Harvard's odd quota on Asian-Americans

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:speaking of agendas....

Why do you hate/resent African American professionals so much?

And do you have any evidence at all that their children are keeping *more qualified* first generation college African African students out of elite schools? Seems highly unlikely.

Are you opposed to legacy preferences generally?

No resentment here, I was just describing what you chose to ignore, driven by your obvious resentment against white students.

As for evidence, just look up this same thread, a few comments before ours:

1) "Overall, UC campuses are admitting more students from poor families than before the ban -- no surprise, perhaps, given demographic shifts and the system's post-Proposition 209 emphasis on reaching low-income students of all races. More than one third of the roughly 35,000 UC freshmen enrolled in 2010 came from families making less than $40,000, up from 28 percent in 1995. And even with record-high applications, the system's universities accepted 75 percent of all first-generation college students that year who applied."
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23516740/affirmative-action-ban-at-uc-15-years-later

2) And, white and Latino admission rates have kept steady, while AA have gone down

3) Do your math

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:speaking of agendas....

Why do you hate/resent African American professionals so much?

And do you have any evidence at all that their children are keeping *more qualified* first generation college African African students out of elite schools? Seems highly unlikely.

Are you opposed to legacy preferences generally?

No resentment here, I was just describing what you chose to ignore, driven by your obvious resentment against white students.

As for evidence, just look up this same thread, a few comments before ours:

1) "Overall, UC campuses are admitting more students from poor families than before the ban -- no surprise, perhaps, given demographic shifts and the system's post-Proposition 209 emphasis on reaching low-income students of all races. More than one third of the roughly 35,000 UC freshmen enrolled in 2010 came from families making less than $40,000, up from 28 percent in 1995. And even with record-high applications, the system's universities accepted 75 percent of all first-generation college students that year who applied."
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23516740/affirmative-action-ban-at-uc-15-years-later

2) And, white and Latino admission rates have kept steady, while AA have gone down

3) Do your math

Sorry, forgot your last question. If it was up to me, I'd abolish legacy and sports preferences tomorrow. But in this thread we're talking about not discriminating against Asian Americans because of their race...which of course somehow has become a conversation about AAs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:speaking of agendas....

Why do you hate/resent African American professionals so much?

And do you have any evidence at all that their children are keeping *more qualified* first generation college African African students out of elite schools? Seems highly unlikely.

Are you opposed to legacy preferences generally?

No resentment here, I was just describing what you chose to ignore, driven by your obvious resentment against white students.

As for evidence, just look up this same thread, a few comments before ours:

1) "Overall, UC campuses are admitting more students from poor families than before the ban -- no surprise, perhaps, given demographic shifts and the system's post-Proposition 209 emphasis on reaching low-income students of all races. More than one third of the roughly 35,000 UC freshmen enrolled in 2010 came from families making less than $40,000, up from 28 percent in 1995. And even with record-high applications, the system's universities accepted 75 percent of all first-generation college students that year who applied."
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23516740/affirmative-action-ban-at-uc-15-years-later

2) And, white and Latino admission rates have kept steady, while AA have gone down

3) Do your math

Sorry, forgot your last question. If it was up to me, I'd abolish legacy and sports preferences tomorrow. But in this thread we're talking about not discriminating against Asian Americans because of their race...which of course somehow has become a conversation about AAs.

Every third thread on DCUM for some reason. I am beginning to think that DCUM is obsessed with AA, in a very much negative way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:speaking of agendas....

Why do you hate/resent African American professionals so much?

And do you have any evidence at all that their children are keeping *more qualified* first generation college African African students out of elite schools? Seems highly unlikely.

Are you opposed to legacy preferences generally?

No resentment here, I was just describing what you chose to ignore, driven by your obvious resentment against white students.

As for evidence, just look up this same thread, a few comments before ours:

1) "Overall, UC campuses are admitting more students from poor families than before the ban -- no surprise, perhaps, given demographic shifts and the system's post-Proposition 209 emphasis on reaching low-income students of all races. More than one third of the roughly 35,000 UC freshmen enrolled in 2010 came from families making less than $40,000, up from 28 percent in 1995. And even with record-high applications, the system's universities accepted 75 percent of all first-generation college students that year who applied."
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23516740/affirmative-action-ban-at-uc-15-years-later

2) And, white and Latino admission rates have kept steady, while AA have gone down

3) Do your math

I don't know where you see "obvious resentment against white students" in my post (which didn't even mention white students). For the record, I'm white (and so's my soon-to-be college-bound child). And, FWIW, I'm not the "NP" whom you accused of having an agenda.

The evidence I asked for was support for your claim that, pre Prop 209, the "relatively unqualified" children of Black doctors and lawyers were taking spots away from "truly qualified" first generation college students. The passage you cite doesn't say anything about the respective qualifications of those two groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:speaking of agendas....

Why do you hate/resent African American professionals so much?

And do you have any evidence at all that their children are keeping *more qualified* first generation college African African students out of elite schools? Seems highly unlikely.

