Asian American student with 1590 SAT score blames affirmative action for rejections from 6 colleges

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m so sick and tired of Asians complaining about unfairness in America. When I look around my UMC neighborhood, Asians seem to be doing quite well. I wonder how well American students would fare in Asian schools or American workers in Asian corporations. Something tells me that it would be FAR worse for Americans in Asia than it is for Asians in America.

Americans are treated very well in Asians countries.

I’m a white American and experienced overt racism in Asia.

White Americans are usually treated very well in Asian countries.
Maybe you didn't respect the local culture or something.

Asian countries like Korea/Japan/China tend to discriminate South East Asians.

I’m the person you were asking if I respected the culture. Very much so as learning the culture was the reason I went on the trip. In one instance, we merely went into a restaurant and were told it was “not for people like us” and we had to leave.

Discrimination in South Korea/Japan/India/wherever else in the world has no relevance here at all. The issue being discussed is about Americans being discriminated in America.

Agreed but the quote in in response to a poster claiming that Americans would not be discriminated against in Asia. It’s responsive to the post but the whole line of discussion is irrelevant to the issue (like so much on DCUM).

It is kinda relevant. Though American treatment abroad doesn’t have anything to do with how American laws treat people in America, it does raise a cultural issue. Namely, immigrants to America expect to be treated better here than anywhere else in the world. Sometimes, this includes how they would be treated in their own country. As a point of personal reflection, it’s healthy for such people to consider the entitlement of their request. Literally, they are asking for their new country to treat them better than their country would treat them or their country would treat Americans. Pretty incredible when you think about it.

Ok. this is making me insane. this whole discussion is not about immigrants. About about the people of Asian extraction who are AMERICANS. US citizens. They are simply asking to not be discriminated against based on their race. NOT THEIR CITIZENSHIP.


I get it. Asian Americans will always be "perpetual foreigners" because of the way that they look... even those who have been here for 3 or 4 generations, until they start intermarrying and their children look less Asian. But they are simply. not. immigrants.

The vast majority of asian americans suing colleges for not getting in have Asian born and raised parents.

Even if true, that does but make their kids immigrants!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He wanted to major in computer science. It is hard to get into an Ivy but even harder if you want to major in computer science.

He was rejected from UC Berkeley, which hasn't used race in admission for over 25 years. Cal Tech also which tends to admit more based on GPA and test scores and not on diversity.

He doesn't come across very well in the interview I watched. He spent a lot of time growing up playing golf instead of a participating in a team sport.

Perhaps if he went to a school that was more than 2% black (Florida is 15% black) he would have put more thought into joining the lawsuit.

No one took his spot, chances are he never would have been admitted even if he had applied this year.

Maybe because they are still discriminating this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:eh. my white kid had higher stats than that kid, and he got rejected to all those schools, too, including GA Tech.

There is no dispute: The college admission system is totally rigged against white and Asian applicants.

There are not enough black people and URMs at universities for college admissions to have any real bias against white applicants. The top 20 universities accept less than 10% of applicants and of which less than single digits go to "unqualified black students."

Yes, Asian students are being discriminated by less qualified whites getting in--- not black students. People keep ignoring this. This is why people think this whole thing is racist. Going after the less than 10% of blacks and saying you didn't get in because of them is transparent.

Noone is going after blacks. They are going after the racial discrimination. There was an explicit racial preference for blacks and hispanics, yes. But there was also discrimination against asians, they wanted diversity and there were too many asians so they limited it..

The preference is for diversity, not for or against any one subgroup of humans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most astute observers believe that the SC decision will not ultimately change college admissions much. If the schools overtly disengage from racial proxies, studies show that blacks and Hispanics will lose out to whites and Asians. But, schools are likely to develop more ambiguous criteria that allow them to maintain the status quo or whatever profile they choose.

Yes, if they simply use SES as a proxy, they can easily keep the diversity. And I think most people are fine with SES affirmative action, but not by race.

Why is SES affirmative action okay, but not race?

Because the law does not protect the wealthy from being discriminated against. Not all discrimination is illegal, nor even “bad”. Attractive/tall people get lifelong benefits from those traits, irrespective of whether they are relevant to what they do. Entirely legally. In fact, we all discriminate every day. That’s what preferences are. It’s only when a state actor (or private actor using state resources) discriminates ON THE BASIS of a protected status (eg race, nationality, religion, gender to a lesser extent) that it becomes illegal. But any college is perfectly free and welcome to accept a 1250 SAT/3.5 GPA from a terrible rural or urban HS over a 1500/4.0 from BCC or Langley as long as race per se wasn’t a factor.

