Yale discriminated against whites and Asians, per Justice Department

[Anonymous]

Football players contribute more to the school community than most undergraduates, depending on the conference between hundreds of thousands and millions more

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree, it is what it is. The US finds social engineering acceptable in certain processes whereas many other western countries or developed Asian countries use pure meritocracy. Both have its pros and cons. I guess time will tell which one is a better system for achieving a ‘desirable’ society.

There are several flaws you packed into a few sentences, but I will address only giant one:

Colleges goal in seeking racial balance in admissions when building a class has nothing to do with "a better system for achieving a ‘desirable’ society."

I can explain that one and point out the others if you wish.

sure, please do.
I'm also interested in the other flaws too.

Colleges are choosing a class to best accommodate their mission. Most feel a balanced cohort allows them to attract students from the widest array. It's self fulfilling - don't have any AA students? Well then no AA students will apply. It's why so few white and asian students apply to HBCs.

It's also why the policies are not discriminatory, because they affect all races at certain colleges. If suddenly on 10 asian students applied to Yale, all 10 who meet the minimum standards would be admitted. They would not be excluded because of their race.

Racial balance quotas are because colleges want it that way, plain and simple. It's not affirmative action, it's not social engineering, and it's not based on any historical factors whatsoever. They want a student body that reflects the country.

The "meritocracy" you refer to in Asian countries I believe often means a single test score taken on a single day. I do not believe that to be a purely meritocratic method at all, and I think most would agree. All methods of selection will have their critics and since it is relative they are all valid. It's up to the colleges to choose what works best for them and is not something those of us outside the process could or should have any influence over -- just like you wouldn't expect to be able to tell Microsoft who to hire or the Red Sox who to pitch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of very talented and high test scoring/high GPA Asian Americans who deserve to get into Ivy league schools but don't get accepted. It is what it is. It sucks for those who don't get accepted and it's probably not going to change (SCOTUS or not).

However, you're not going to change how it works because it's a zero sum game. You'd have to take something away from another racial group and that's not going to happen anytime soon. Asians are competing against themselves and the only ones complaining are the ones who didn't get accepted. It's not like there aren't any Asians getting accepted. IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT THE SCORES AND GPAs!!!

Also, if they made it harder for URMs to get accepted, do you really think they'd make room for more Asians? If you think that, then you don't know how society works.

I agree, it is what it is. The US finds social engineering acceptable in certain processes whereas many other western countries or developed Asian countries use pure meritocracy. Both have its pros and cons. I guess time will tell which one is a better system for achieving a ‘desirable’ society.

In the meantime, I will fight to end racial discrimination against Asian Americans.

So you consider not letting ALL Asian Americans who meet the minimum quantitative threshold (scores/GPA) to get into their college of choice to be racial discrimination? You're just throwing away all of the other criteria that factor into an admissions decision?

No, I do not. These schools should replace affirmative action only for blacks/Hispanics with a boost based on SES for all races. That would be infinitely more ideal.

Ideal? Ideal for whom?
Maybe you should define what you mean by “affirmative action” — so we’re all working with the same definitions. Since you seem to think it is “only for blacks/Hispanics” (sic), while I think it starts with legacy admissions and sports admits, we’re definitely not talking about the same thing, or, for the most part, the same groups of people.

Academic exceptions for athletics overwhelmingly benefits football and basketball playing African Americans. Everyone knows academics are a joke to these programs and 80% of their rosters would not have gotten admitted to the school if it wasn’t for their ballin’ skills.

You’re embarrassing yourself with both your ignorance and your racism. Whites make up the vast majority of less qualified, athletic recruits throughout the Ivy League.

