Percentage of BIPOCs at your child’s top pick

[Anonymous]

We absolutely don’t care

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America is about the only place in the world where diversity in college is a consideration. The overwhelming majority of the top academic institutions in other countries are racially homogenous and yet they are still able to learn despite the lack of classmates with different colored skin. it's astounding.[

Well, you still have Washington and Lee.

W&L is at least 5% black whereas Notre Dame is only 3.6% black.

Notre Dame is a Catholic school, which I am sure you realize and just want to be a jackass. Not a lot of black Catholics.

Oddly, USF is Catholic and has more black students, much more diverse than Notre Dame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate the term biopic, but of course guys is a consideration. I am Indian American, born here. We value diversity in our family. We live in a country where race has become electrified. See the comments by JD about Usha and how Indians are made fun of on social media, how Trump refers to immigrants as illegals, and how her ghoulishly depicted the House Majority Leader inexplicably wearing a sombrero. I’m disgusted by many of the comments here, but clearly I’ve been deluding myself that the higher educated DCUM population is reasonable and not racist. Glad to see there are some white students who care to mix with others.

But, Indians and Indian-Americans are not BIPOCs.

Why? Are they white? BIPOCs are basically all non-white.

Indians are not URMs, because they benefit from unearned privilege. This is why Indians and other Asian peoples are excluded from programs which take race into consideration, such as many scholarships set aside exclusively to benefit BIPOCs.

Indians are not URM. They are, however, BIPOCs.

The central defining characteristic of being BIPOC is having experienced racism and oppression (particularly economic oppression) at the hands of whites and white culture. Indians have long had higher HHI and a far greater rate of college attainment than whites, proportionally. The same is true for other Asian peoples. Thus, by definition, Indians, Indian-Americans, and Asian peoples are not BIPOC.

That is a completely ignorant statement considering the ugly history of anti Asian discrimination and hate crimes in the United States, starting as early as the Gold Rush era, and extending to the present day with Covid related hate crimes. The fact that a certain subsegment of the Asian population has tended to outperform in a small specific area of academics does not negate their minority status and relative lack of political and cultural representation/power in the US. Further, the above poster is conflating certain Asian groups like Indians and Chinese as representing the good fortunes of all Asian groups, which is another gross oversimplification. Should
we talk as if all white Southerners are racist redneck gunowners, or all black people are drug dealers and live in housing projects?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what are we to infer from this thread? Many whites do not value diversity? You just tolerate non-white people? And that you'd be equally as happy to be at an all white institution. I find this utterly depressing.

Also you keep asking if we are in more "woke" times, but for many of us, this is our current reality. I don't want to send my kid to a school that only has 3% of other kids that look like him. That sounds horrible.

It means that people value other things more than just what their classmates look like. We all have our own priorities.

But that is not it. Lots of people on this thread saying people who value being in a diverse environment are “woke” or crazy. It’s not just that some people don’t care, they actively denigrate those who may consider diversity at all.

No, I am denigrating people who can’t write a post about diversity without being righteous. Just because one values diversity one is not better than wide swaths of the country that are less diverse.

If you don’t believe diversity is important and your kid does not, why does it matter to you that others find it valuable? Is there any way that someone can express that opinion (on an anonymous message board, natch) that doesn’t strike you as performative?

A different example - I have found generally vegetarians to be annoying. Mostly because I agree with them on the morality of industrial meat production that I support through my purchases. Obviously if a friend is vegetarian, I am not at all annoyed if she chooses a vegetarian meal when we go out to dinner together. However, if someone starts talking about slaughterhouses or even why vegetarianism is healthier for her, I recognize myself wanting to change the subject. It’s because I think I should perhaps try eating less meat but really there are reasons why I don’t want to. I think it’s the same with this whole topic. People tend to think there is value in diversity as a whole but get annoyed when having to confront for themselves how low they prioritize it. It’s why they feel others are “lecturing” them. If you truly thought it was crazy talk, you wouldn’t care.

I don’t have an issue with diversity, just people who are pompous. If you can’t express yourself without sounding like someone with a superiority complex, you need to work on you.

The pomposity immediately came on this thread from people ridiculing kids and parents who value it.

