is not for you, is for white men.

Uh yes, thats why asians have the highest average incomes of any race. Higher than whites.

The highest income levels (and more significantly the wealthiest people rather than just those with high incomes) and public and private decision makers in the US are still heavily white though. Median income statistics don't come close to telling the story about "the American system."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WTF slavery has to do with admission to colleges for kids born in the 21st century.

I know you wouldn't know. Enjoy your ignorance.

Yea right some kids born in 2005 should be sacrificed for your kids because of slavery.

Funny how you think it’s the black kids stealing Asian kids’ seats. And not the numerous legacies, athletes, etc. Very telling.

And it’s basically a lottery for a bunch of quailed applicants, including POC. No one is entitled to a seat.

I don't know what the legacy admit rates are for the different races but since the 80's thanks to aa there a have been at least proportional representation of all the races. Sure whites may have advantage if you are looking for multigenerational legacies but if you are looking at the parents there were adequate numbers of asians, blacks and hispanics at all the ivies by the 80's.

How do you define “adequate”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:wow this is crazy, you can be the 4th lowest decile aa and still be way above asians. crazy no wonder asians feel discriminated

Standardized tests are culturally biased and we're originally implemented by a racist.

If the index was normalized for tests, this alleged disparity ( SFFA is the source of this massaged data) would be much lower.

Anyways, the SAT / ACT impact will continue to diminish over time.

What are Asians and Whites in common but so much different for Blacks? culturally

What biase are we talking about?

What?

DP.. apparently, SATs are culturally bias, hence Black people score lower on SATs. But since Asian Americans score higher on SATs that must mean that they have more in common with white people.

That's the argument. And yes, it's laughable and ignorant.

Then what is your reason for AA people scoring lower?

Go ahead, say it out loud. I dare you. You know you think it. Have some courage and show everyone what you really think.

And that, right there, ladies and gents, is why colleges have the current policy.

How would anyone other than the kid know why they score lower?

I'll ask you this: how does an admission office who has never met the student give that student a low "personality" score even as the interviewer gave that student a high personality score.

Go ahead, say it out loud. I dare you. You know you think it. Have some courage and show everyone what you really think.

The argument that black kids don't do as well on SATs compared to Asian kids must mean that the SAT is culturally bias is a dumb argument, as if an Asian American is culturally closer to white America than a black kid whose ancestors have probably lived in the US for many generations.

I have no idea why they score lower. I was not making a claim to know. PP made a claim what they knew it wasn't.

You understand that difference, right?

And we are not talking about "the kid" taking the test, which is an absurd reference. We're talking about races of people and a policy designed by colleges to ensure they can get the students they want to build the class they need. These questions of why are gigantic academic and intellectual ones which we may never solve in our lifetime. However, we can ensure those reasons - whatever they are - don't continue to hurt people and stop colleges from building the class they want.

The "build the class they want" argument is the same argument that white people used way back to implement holistic admissions to keep out the Jews. It's basically social engineering in favor of one side over the other.

No it is not the same argument. In any way. One was designed to exclude a certain type of people, and the other is done to ensure one type of person is not excluded. This is so obvious and the fact that you deny it shows your bias

They both are designed to exclude qualified applicants in order to admit less qualified applicants. One is already illegal and the other will be once this decision is released.

No they are not. One is designed to not exclude certain people. I’ll keep saying it if you keep denying it.

Because you seem to think there are infinite seats. Something designed to include one group is also necessarily designed to exclude anyone who is not a member of that group

No I do not think there are infinite seats at Harvard. But I do think there are more places than students nationwide, because there are.

One is designed to not exclude certain people. Not. Exclude.

That argument goes both ways. Those seats are available to URMs as well.

If there is something inherently valuable about the Harvard seats, then people will have views on who "should" get them.

Except one means there will be nearly no balance across those seats, excluding certain races, and the other will have a balance representative to the population. Tell me which is worse - not which is worse for any individual kid who is unlikely to get in anyway, but worse for the college and worse for the country.

Why do you think anything should be balanced against the racial breakdown of the country? I can’t imagine a more infantile and idiotic thought. Shall we mandate that every NFL team be 7% Asian? Or that 2% of artists performing at MSG be jewish? Do you event relaid show stupid you are?

The NFL! Another example as stupid as the NBA example. And for the record, YES, the NFL with its 3600 employees should not show racial bias in hiring, and should be able to demonstrate that statistically.

But we are talking about colleges who should be allowed to - NOT REQUIRED TO - use criteria they want to get the students they want to build the class they want as long as they do not break the law.

You shouldn't resort to calling people stupid regarding topics you don't understand and have made no effort to. Makes you look... you know...

Racism is breaking law so Supreme Court will rightfully judge that.

It's not racism because it is not specifically biased against a specific race. It's the opposite. It ensures certain races are not excluded from the class.

It's favoritism to certain race. That's racism.

It’s a boost to a few underrepresented groups. First gen applicants also a boost.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:wow this is crazy, you can be the 4th lowest decile aa and still be way above asians. crazy no wonder asians feel discriminated

Standardized tests are culturally biased and we're originally implemented by a racist.

If the index was normalized for tests, this alleged disparity ( SFFA is the source of this massaged data) would be much lower.

Anyways, the SAT / ACT impact will continue to diminish over time.