[Anonymous]

^^^ "If suddenly ONLY 10 asian students applied to Yale" is what I intended to type above. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Football players contribute more to the school community than most undergraduates, depending on the conference between hundreds of thousands and millions more

We are talking about elite academic institutions. No one gives a darn whether their kid can get into Clemson. Yale isn’t making money off football.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Football players contribute more to the school community than most undergraduates, depending on the conference between hundreds of thousands and millions more

We are talking about elite academic institutions. No one gives a darn whether their kid can get into Clemson. Yale isn’t making money off football.

Apparently Stanford is no longer elite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At some point, civil rights went from “don’t discriminate against black people” to “we insist that you discriminate against white people.”

In a majority white representative democracy, it seems inevitable that this sort of guidance will result in a backlash. Affirmative Action supporters got too bold and are getting singed.

It’s always fascinating when people make sweeping generalizations with no specifics to support them. Not even a few examples. Pathetic.
This thread is several pages long. Couldn’t you at least make SOME semblance of connecting your comments to the topic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At some point, civil rights went from “don’t discriminate against black people” to “we insist that you discriminate against white people.”

In a majority white representative democracy, it seems inevitable that this sort of guidance will result in a backlash. Affirmative Action supporters got too bold and are getting singed.

Better run along now, I think you are late for the KKK rally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of very talented and high test scoring/high GPA Asian Americans who deserve to get into Ivy league schools but don't get accepted. It is what it is. It sucks for those who don't get accepted and it's probably not going to change (SCOTUS or not).

However, you're not going to change how it works because it's a zero sum game. You'd have to take something away from another racial group and that's not going to happen anytime soon. Asians are competing against themselves and the only ones complaining are the ones who didn't get accepted. It's not like there aren't any Asians getting accepted. IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT THE SCORES AND GPAs!!!

Also, if they made it harder for URMs to get accepted, do you really think they'd make room for more Asians? If you think that, then you don't know how society works.

I agree, it is what it is. The US finds social engineering acceptable in certain processes whereas many other western countries or developed Asian countries use pure meritocracy. Both have its pros and cons. I guess time will tell which one is a better system for achieving a ‘desirable’ society.

In the meantime, I will fight to end racial discrimination against Asian Americans.

So you consider not letting ALL Asian Americans who meet the minimum quantitative threshold (scores/GPA) to get into their college of choice to be racial discrimination? You're just throwing away all of the other criteria that factor into an admissions decision?

No, I do not. These schools should replace affirmative action only for blacks/Hispanics with a boost based on SES for all races. That would be infinitely more ideal.

Ideal? Ideal for whom?
Maybe you should define what you mean by “affirmative action” — so we’re all working with the same definitions. Since you seem to think it is “only for blacks/Hispanics” (sic), while I think it starts with legacy admissions and sports admits, we’re definitely not talking about the same thing, or, for the most part, the same groups of people.

Academic exceptions for athletics overwhelmingly benefits football and basketball playing African Americans. Everyone knows academics are a joke to these programs and 80% of their rosters would not have gotten admitted to the school if it wasn’t for their ballin’ skills.

This topic is about Yale, which is part of the Ivy League. Academics are not “a joke” to these programs. If you have data that suggests otherwise, please post. I’d be interested in hearing more about your thoughts on the fencers, the crew teams, the water polo teams, the squash teams... you get the idea. And maybe research the scholar-athlete model while you’re at it. If you’re the PP, again, a definite of Affirmation Action would be helpful. So would some stats on the water polo and ice hockey teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what do you mean rate them equally? the same or similar achievement from the more disadvantaged student is more impressive.

ah finally someone who gets it

DP.. indeed, but students who don't achieve as much still get preference based on their background. Now, one can argue that someone who comes from a poor background had more hurdles to overcome, so that achievement is more impressive, which I would agree.

But, are these universities giving the same weight to those achievements to students from similar income/SES background but different skin color?

If they are not, then that is playing fast and furious with quotas in the guise of "holistic" approach.

I think most people are fine with giving a leg up to those from poorer backgrounds, irrespective of skin color, but not based on skin color alone.