Nope, from the get go we got my kids don’t want to mix with white kids from non diverse parts of the country and highly selective schools that I don’t think are diverse enough for my kid (Wake and Davidson) are their safeties. I guess folks here are pompous and insulting all the time so they don’t have self awareness of how they come off.

And honestly Wake, Davidson, and W&L are hardly anyone's safeties. Admissions for RD is a crapshoot for almost anyone and the schools will yield protect. To suggest otherwise is delusional (and pompous!).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate the term biopic, but of course guys is a consideration. I am Indian American, born here. We value diversity in our family. We live in a country where race has become electrified. See the comments by JD about Usha and how Indians are made fun of on social media, how Trump refers to immigrants as illegals, and how her ghoulishly depicted the House Majority Leader inexplicably wearing a sombrero. I’m disgusted by many of the comments here, but clearly I’ve been deluding myself that the higher educated DCUM population is reasonable and not racist. Glad to see there are some white students who care to mix with others.

But, Indians and Indian-Americans are not BIPOCs.

Why? Are they white? BIPOCs are basically all non-white.

Indians are not URMs, because they benefit from unearned privilege. This is why Indians and other Asian peoples are excluded from programs which take race into consideration, such as many scholarships set aside exclusively to benefit BIPOCs.

Indians are not URM. They are, however, BIPOCs.

The central defining characteristic of being BIPOC is having experienced racism and oppression (particularly economic oppression) at the hands of whites and white culture. Indians have long had higher HHI and a far greater rate of college attainment than whites, proportionally. The same is true for other Asian peoples. Thus, by definition, Indians, Indian-Americans, and Asian peoples are not BIPOC.

That is a completely ignorant statement considering the ugly history of anti Asian discrimination and hate crimes in the United States, starting as early as the Gold Rush era, and extending to the present day with Covid related hate crimes. The fact that a certain subsegment of the Asian population has tended to outperform in a small specific area of academics does not negate their minority status and relative lack of political and cultural representation/power in the US. Further, the above poster is conflating certain Asian groups like Indians and Chinese as representing the good fortunes of all Asian groups, which is another gross oversimplification. Should
we talk as if all white Southerners are racist redneck gunowners, or all black people are drug dealers and live in housing projects?

You are grouping a lot of people from many different countries under the "Asian" label conveniently for your argument. Indians were not around during the Gold Rush. Filippinos have little in common with Chinese people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate the term biopic, but of course guys is a consideration. I am Indian American, born here. We value diversity in our family. We live in a country where race has become electrified. See the comments by JD about Usha and how Indians are made fun of on social media, how Trump refers to immigrants as illegals, and how her ghoulishly depicted the House Majority Leader inexplicably wearing a sombrero. I’m disgusted by many of the comments here, but clearly I’ve been deluding myself that the higher educated DCUM population is reasonable and not racist. Glad to see there are some white students who care to mix with others.

But, Indians and Indian-Americans are not BIPOCs.

Why? Are they white? BIPOCs are basically all non-white.

Indians are not URMs, because they benefit from unearned privilege. This is why Indians and other Asian peoples are excluded from programs which take race into consideration, such as many scholarships set aside exclusively to benefit BIPOCs.

Indians are not URM. They are, however, BIPOCs.

The central defining characteristic of being BIPOC is having experienced racism and oppression (particularly economic oppression) at the hands of whites and white culture. Indians have long had higher HHI and a far greater rate of college attainment than whites, proportionally. The same is true for other Asian peoples. Thus, by definition, Indians, Indian-Americans, and Asian peoples are not BIPOC.

That is a completely ignorant statement considering the ugly history of anti Asian discrimination and hate crimes in the United States, starting as early as the Gold Rush era, and extending to the present day with Covid related hate crimes. The fact that a certain subsegment of the Asian population has tended to outperform in a small specific area of academics does not negate their minority status and relative lack of political and cultural representation/power in the US. Further, the above poster is conflating certain Asian groups like Indians and Chinese as representing the good fortunes of all Asian groups, which is another gross oversimplification. Should
we talk as if all white Southerners are racist redneck gunowners, or all black people are drug dealers and live in housing projects?

