US Supreme Court Rules Against Affirmative Action in College Admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funny how people are missing the fact that AA largely benefits WHITE WOMEN.

This is true.

As if race and sex for white women is not taken into consideration seems to be the idea a lot of white people have.

white women are the biggest beneficiaries for affirmative action.

Luckily, now white men can change all of their ID and then use AA’s leavings to get accepted as white women. Yay white men!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have such complicated feelings about this, on one hand I am an Asian (Indian) and in 4-5 years my kids will be entering the ringer of college admissions and sure, we want to get to the best place they can get to according to their abilities. However, being an Asian I am aware that they face greater odds compared to others and that makes me somewhat anxious.

OTOH, Blacks have suffered tremendous trauma in this country, generations of blacks have been exploited and their psychology has been deeply affected by constantly treating them as less than. They do need a leg up, some sort of support to give them a shot at a prosperous life, a way to get into upper ranks of society. We all have our struggles but it is extremely hard to overcome trauma that is left by society treating you as not equal.

I still hope that colleges find a way to accommodate bright black kids from underprivileged backgrounds. I do not support prioritizing black kids from affluent backgrounds.

The fact is that a substantial proportion of the Black students admitted at elite universities are the children of wealthy, well-educated African immigrants--the kids of Ghanaian and Nigerian engineers and doctors. They have not suffered generations of racism in America. If AA is intended to address the legacy of slavery in the US, then the policy should explicitly and exclusively target the descendants of enslaved people in the US.

+100. I think Roberts even asked a hypothetical about this during the oral argument in this case. Instead of a generic “black” box, Harvard could ask “were 50% or more (or whatever required threshold) of your ancestors enslaved in the United States?”

I think there should be preferential treatment for African Descendants of Slaves in the US as well as for Native Americans due to US history. I think few can argue that other races/genders have experienced the same severity of historical mistreatment that has persisted throughout US history. Besides that, everyone should be considered on their own merits and what they can add to the college community--and that the schools can have latitude in what they see as merit--whether it is rigorous coursework, well-rounded activities, artistic merit, entrepreneurship, SAT scores, GPA, quality of writing etc.

You don’t think that, over history, women have been as victimized as Black people? Check out who the prehistoric era up ‘til the 1600’s or so got the short end of the stick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funny how people are missing the fact that AA largely benefits WHITE WOMEN.

This is true.

As if race and sex for white women is not taken into consideration seems to be the idea a lot of white people have.

white women are the biggest beneficiaries for affirmative action.

Luckily, now white men can change all of their ID and then use AA’s leavings to get accepted as white women. Yay white men!

And one of them will be able to finally fulfil PP's lifelong fantasy of hooking up with a white "woman."

[Anonymous]

Additionally, current women and girls are vastly more likely to be the victim of sexual assault (which can be incredibly mentally and emotionally taxing and could certainly cause one to perform poorly in school, perhaps even more than being born Black in America) so where are their free points? (And certainly Black women and girls in America are even more likely to be targeted.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funny how people are missing the fact that AA largely benefits WHITE WOMEN.

This is true.

As if race and sex for white women is not taken into consideration seems to be the idea a lot of white people have.

white women are the biggest beneficiaries for affirmative action.

Luckily, now white men can change all of their ID and then use AA’s leavings to get accepted as white women. Yay white men!

And one of them will be able to finally fulfil PP's lifelong fantasy of hooking up with a white "woman."

Eww (pp)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Additionally, current women and girls are vastly more likely to be the victim of sexual assault (which can be incredibly mentally and emotionally taxing and could certainly cause one to perform poorly in school, perhaps even more than being born Black in America) so where are their free points? (And certainly Black women and girls in America are even more likely to be targeted.)

Holistic admissions and working to have student bodies that broadly match the make-up of society, no matter how imperfect, would boost women if they were under-represented. However, it seems DCUM punters overall are majority anti-AA and want a China style national IQ test only for admissions. I guess if you in a library all the time you don’t care much for a vibrant campus life (or worse, the notion of community).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was arguably a weird instance of whites using Asians yo do their dirty work. It worked.

Ummmm… how? If Harvard etc truly admit “race blind” then whites will lose as well as blacks, and Asians will win big. HYPS etc would have TJ high school demographics.

But it will never truly be race blind. Whites still have so many work arounds.