Are you opposed to legacy preferences generally?

No resentment here, I was just describing what you chose to ignore, driven by your obvious resentment against white students.

As for evidence, just look up this same thread, a few comments before ours:

1) "Overall, UC campuses are admitting more students from poor families than before the ban -- no surprise, perhaps, given demographic shifts and the system's post-Proposition 209 emphasis on reaching low-income students of all races. More than one third of the roughly 35,000 UC freshmen enrolled in 2010 came from families making less than $40,000, up from 28 percent in 1995. And even with record-high applications, the system's universities accepted 75 percent of all first-generation college students that year who applied."
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23516740/affirmative-action-ban-at-uc-15-years-later

2) And, white and Latino admission rates have kept steady, while AA have gone down

3) Do your math

Sorry, forgot your last question. If it was up to me, I'd abolish legacy and sports preferences tomorrow. But in this thread we're talking about not discriminating against Asian Americans because of their race...which of course somehow has become a conversation about AAs.

Every third thread on DCUM for some reason. I am beginning to think that DCUM is obsessed with AA, in a very much negative way.

The reason, I believe, is 1) there are many AAs in this forum, which is natural given DC demographics, 2) some (or many) of them are obsessed with racial matters.

I never experienced a similar reaction in other parts of the country.

[Anonymous]

I would have said that the reason is that there are lots of and/or a few very prolific racists here and anonymity is to blame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:speaking of agendas....

Why do you hate/resent African American professionals so much?

And do you have any evidence at all that their children are keeping *more qualified* first generation college African African students out of elite schools? Seems highly unlikely.

Are you opposed to legacy preferences generally?

No resentment here, I was just describing what you chose to ignore, driven by your obvious resentment against white students.

As for evidence, just look up this same thread, a few comments before ours:

1) "Overall, UC campuses are admitting more students from poor families than before the ban -- no surprise, perhaps, given demographic shifts and the system's post-Proposition 209 emphasis on reaching low-income students of all races. More than one third of the roughly 35,000 UC freshmen enrolled in 2010 came from families making less than $40,000, up from 28 percent in 1995. And even with record-high applications, the system's universities accepted 75 percent of all first-generation college students that year who applied."
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23516740/affirmative-action-ban-at-uc-15-years-later

2) And, white and Latino admission rates have kept steady, while AA have gone down

3) Do your math

Sorry, forgot your last question. If it was up to me, I'd abolish legacy and sports preferences tomorrow. But in this thread we're talking about not discriminating against Asian Americans because of their race...which of course somehow has become a conversation about AAs.

Every third thread on DCUM for some reason. I am beginning to think that DCUM is obsessed with AA, in a very much negative way.

The reason, I believe, is 1) there are many AAs in this forum, which is natural given DC demographics, 2) some (or many) of them are obsessed with racial matters.

I never experienced a similar reaction in other parts of the country.

Nope. Jeff once said that AA were not well represented on DCUM. I don't think the numbers have suddenly jumped upward. Anecdotally, when I mention DCUM to my Black friends, the vast majority have said they stopped reading the racist site long ago. Their words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:speaking of agendas....

Why do you hate/resent African American professionals so much?

And do you have any evidence at all that their children are keeping *more qualified* first generation college African African students out of elite schools? Seems highly unlikely.

Are you opposed to legacy preferences generally?

No resentment here, I was just describing what you chose to ignore, driven by your obvious resentment against white students.

As for evidence, just look up this same thread, a few comments before ours:

1) "Overall, UC campuses are admitting more students from poor families than before the ban -- no surprise, perhaps, given demographic shifts and the system's post-Proposition 209 emphasis on reaching low-income students of all races. More than one third of the roughly 35,000 UC freshmen enrolled in 2010 came from families making less than $40,000, up from 28 percent in 1995. And even with record-high applications, the system's universities accepted 75 percent of all first-generation college students that year who applied."
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23516740/affirmative-action-ban-at-uc-15-years-later

2) And, white and Latino admission rates have kept steady, while AA have gone down

3) Do your math

Sorry, forgot your last question. If it was up to me, I'd abolish legacy and sports preferences tomorrow. But in this thread we're talking about not discriminating against Asian Americans because of their race...which of course somehow has become a conversation about AAs.

Every third thread on DCUM for some reason. I am beginning to think that DCUM is obsessed with AA, in a very much negative way.

The reason, I believe, is 1) there are many AAs in this forum, which is natural given DC demographics, 2) some (or many) of them are obsessed with racial matters.

I never experienced a similar reaction in other parts of the country.

So...you are saying that the negative obsession with AA's on here (example: becoming the negative focus of a thread that had NOTHING to do with them) is because there are a lot of AA's on DCUM (which the Mod has said is not true) and those AA's seem obsessed with racial matters. In otherwords, it is AA's fault that there is so much negativity about them on this forum - even in threads that purport to talk about other groups.

Man...I just can't anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:speaking of agendas....