Race cannot be a factor, directly or indirectly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He wanted to major in computer science. It is hard to get into an Ivy but even harder if you want to major in computer science.

He was rejected from UC Berkeley, which hasn't used race in admission for over 25 years. Cal Tech also which tends to admit more based on GPA and test scores and not on diversity.

He doesn't come across very well in the interview I watched. He spent a lot of time growing up playing golf instead of a participating in a team sport.

Perhaps if he went to a school that was more than 2% black (Florida is 15% black) he would have put more thought into joining the lawsuit.

No one took his spot, chances are he never would have been admitted even if he had applied this year.

THis 1000%! He was rejected from HIGHLY rejective schools. They all have single digit acceptance rates, in general. He wanted CS major. That is even MORE selective so likely 2-3% acceptance rates.
Hint: It's not about your race. It's about the fact that 97% of those who apply will get rejected from that school with that intended major. And in reality, once you get to 1540+ they don't (and shouldn't ) care what your Score is.
So if you were able to look at who was Not accepted, I'm willing to bet there are plenty of people with 1540+ who were rejected, and some 1580/1590/1600. Perhaps it's the entitled attitude as well that makes them not want him as part of freshman class

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He wanted to major in computer science. It is hard to get into an Ivy but even harder if you want to major in computer science.

He was rejected from UC Berkeley, which hasn't used race in admission for over 25 years. Cal Tech also which tends to admit more based on GPA and test scores and not on diversity.

He doesn't come across very well in the interview I watched. He spent a lot of time growing up playing golf instead of a participating in a team sport.

Perhaps if he went to a school that was more than 2% black (Florida is 15% black) he would have put more thought into joining the lawsuit.

No one took his spot, chances are he never would have been admitted even if he had applied this year.

THis 1000%! He was rejected from HIGHLY rejective schools. They all have single digit acceptance rates, in general. He wanted CS major. That is even MORE selective so likely 2-3% acceptance rates.
Hint: It's not about your race. It's about the fact that 97% of those who apply will get rejected from that school with that intended major. And in reality, once you get to 1540+ they don't (and shouldn't ) care what your Score is.
So if you were able to look at who was Not accepted, I'm willing to bet there are plenty of people with 1540+ who were rejected, and some 1580/1590/1600. Perhaps it's the entitled attitude as well that makes them not want him as part of freshman class

Sorry we have the Supreme Court decision already.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most astute observers believe that the SC decision will not ultimately change college admissions much. If the schools overtly disengage from racial proxies, studies show that blacks and Hispanics will lose out to whites and Asians. But, schools are likely to develop more ambiguous criteria that allow them to maintain the status quo or whatever profile they choose.

Yes, if they simply use SES as a proxy, they can easily keep the diversity. And I think most people are fine with SES affirmative action, but not by race.

Why is SES affirmative action okay, but not race?

Because the law does not protect the wealthy from being discriminated against. Not all discrimination is illegal, nor even “bad”. Attractive/tall people get lifelong benefits from those traits, irrespective of whether they are relevant to what they do. Entirely legally. In fact, we all discriminate every day. That’s what preferences are. It’s only when a state actor (or private actor using state resources) discriminates ON THE BASIS of a protected status (eg race, nationality, religion, gender to a lesser extent) that it becomes illegal. But any college is perfectly free and welcome to accept a 1250 SAT/3.5 GPA from a terrible rural or urban HS over a 1500/4.0 from BCC or Langley as long as race per se wasn’t a factor.

Race cannot be a factor, directly or indirectly.

Things correlated with race can be a factor. The SAT is correlated with race and that can be a factor. Intended major is correlated with race and that can be a factor.

The SFFA position seems to be that factors that tend to increase Asian admission rates are mandatory, while factors that tend to decrease Asian admission rates are illegal. That is not the law.

[Anonymous]

Georgia Tech better than Princeton, Harvard, and Berkeley for STEM. Much ado about nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Georgia Tech better than Princeton, Harvard, and Berkeley for STEM. Much ado about nothing.

Princeton and Berkeley crap on any other university for stem. Georgia tech is great if you’re interested in aerospace engineering, but the most rigorous education and best STEM programs/grads come out of Princeton and berkeley

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Georgia Tech better than Princeton, Harvard, and Berkeley for STEM. Much ado about nothing.