What are Asians and Whites in common but so much different for Blacks? culturally

What biase are we talking about?

What?

DP.. apparently, SATs are culturally bias, hence Black people score lower on SATs. But since Asian Americans score higher on SATs that must mean that they have more in common with white people.

That's the argument. And yes, it's laughable and ignorant.

Then what is your reason for AA people scoring lower?

Go ahead, say it out loud. I dare you. You know you think it. Have some courage and show everyone what you really think.

And that, right there, ladies and gents, is why colleges have the current policy.

How would anyone other than the kid know why they score lower?

I'll ask you this: how does an admission office who has never met the student give that student a low "personality" score even as the interviewer gave that student a high personality score.

Go ahead, say it out loud. I dare you. You know you think it. Have some courage and show everyone what you really think.

The argument that black kids don't do as well on SATs compared to Asian kids must mean that the SAT is culturally bias is a dumb argument, as if an Asian American is culturally closer to white America than a black kid whose ancestors have probably lived in the US for many generations.

I have no idea why they score lower. I was not making a claim to know. PP made a claim what they knew it wasn't.

You understand that difference, right?

And we are not talking about "the kid" taking the test, which is an absurd reference. We're talking about races of people and a policy designed by colleges to ensure they can get the students they want to build the class they need. These questions of why are gigantic academic and intellectual ones which we may never solve in our lifetime. However, we can ensure those reasons - whatever they are - don't continue to hurt people and stop colleges from building the class they want.

The "build the class they want" argument is the same argument that white people used way back to implement holistic admissions to keep out the Jews. It's basically social engineering in favor of one side over the other.

No it is not the same argument. In any way. One was designed to exclude a certain type of people, and the other is done to ensure one type of person is not excluded. This is so obvious and the fact that you deny it shows your bias

They both are designed to exclude qualified applicants in order to admit less qualified applicants. One is already illegal and the other will be once this decision is released.

No they are not. One is designed to not exclude certain people. I’ll keep saying it if you keep denying it.

Because you seem to think there are infinite seats. Something designed to include one group is also necessarily designed to exclude anyone who is not a member of that group

No I do not think there are infinite seats at Harvard. But I do think there are more places than students nationwide, because there are.

One is designed to not exclude certain people. Not. Exclude.

That argument goes both ways. Those seats are available to URMs as well.

If there is something inherently valuable about the Harvard seats, then people will have views on who "should" get them.

Except one means there will be nearly no balance across those seats, excluding certain races, and the other will have a balance representative to the population. Tell me which is worse - not which is worse for any individual kid who is unlikely to get in anyway, but worse for the college and worse for the country.

Why do you think anything should be balanced against the racial breakdown of the country? I can’t imagine a more infantile and idiotic thought. Shall we mandate that every NFL team be 7% Asian? Or that 2% of artists performing at MSG be jewish? Do you event relaid show stupid you are?

You're too logical! I'd like to see the response to this but of course it won't happen. Victim mentality folks only want to choose the arguments benefitting their position.

Stop it, victim mentality is all the rage. We must all bow to the alter of race and atone for our privilege it's the new law, any other opinion is well...we know, it's the big R word, how dare you have an opposite opinion.

We get it. You are perfectly fine with the effects of systemic racism.

LOL, I'm black, successful and self made. You proved my point and brought out the old "R" word just as predicted. Funny thing is I bet you are white as a ball of cotton, thanks for being a Soldier for my people.

Good thing you are “atoning for your privilege”.

I earned my privilege with hard work, how bout you cotton?

I was given many advantages because of my race and SES. My grandfather went from a poor farming kid to professional after WWII with his GI Bill college degree. He went from shack to middle class neighborhood. All of his kids went to decent colleges and one Ivy. I grew up UMC and had it pretty easy. Parents each received modest inheritance. My well-educated mom taught me to read at an early age and I entered school reading at four. Went to great schools, funded by taxes of expensive homes in our 95% white township. Had multiple summer academic opportunities. I didn’t have to get a job, but I did have a cool internship via family friend. Spoke and wrote like an UMC kid. Great essays on my applications. Little bit of SAT prep. Went to top college & grad school. No loans. Had no problem getting interviews/offers. Etc.

Yes, I’m really freaking privileged. So are my kids. I don’t think I was entitled to attend those schools based on some innate abilities; I was just lucky. I’m ok if my kids don’t get all of the same opportunities. They are already ahead, they will be fine. I would love to see kids who weren’t so lucky get some of those golden opportunities that come so easily to others.

Cool story but not germane to this conversation, it's comical you took the time to write all that cotton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the Asian parents in this thread, at the end of the day, all your child's hard and admirable work to get into Harvard will be for nought when your child graduates and experiences the cold reality that anti-Asian racism will always trump that Harvard degree. The same white people who are clamouring to dismantle AA and are touting "meritocracy" will also be the ones promoting unqualified white males and females above your over-qualified Asian child. Don't fool yourself into thinking that meritocracy exists in this country. You too will be cast aside when you've served your purpose as tools of conservative white men. The SFAA case is not for you, is for white men.

Asians are already experiencing enough discrimination.
You certainly don't need to warn them about it. The world will never be perfect. It can only progress. I'm not going to be a crybaby and ask for entitlement but keep asking for fair and equal chances.