You do get that what you’re dismissing as “skin color” has been associated with some pretty noxious forms of discrimination in this country, right? So, is your point that overcoming the impact of some significant barriers should never be considered as part of a school’s admissions process?

pp wrote "most people are fine giving a leg up to those from poorer backgrounds... not based on skin color alone", not "skin color should not be considered".
I agree. If elite institutions want to discriminate aka select a certain group in order to achieve equity of opportunities, HHI or HHI+race is a much more fair benchmark than just race.

[Anonymous]

I cannot, for the life of me, understand why anyone even cares about their kid going to an ivy. There are smart people at every school, great professors at other Universities and amazing Developmental opportunities for college kids at schoolS other than certainly this HYP nonsense.

I have worked with people from the Ivys who are bright but can’t manage their grocery list. I have worked with people who went to state schools and were some if the smartest mentors I had.

The school that represents the most Fortune 500 CEOs is Texas A&M.

Like Asians, pick other schools and make them great.

I have suggested to my kids to not even bother applying. It’s Totally their choice, but they’ve got too many strikes against them. Their skin color, their religion, their college educated parents and their middle class background. Unless one of them brokers a peace deal between Israel and Palestine and even then, chances of them getting in are slim to none.

Seriously These schools are just not all that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I cannot, for the life of me, understand why anyone even cares about their kid going to an ivy. There are smart people at every school, great professors at other Universities and amazing Developmental opportunities for college kids at schoolS other than certainly this HYP nonsense.

I have worked with people from the Ivys who are bright but can’t manage their grocery list. I have worked with people who went to state schools and were some if the smartest mentors I had.

The school that represents the most Fortune 500 CEOs is Texas A&M.

Like Asians, pick other schools and make them great.

I have suggested to my kids to not even bother applying. It’s Totally their choice, but they’ve got too many strikes against them. Their skin color, their religion, their college educated parents and their middle class background. Unless one of them brokers a peace deal between Israel and Palestine and even then, chances of them getting in are slim to none.

Seriously These schools are just not all that.

Boo boo the rich white college educated Christians really have it tough in this country. You guys are the biggest whiners around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I cannot, for the life of me, understand why anyone even cares about their kid going to an ivy. There are smart people at every school, great professors at other Universities and amazing Developmental opportunities for college kids at schoolS other than certainly this HYP nonsense.

I have worked with people from the Ivys who are bright but can’t manage their grocery list. I have worked with people who went to state schools and were some if the smartest mentors I had.

The school that represents the most Fortune 500 CEOs is Texas A&M.

Like Asians, pick other schools and make them great.

I have suggested to my kids to not even bother applying. It’s Totally their choice, but they’ve got too many strikes against them. Their skin color, their religion, their college educated parents and their middle class background. Unless one of them brokers a peace deal between Israel and Palestine and even then, chances of them getting in are slim to none.

Seriously These schools are just not all that.

+1 and remember, people: just as your child who you believe is academically top notch and otherwise accomplished/qualified for an Ivy is “having” to go to a lower ranked school lots of other very talented kids are too-they will be your child’s classmates and friends. Chill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/13/yale-illegally-discriminates-against-white-and-asian-students-justice-department-says.html

Fascinating to find an opposing ruling from the recent Harvard law suit. Are the admission preferences so drastically different, or was it simply a different evaluating body?

Uhhhh, the Harvard issue was before a federal district court judge. Enjoy George Mason!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/13/yale-illegally-discriminates-against-white-and-asian-students-justice-department-says.html

Fascinating to find an opposing ruling from the recent Harvard law suit. Are the admission preferences so drastically different, or was it simply a different evaluating body?

?? What ruling? The Harvard lawsuit was a court case that, after a trial, resulted in a ruling against the plaintiff.

This complaint you're citing is just an allegation by the Justice Department that, if it goes to trial, will also result in a loss. Yale just needs to mount the same defense Harvard did.

C’mon man, it depends on the facts. Did you go to a T100 law school?