That is why the "Asian" label is pointless...but maybe it is not...it can be used when wanting to be the model minority one day...but on the next day, to claim oppression, as the PP does above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate the term biopic, but of course guys is a consideration. I am Indian American, born here. We value diversity in our family. We live in a country where race has become electrified. See the comments by JD about Usha and how Indians are made fun of on social media, how Trump refers to immigrants as illegals, and how her ghoulishly depicted the House Majority Leader inexplicably wearing a sombrero. I’m disgusted by many of the comments here, but clearly I’ve been deluding myself that the higher educated DCUM population is reasonable and not racist. Glad to see there are some white students who care to mix with others.

But, Indians and Indian-Americans are not BIPOCs.

Why? Are they white? BIPOCs are basically all non-white.

Indians are not URMs, because they benefit from unearned privilege. This is why Indians and other Asian peoples are excluded from programs which take race into consideration, such as many scholarships set aside exclusively to benefit BIPOCs.

Indians are not URM. They are, however, BIPOCs.

The central defining characteristic of being BIPOC is having experienced racism and oppression (particularly economic oppression) at the hands of whites and white culture. Indians have long had higher HHI and a far greater rate of college attainment than whites, proportionally. The same is true for other Asian peoples. Thus, by definition, Indians, Indian-Americans, and Asian peoples are not BIPOC.

That is a completely ignorant statement considering the ugly history of anti Asian discrimination and hate crimes in the United States, starting as early as the Gold Rush era, and extending to the present day with Covid related hate crimes. The fact that a certain subsegment of the Asian population has tended to outperform in a small specific area of academics does not negate their minority status and relative lack of political and cultural representation/power in the US. Further, the above poster is conflating certain Asian groups like Indians and Chinese as representing the good fortunes of all Asian groups, which is another gross oversimplification. Should
we talk as if all white Southerners are racist redneck gunowners, or all black people are drug dealers and live in housing projects?

You are grouping a lot of people from many different countries under the "Asian" label conveniently for your argument. Indians were not around during the Gold Rush. Filippinos have little in common with Chinese people.

This grouping of many countries under the “Asian” group is a direct response to an earlier poster saying all Asian people are privileged and therefore not BIPOC. They are pointing out that Asians are a disparate group. You guys are agreeing with each other, dimwit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate the term biopic, but of course guys is a consideration. I am Indian American, born here. We value diversity in our family. We live in a country where race has become electrified. See the comments by JD about Usha and how Indians are made fun of on social media, how Trump refers to immigrants as illegals, and how her ghoulishly depicted the House Majority Leader inexplicably wearing a sombrero. I’m disgusted by many of the comments here, but clearly I’ve been deluding myself that the higher educated DCUM population is reasonable and not racist. Glad to see there are some white students who care to mix with others.

But, Indians and Indian-Americans are not BIPOCs.

Why? Are they white? BIPOCs are basically all non-white.

Indians are not URMs, because they benefit from unearned privilege. This is why Indians and other Asian peoples are excluded from programs which take race into consideration, such as many scholarships set aside exclusively to benefit BIPOCs.

Indians are not URM. They are, however, BIPOCs.

The central defining characteristic of being BIPOC is having experienced racism and oppression (particularly economic oppression) at the hands of whites and white culture. Indians have long had higher HHI and a far greater rate of college attainment than whites, proportionally. The same is true for other Asian peoples. Thus, by definition, Indians, Indian-Americans, and Asian peoples are not BIPOC.

That is a completely ignorant statement considering the ugly history of anti Asian discrimination and hate crimes in the United States, starting as early as the Gold Rush era, and extending to the present day with Covid related hate crimes. The fact that a certain subsegment of the Asian population has tended to outperform in a small specific area of academics does not negate their minority status and relative lack of political and cultural representation/power in the US. Further, the above poster is conflating certain Asian groups like Indians and Chinese as representing the good fortunes of all Asian groups, which is another gross oversimplification. Should
we talk as if all white Southerners are racist redneck gunowners, or all black people are drug dealers and live in housing projects?

You are grouping a lot of people from many different countries under the "Asian" label conveniently for your argument. Indians were not around during the Gold Rush. Filippinos have little in common with Chinese people.

This grouping of many countries under the “Asian” group is a direct response to an earlier poster saying all Asian people are privileged and therefore not BIPOC. They are pointing out that Asians are a disparate group. You guys are agreeing with each other, dimwit.