Oh be serious. GT is not even the best school in its state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most astute observers believe that the SC decision will not ultimately change college admissions much. If the schools overtly disengage from racial proxies, studies show that blacks and Hispanics will lose out to whites and Asians. But, schools are likely to develop more ambiguous criteria that allow them to maintain the status quo or whatever profile they choose.

Yes, if they simply use SES as a proxy, they can easily keep the diversity. And I think most people are fine with SES affirmative action, but not by race.

Why is SES affirmative action okay, but not race?

Because the law does not protect the wealthy from being discriminated against. Not all discrimination is illegal, nor even “bad”. Attractive/tall people get lifelong benefits from those traits, irrespective of whether they are relevant to what they do. Entirely legally. In fact, we all discriminate every day. That’s what preferences are. It’s only when a state actor (or private actor using state resources) discriminates ON THE BASIS of a protected status (eg race, nationality, religion, gender to a lesser extent) that it becomes illegal. But any college is perfectly free and welcome to accept a 1250 SAT/3.5 GPA from a terrible rural or urban HS over a 1500/4.0 from BCC or Langley as long as race per se wasn’t a factor.

Race cannot be a factor, directly or indirectly.

Of course it can. You clearly didn't read the Supreme Court's decision carefully.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I’m so sick and tired of Asians complaining about unfairness in America. When I look around my UMC neighborhood, Asians seem to be doing quite well. I wonder how well American students would fare in Asian schools or American workers in Asian corporations. Something tells me that it would be FAR worse for Americans in Asia than it is for Asians in America.

Americans are treated very well in Asians countries.

I’m a white American and experienced overt racism in Asia.

White Americans are usually treated very well in Asian countries.
Maybe you didn't respect the local culture or something.

Asian countries like Korea/Japan/China tend to discriminate South East Asians.

I’m the person you were asking if I respected the culture. Very much so as learning the culture was the reason I went on the trip. In one instance, we merely went into a restaurant and were told it was “not for people like us” and we had to leave.

Discrimination in South Korea/Japan/India/wherever else in the world has no relevance here at all. The issue being discussed is about Americans being discriminated in America.

Agreed but the quote in in response to a poster claiming that Americans would not be discriminated against in Asia. It’s responsive to the post but the whole line of discussion is irrelevant to the issue (like so much on DCUM).

It is kinda relevant. Though American treatment abroad doesn’t have anything to do with how American laws treat people in America, it does raise a cultural issue. Namely, immigrants to America expect to be treated better here than anywhere else in the world. Sometimes, this includes how they would be treated in their own country. As a point of personal reflection, it’s healthy for such people to consider the entitlement of their request. Literally, they are asking for their new country to treat them better than their country would treat them or their country would treat Americans. Pretty incredible when you think about it.

Ok. this is making me insane. this whole discussion is not about immigrants. About about the people of Asian extraction who are AMERICANS. US citizens. They are simply asking to not be discriminated against based on their race. NOT THEIR CITIZENSHIP.


I get it. Asian Americans will always be "perpetual foreigners" because of the way that they look... even those who have been here for 3 or 4 generations, until they start intermarrying and their children look less Asian. But they are simply. not. immigrants.

The vast majority of asian americans suing colleges for not getting in have Asian born and raised parents.

Even if true, that does but make their kids immigrants!

immigrants:
a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country.
- definition by Oxford Languages

Another definition
"an immigrant is a person living in a country other than that of his or her birth."

The kids were born in the US and not immigrants.

Ignorant fcuk

[Anonymous]

The kid did not watch the video from the admissions dean at Brown. The dean said so many kids have the credentials, so they are looking for joy and deep interest in projects and activities. Even with that, they will have to say no to many.

Getting a 1590 is not that special around these parts.

[Anonymous]

Exactly. There's nothing wrong or impermissible about a college admitting someone with a 1500 but brings certain types of diversity that's lacking in the overall class over someone with a 1590 who doesn't add anything unique.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Georgia Tech better than Princeton, Harvard, and Berkeley for STEM. Much ado about nothing.

Princeton and Berkeley crap on any other university for stem. Georgia tech is great if you’re interested in aerospace engineering, but the most rigorous education and best STEM programs/grads come out of Princeton and berkeley

I vote MIT, Cal tech, U of Colorado, Georgia tech, and Rensselaer