Why do you hate/resent African American professionals so much?

And do you have any evidence at all that their children are keeping *more qualified* first generation college African African students out of elite schools? Seems highly unlikely.

Are you opposed to legacy preferences generally?

No resentment here, I was just describing what you chose to ignore, driven by your obvious resentment against white students.

As for evidence, just look up this same thread, a few comments before ours:

1) "Overall, UC campuses are admitting more students from poor families than before the ban -- no surprise, perhaps, given demographic shifts and the system's post-Proposition 209 emphasis on reaching low-income students of all races. More than one third of the roughly 35,000 UC freshmen enrolled in 2010 came from families making less than $40,000, up from 28 percent in 1995. And even with record-high applications, the system's universities accepted 75 percent of all first-generation college students that year who applied."
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23516740/affirmative-action-ban-at-uc-15-years-later

2) And, white and Latino admission rates have kept steady, while AA have gone down

3) Do your math

Sorry, forgot your last question. If it was up to me, I'd abolish legacy and sports preferences tomorrow. But in this thread we're talking about not discriminating against Asian Americans because of their race...which of course somehow has become a conversation about AAs.

Every third thread on DCUM for some reason. I am beginning to think that DCUM is obsessed with AA, in a very much negative way.

The reason, I believe, is 1) there are many AAs in this forum, which is natural given DC demographics, 2) some (or many) of them are obsessed with racial matters.

I never experienced a similar reaction in other parts of the country.

Nope. Jeff once said that AA were not well represented on DCUM. I don't think the numbers have suddenly jumped upward. Anecdotally, when I mention DCUM to my Black friends, the vast majority have said they stopped reading the racist site long ago. Their words.

Very good critical thinking there, with the "Jeff once said..."

It is pretty obvious that in the Off-topic and DCPS threads there's a lot of AAs. Perhaps Jeff meant there's not too many in the website overall, but that's irrelevant: Anyone who has posted in DCUM knows that, if a thread has anything to do with race, there will be tons of posts by self-declared AAs. True, those posters may be lying...but that's what they say.

And, IMO, if there's clear, unchecked racism in this forum, it is directed at Asians and Latinos (both legal and illegal immigrants) and Jews. Jeff does a good job at blocking or deleting anything, even if valid, that can hurt the apparently very sensitive nature of AAs. He seems to trust other minorities have more self-confidence.

[Anonymous]

Looks like Columbia didn't get the memo about the Asian quota....

[Anonymous]

^^ I'd put your post in the category of clear unchecked racism.

And I'm not African-American.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ I'd put your post in the category of clear unchecked racism.

And I'm not African-American.

Oops, here's the post I was referring to:

"It is pretty obvious that in the Off-topic and DCPS threads there's a lot of AAs. Perhaps Jeff meant there's not too many in the website overall, but that's irrelevant: Anyone who has posted in DCUM knows that, if a thread has anything to do with race, there will be tons of posts by self-declared AAs. True, those posters may be lying...but that's what they say.

And, IMO, if there's clear, unchecked racism in this forum, it is directed at Asians and Latinos (both legal and illegal immigrants) and Jews. Jeff does a good job at blocking or deleting anything, even if valid, that can hurt the apparently very sensitive nature of AAs. He seems to trust other minorities have more self-confidence."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ I'd put your post in the category of clear unchecked racism.

And I'm not African-American.

Oops, here's the post I was referring to:

"It is pretty obvious that in the Off-topic and DCPS threads there's a lot of AAs. Perhaps Jeff meant there's not too many in the website overall, but that's irrelevant: Anyone who has posted in DCUM knows that, if a thread has anything to do with race, there will be tons of posts by self-declared AAs. True, those posters may be lying...but that's what they say.

And, IMO, if there's clear, unchecked racism in this forum, it is directed at Asians and Latinos (both legal and illegal immigrants) and Jews. Jeff does a good job at blocking or deleting anything, even if valid, that can hurt the apparently very sensitive nature of AAs. He seems to trust other minorities have more self-confidence."

Based on what, darling? I presume that at some point in your life you read The Boy Who Cried Wolf and understood it?

[Anonymous]

The fact that you don't even recognize your own racism (e.g. African Americans are hyper-sensitive, demand and receive special treatment, keep bringing up race) suggests that your analysis of conversational dynamic around race aren't very reliable.

Similarly, your tendency to rely on snark and name-calling and to ignore or misrepresent substance whenever it undermines your POV, indicates that you don't really know WTF you're talking about and you sure as hell won't let facts get in the way of your opinions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact that you don't even recognize your own racism (e.g. African Americans are hyper-sensitive, demand and receive special treatment, keep bringing up race) suggests that your analysis of conversational dynamic around race aren't very reliable.

Similarly, your tendency to rely on snark and name-calling and to ignore or misrepresent substance whenever it undermines your POV, indicates that you don't really know WTF you're talking about and you sure as hell won't let facts get in the way of your opinions.

+1