No, I was responding to the part that stated "The fact that a certain subsegment of the Asian population has tended to outperform in a small specific area of academics does not negate their minority status and relative lack of political and cultural representation/power in the US."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate the term biopic, but of course guys is a consideration. I am Indian American, born here. We value diversity in our family. We live in a country where race has become electrified. See the comments by JD about Usha and how Indians are made fun of on social media, how Trump refers to immigrants as illegals, and how her ghoulishly depicted the House Majority Leader inexplicably wearing a sombrero. I’m disgusted by many of the comments here, but clearly I’ve been deluding myself that the higher educated DCUM population is reasonable and not racist. Glad to see there are some white students who care to mix with others.

But, Indians and Indian-Americans are not BIPOCs.

Why? Are they white? BIPOCs are basically all non-white.

Indians are not URMs, because they benefit from unearned privilege. This is why Indians and other Asian peoples are excluded from programs which take race into consideration, such as many scholarships set aside exclusively to benefit BIPOCs.

Indians are not URM. They are, however, BIPOCs.

The central defining characteristic of being BIPOC is having experienced racism and oppression (particularly economic oppression) at the hands of whites and white culture. Indians have long had higher HHI and a far greater rate of college attainment than whites, proportionally. The same is true for other Asian peoples. Thus, by definition, Indians, Indian-Americans, and Asian peoples are not BIPOC.

That is a completely ignorant statement considering the ugly history of anti Asian discrimination and hate crimes in the United States, starting as early as the Gold Rush era, and extending to the present day with Covid related hate crimes. The fact that a certain subsegment of the Asian population has tended to outperform in a small specific area of academics does not negate their minority status and relative lack of political and cultural representation/power in the US. Further, the above poster is conflating certain Asian groups like Indians and Chinese as representing the good fortunes of all Asian groups, which is another gross oversimplification. Should
we talk as if all white Southerners are racist redneck gunowners, or all black people are drug dealers and live in housing projects?

That is why the "Asian" label is pointless...but maybe it is not...it can be used when wanting to be the model minority one day...but on the next day, to claim oppression, as the PP does above.

The “Asian” label is not pointless as long as lazy members of society don’t care to make distinctions between countries of origin when targeting them for discrimination. Whether they feel they are alike or not, if other segments of society perceive them as a lump of indistinguishable people, then for all intents and purposes, the perception determines their reality. Do you think racists cared during Covid when other Asians insisted “but I’m not Chinese” when coming under physical attack? do you think racists cared when Sikhs said but I’m not Muslim after 9/11?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate the term biopic, but of course guys is a consideration. I am Indian American, born here. We value diversity in our family. We live in a country where race has become electrified. See the comments by JD about Usha and how Indians are made fun of on social media, how Trump refers to immigrants as illegals, and how her ghoulishly depicted the House Majority Leader inexplicably wearing a sombrero. I’m disgusted by many of the comments here, but clearly I’ve been deluding myself that the higher educated DCUM population is reasonable and not racist. Glad to see there are some white students who care to mix with others.

But, Indians and Indian-Americans are not BIPOCs.

Why? Are they white? BIPOCs are basically all non-white.

Indians are not URMs, because they benefit from unearned privilege. This is why Indians and other Asian peoples are excluded from programs which take race into consideration, such as many scholarships set aside exclusively to benefit BIPOCs.

Indians are not URM. They are, however, BIPOCs.

The central defining characteristic of being BIPOC is having experienced racism and oppression (particularly economic oppression) at the hands of whites and white culture. Indians have long had higher HHI and a far greater rate of college attainment than whites, proportionally. The same is true for other Asian peoples. Thus, by definition, Indians, Indian-Americans, and Asian peoples are not BIPOC.

That is a completely ignorant statement considering the ugly history of anti Asian discrimination and hate crimes in the United States, starting as early as the Gold Rush era, and extending to the present day with Covid related hate crimes. The fact that a certain subsegment of the Asian population has tended to outperform in a small specific area of academics does not negate their minority status and relative lack of political and cultural representation/power in the US. Further, the above poster is conflating certain Asian groups like Indians and Chinese as representing the good fortunes of all Asian groups, which is another gross oversimplification. Should
we talk as if all white Southerners are racist redneck gunowners, or all black people are drug dealers and live in housing projects?