Asians are smarter than whites. There is no workaround that whites can contrive that Asians won’t figure out and beat them at it. The only thing that can stop Asians is overt racism. Which is what the elite schools have been doing.

Yes there is, there is nepotism. That’s what will keep whites in.

How is nepotism going to affect college admissions? If your parent is an admissions officer, you’re in? How many kids is that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was arguably a weird instance of whites using Asians yo do their dirty work. It worked.

Ummmm… how? If Harvard etc truly admit “race blind” then whites will lose as well as blacks, and Asians will win big. HYPS etc would have TJ high school demographics.

But it will never truly be race blind. Whites still have so many work arounds.

Asians are smarter than whites. There is no workaround that whites can contrive that Asians won’t figure out and beat them at it. The only thing that can stop Asians is overt racism. Which is what the elite schools have been doing.

And now that AA is no no longer in play, even fewer Asian students can be accepted and private elite schools can completely pander to the wealthiest, mostly white, students.

Looking at the facts of the case, it is very clear that private elite schools pander to blacks, not wealthy whites, and I simply don’t believe that’s going to end. The schools will just invent new and more opaque ways to pander to blacks at the expense of Asians. And there will be more lawsuits in the future when the admissions stats continue to show Asians are being shortchanged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have such complicated feelings about this, on one hand I am an Asian (Indian) and in 4-5 years my kids will be entering the ringer of college admissions and sure, we want to get to the best place they can get to according to their abilities. However, being an Asian I am aware that they face greater odds compared to others and that makes me somewhat anxious.

OTOH, Blacks have suffered tremendous trauma in this country, generations of blacks have been exploited and their psychology has been deeply affected by constantly treating them as less than. They do need a leg up, some sort of support to give them a shot at a prosperous life, a way to get into upper ranks of society. We all have our struggles but it is extremely hard to overcome trauma that is left by society treating you as not equal.

I still hope that colleges find a way to accommodate bright black kids from underprivileged backgrounds. I do not support prioritizing black kids from affluent backgrounds.

The fact is that a substantial proportion of the Black students admitted at elite universities are the children of wealthy, well-educated African immigrants--the kids of Ghanaian and Nigerian engineers and doctors. They have not suffered generations of racism in America. If AA is intended to address the legacy of slavery in the US, then the policy should explicitly and exclusively target the descendants of enslaved people in the US.

+100. I think Roberts even asked a hypothetical about this during the oral argument in this case. Instead of a generic “black” box, Harvard could ask “were 50% or more (or whatever required threshold) of your ancestors enslaved in the United States?”

I think there should be preferential treatment for African Descendants of Slaves in the US as well as for Native Americans due to US history. I think few can argue that other races/genders have experienced the same severity of historical mistreatment that has persisted throughout US history. Besides that, everyone should be considered on their own merits and what they can add to the college community--and that the schools can have latitude in what they see as merit--whether it is rigorous coursework, well-rounded activities, artistic merit, entrepreneurship, SAT scores, GPA, quality of writing etc.

You don’t think that, over history, women have been as victimized as Black people? Check out who the prehistoric era up ‘til the 1600’s or so got the short end of the stick.

Every family has a woman so it neutralizes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was arguably a weird instance of whites using Asians yo do their dirty work. It worked.

Ummmm… how? If Harvard etc truly admit “race blind” then whites will lose as well as blacks, and Asians will win big. HYPS etc would have TJ high school demographics.

But it will never truly be race blind. Whites still have so many work arounds.

Asians are smarter than whites. There is no workaround that whites can contrive that Asians won’t figure out and beat them at it. The only thing that can stop Asians is overt racism. Which is what the elite schools have been doing.

And now that AA is no no longer in play, even fewer Asian students can be accepted and private elite schools can completely pander to the wealthiest, mostly white, students.

Looking at the facts of the case, it is very clear that private elite schools pander to blacks, not wealthy whites, and I simply don’t believe that’s going to end. The schools will just invent new and more opaque ways to pander to blacks at the expense of Asians. And there will be more lawsuits in the future when the admissions stats continue to show Asians are being shortchanged.

They will remove the SAT/ACT so no stats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do Asians care that Oxford is 70% white?

no, because Oxford doesn't use race in its admissions, so Asian Brits know that those who got into Oxford got in due to their own merits, and not the color of their skin.

And also, we don't live in the UK so we don't really care what Oxford does.

-Asian American married to a Brit

They have made a conscious effort to recruit more URMs at Oxford, so should they have not earned it? What about the wealthy who have always had a pipeline to Oxford?