That is why the "Asian" label is pointless...but maybe it is not...it can be used when wanting to be the model minority one day...but on the next day, to claim oppression, as the PP does above.

The “Asian” label is not pointless as long as lazy members of society don’t care to make distinctions between countries of origin when targeting them for discrimination. Whether they feel they are alike or not, if other segments of society perceive them as a lump of indistinguishable people, then for all intents and purposes, the perception determines their reality. Do you think racists cared during Covid when other Asians insisted “but I’m not Chinese” when coming under physical attack? do you think racists cared when Sikhs said but I’m not Muslim after 9/11?

That violence that you reference is unfortunate, but that is a different topic re: Asian label, and actually, the people committing the violence are confusing one country of origin for another, not grouping all Asians together.

[Anonymous]

Kid’s 1st choice is Swarthmore, which is under 40% Caucasian. Absolutely noticed and was put off by “whiteness” at BC and Dickinson. (Currently attends private hs 50% white).

[Anonymous]

My South Asian kid opted for a more urban school where they would have easier access to things like South Asian food, religious/cultural events, etc. Once can have a preference regarding social/cultural environment/rural/urban/small/big and still be open to people from different experiences and backgrounds. I think that’s something that’s getting lost on this thread. You can’t pigeon-hole someone or stereotype someone based upon the specific school they attend. There are closed-minded people at Oberlin and open-minded people at W & L.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Idk about my kid but I do care, for matrimonial reasons tbh.

Yikes. This thread is infected with MAGA bigots.

[Anonymous]

The ignorance on this thread is stunning.

But anyway, my kids are half white half BIPOC and they go to a high school that is 85% Black and Hispanic. So, yes, it's something they think about. DD doesn't love a campus with a lack of diversity, but it is more important to her to go to the best school she can academically (in her opinion).

She feels the colleges on her list do well "checking the boxes" when it comes to racial diversity and wishes there was more diversity in thought/opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate the term biopic, but of course guys is a consideration. I am Indian American, born here. We value diversity in our family. We live in a country where race has become electrified. See the comments by JD about Usha and how Indians are made fun of on social media, how Trump refers to immigrants as illegals, and how her ghoulishly depicted the House Majority Leader inexplicably wearing a sombrero. I’m disgusted by many of the comments here, but clearly I’ve been deluding myself that the higher educated DCUM population is reasonable and not racist. Glad to see there are some white students who care to mix with others.

But, Indians and Indian-Americans are not BIPOCs.

Why? Are they white? BIPOCs are basically all non-white.

Indians are not URMs, because they benefit from unearned privilege. This is why Indians and other Asian peoples are excluded from programs which take race into consideration, such as many scholarships set aside exclusively to benefit BIPOCs.

Indians are not URM. They are, however, BIPOCs.

The central defining characteristic of being BIPOC is having experienced racism and oppression (particularly economic oppression) at the hands of whites and white culture. Indians have long had higher HHI and a far greater rate of college attainment than whites, proportionally. The same is true for other Asian peoples. Thus, by definition, Indians, Indian-Americans, and Asian peoples are not BIPOC.

That is a completely ignorant statement considering the ugly history of anti Asian discrimination and hate crimes in the United States, starting as early as the Gold Rush era, and extending to the present day with Covid related hate crimes. The fact that a certain subsegment of the Asian population has tended to outperform in a small specific area of academics does not negate their minority status and relative lack of political and cultural representation/power in the US. Further, the above poster is conflating certain Asian groups like Indians and Chinese as representing the good fortunes of all Asian groups, which is another gross oversimplification. Should
we talk as if all white Southerners are racist redneck gunowners, or all black people are drug dealers and live in housing projects?

You are grouping a lot of people from many different countries under the "Asian" label conveniently for your argument. Indians were not around during the Gold Rush. Filippinos have little in common with Chinese people.

This grouping of many countries under the “Asian” group is a direct response to an earlier poster saying all Asian people are privileged and therefore not BIPOC. They are pointing out that Asians are a disparate group. You guys are agreeing with each other, dimwit.

No, I was responding to the part that stated "The fact that a certain subsegment of the Asian population has tended to outperform in a small specific area of academics does not negate their minority status and relative lack of political and cultural representation/power in the US."

Point is:

As a whole, Asians are privileged. And that is why they cannot be included.