BTW, all the Oxford colleges have interviews fir admission, so their process is not objective like dcum makes it out to be.

They don't use holistic admissions as much as we do here. They care about how much interest you show in your particular field, not your personality and "likeability".

Even so, we don't live in the UK.

Them why did you bring it up? I was only clarifying.

The interview can mean whatever they want it to mean. That is certainly a holistic aspect, though their overall approach doesn't look so much at EC aspects like US. My point is UK isn't completely data driven either.

PP here.. I am not the poster who brought it up.

I have no problems with interviews. In fact, the Harvard case showed that Asian Americans interviewed very well, whereas the AO marked Asian Americans "likeability" score low even as they never interviewed the applicant. This is the main issue that people have with Harvard.

Asian Americans score higher or about the same in every metric except "likeability" by AO. That does not pass the sniff test.

If UK universities did the same to purposefully discriminate against Asians or any race, then I'm sure Brits would not like that, either. My Brit spouse has a friend there who is married to an Asian; their kids are super smart and went to Oxbridge. Those universities look at the A levels (and O). They aren't test optional.

Did your friend’s kids go to a comprehensive or public (private) school? That would be an option for your children as well (UK system).

Do you think USA should take on the China or UK higher Ed admissions system? That would be the best for USA society?

The US system doesn't have to be "like" anything. I don't think everything should rest on one standardized test, but I also don't think a BS "likeability" measure should be used as a way to keep the number of one race in check.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do Asians care that Oxford is 70% white?

no, because Oxford doesn't use race in its admissions, so Asian Brits know that those who got into Oxford got in due to their own merits, and not the color of their skin.

And also, we don't live in the UK so we don't really care what Oxford does.

-Asian American married to a Brit

They have made a conscious effort to recruit more URMs at Oxford, so should they have not earned it? What about the wealthy who have always had a pipeline to Oxford?

BTW, all the Oxford colleges have interviews fir admission, so their process is not objective like dcum makes it out to be.

They don't use holistic admissions as much as we do here. They care about how much interest you show in your particular field, not your personality and "likeability".

Even so, we don't live in the UK.

Them why did you bring it up? I was only clarifying.

The interview can mean whatever they want it to mean. That is certainly a holistic aspect, though their overall approach doesn't look so much at EC aspects like US. My point is UK isn't completely data driven either.

PP here.. I am not the poster who brought it up.

I have no problems with interviews. In fact, the Harvard case showed that Asian Americans interviewed very well, whereas the AO marked Asian Americans "likeability" score low even as they never interviewed the applicant. This is the main issue that people have with Harvard.

Asian Americans score higher or about the same in every metric except "likeability" by AO. That does not pass the sniff test.

If UK universities did the same to purposefully discriminate against Asians or any race, then I'm sure Brits would not like that, either. My Brit spouse has a friend there who is married to an Asian; their kids are super smart and went to Oxbridge. Those universities look at the A levels (and O). They aren't test optional.

Did your friend’s kids go to a comprehensive or public (private) school? That would be an option for your children as well (UK system).

Do you think USA should take on the China or UK higher Ed admissions system? That would be the best for USA society?

The US system doesn't have to be "like" anything. I don't think everything should rest on one standardized test, but I also don't think a BS "likeability" measure should be used as a way to keep the number of one race in check.

I agree. We have our own system that works. If you want to see brilliant frustrated people who have been left behind, take a close look at the UK. The US gives people several chances and many late bloomers take advantage of that (including some Asians). What people are forgetting is that MOST Asians are NOT Harvard material. The lions share of productive professionals did not train at Harvard.

[Anonymous]

I think this whole thread is a comical relief for both the left and the right. The left, mostly DCUM readers, relatively affluent DMV people, some of them with cushy govt jobs, really have nothing to lose so they can poke fun. Theb1970s forced bussing has come to an end. What a relief for the left who can now blame Trump. The right has won, so they are less stressed going forward. Lincoln ended slavery. Donald J Trump ended affirmative action.

[Anonymous]

I’m beginning to doubt the smarts of Asians. Do they really think the only path to success is through Harvard?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The right has won, so they are less stressed going forward. Lincoln ended slavery. Donald J Trump ended affirmative action.

We shall see. Colleges are unlikely to abandon their cherished dogma so easily. They will ignore or circumvent the ruling. There will be more lawsuits in the future.