How often do you think applicants lie about their race?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is shocking how easy it is for black students to get into a decent law school. The LSAT scores aren't remotely close to white or Asian students.

It is racist to notice this. Georgetown Law School punishes racist professors and students.

https://www.city-journal.org/georgetown-law-school-dean-caves-to-social-justice-activists

https://www.commentary.org/articles/timothy-maguire/my-bout-with-affirmative-action/

Anonymous wrote: You sound like a nativist bigot. If blacks and Native Americans get AA, Latinos deserve it too.

Exactly, all foreigners and their decendents deserve priority over Americans. Americans have it too easy.

Anonymous wrote:Imagine how dismal k12 schools must be in all Dem-run districts "serving" black kids.

Systematic racists have flunked all the students at 23 Baltimore schools.

https://wpde.com/news/nation-world/23-baltimore-schools-have-zero-students-proficient-in-math-state-test-results-reveal-maryland-comprehensive-assessment-program-department-of-education-statistics-school-failures

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is the data:

https://thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/education/577722-more-than-a-third-of-white-students-lie-about-their/

My guess is that they mostly put Hispanic.

I thought Hispanic % was said to be pretty high at some of the colleges.

Yeah, a friend of my son has an Hispanic mother ... whose family has been in the United States since the late 1800s. The father is a WASP who attended Columbia and HBS. Meanwhile the boy is checking the Hispanic box and applying to Harvard and Yale while my slightly-better-stats kid is focused on, like, Villanova.

It's so frustrating to see people abuse the system. I wish there was a way for colleges to distinguish (and who knows; maybe they do.)

Simple

Latinos should not get any affirmative action

It should be for ados blacks only.

Latinos scam this so hard.

I ask for test scores and transcripts when I hire and I definitely am more willing to bend for black kids (it’s pretty easy also to tell ados from 1st and 2nd gen African/Dominicans when you see their names, ask where they went to high school, make small talk about hobbies, music, sports during the interview process etc)

You sound like a nativist bigot.

Latinos have actually struggled for centuries here, you know the US stole their lands in many states? And their language has been forbidden for decades in states like CA?

If blacks and Native Americans get AA, Latinos deserve it too.

Nah you gotta be enslaved for centuries to get AA but if you want to put on the chains so you can deserve it too, go right ahead.

[Anonymous]

And why should their ultra-wealthy kids deserve AA?

Do you honestly believe the Obama kids were accepted because of AA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who lies about their race or anything else on a college application or job application or whatever is giving up way more than they're gaining. Why would anyone give up their integrity for ANY reason, let alone one that will make no difference in their future happiness or success?

Colleges should not discriminate based on race in the first place.
That's evil.

So basically, "I don't like what I perceive someone else to be doing, so I can do whatever I want in response."

That kind of rationale has led to all sorts of evil through the ages.

Whereas “others do evil to me but I do nothing in response” only leads to good outcomes for the victims. 🙄

Fair point. What I should have said is that you're wrong about colleges discriminating on the basis of race, if you're defining 'discriminating' as deliberate exclusion. There are no evil plans being executed by admissions offices.

Yet it is the Asian students who are suing over considering race in college admissions.

So discrimination is totally fine if it’s the obvious byproduct of a policy?

'Discrimination' is used in different ways by different people and in different situations. If you're using the word to mean deliberate exclusion of a group of people by college admissions offices, then you're wrong. To be more specific, fewer people of one race being admitted to a college as a byproduct of another race being given some preference due to horrific mistreatment historically is not a racist policy. It's the natural outcome in a zero-sum game.

It's moot anyway. Not being admitted to any given college isn't doing anyone any harm. The slightly less selective college they get into is just as capable of giving them the education they need.

You are probably not following the Supreme Court case.
College admissions offices are deliberately lowering percentage of a group of people with bullshit insulting scores on kindness courage likability.

It's the 21st century. We don't need racism in the academic fields.

Regardless of what SCOTUS decides, what is happening is not 'racism'. For it to be racism, there would have to be hundreds of people in an admissions office colluding to exclude a specific group with every one of them capable of keeping the secret and none of them having the spine to go public. And those admissions offices include people of all races and backgrounds, and have people on staff whose job it is to ensure racism doesn't happen. And actually, it's thousands of people who would have to be keeping the secret, because while Harvard and UNC are named in lawsuits, the same thing is happening at all universities. Affirmative action may be found to be unconstitutional by this very biased court, but it is not a racist policy.

It is absolutely possible, and even probable, that what we are seeing is racism. Yes, hundreds of people in admissions offices can definitely have a racist bias against Asians. We see it here in this forum all the time - the attitude that Asians are just boring grade-grubbers and exam-crammers. Admissions officers are very much in the DCUM demographic and I venture to guess that they think the same way.

Furthermore, you are ignoring unconscious bias and systemic racism. Don't you believe those are actual things? I bet that if you do, you think they only operate against blacks, but it is very obvious they operate against Asians in this case.

Last but not least, the courts have found in other cases that it doesn't even matter if there isn't a conscious, racist conspiracy. If your practices have a disproportionately adverse effect on a minority even though your rules are formally race-neutral then you are discriminating by race and that is wrong. And there is no doubt that current admissions practices have a disproportionately adverse effect on Asians.

Your knowledge of the composition of admissions staffs is way off base. It is not at all similar to the DCUM crowd, with deliberate efforts to choose a very diverse group. Many of them are recent grads of the school where they work and care deeply about making sure it maintains the excellence they love so much that they want to try to convince others to attend.

They are mentally and ideologically exactly the same as the DCUM crowd - educated urban liberals. And like the DCUM crowd, they consider some types of "diversity" better than others. For whatever reason, black diversity is held to improve the "excellence" of these schools, but Asian diversity does not contribute to the "excellence" of these schools.

I'm confused how you can say that when 23.7% of Harvard freshman who report only one race are Asian, but only 6.1% of the US population is Asian. That's almost four times the representation in the general population and seems to value Asian diversity pretty highly. This is as contrasted with blacks, who make up 10.1% of the freshmen and 13.6% of the general population. They seem to be valued less than they ought to be.

Blacks make up a far smaller proportion of "college ready" graduating Seniors each year, as measured (with a very low bar) on the ACT; Whites and Asians outpace their share of the population. So, elite schools will reflect this to some extent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is shocking how easy it is for black students to get into a decent law school. The LSAT scores aren't remotely close to white or Asian students.

It is racist to notice this. Georgetown Law School punishes racist professors and students.

https://www.city-journal.org/georgetown-law-school-dean-caves-to-social-justice-activists

https://www.commentary.org/articles/timothy-maguire/my-bout-with-affirmative-action/

Anonymous wrote: You sound like a nativist bigot. If blacks and Native Americans get AA, Latinos deserve it too.

Exactly, all foreigners and their decendents deserve priority over Americans. Americans have it too easy.

Anonymous wrote:Imagine how dismal k12 schools must be in all Dem-run districts "serving" black kids.

Systematic racists have flunked all the students at 23 Baltimore schools.

https://wpde.com/news/nation-world/23-baltimore-schools-have-zero-students-proficient-in-math-state-test-results-reveal-maryland-comprehensive-assessment-program-department-of-education-statistics-school-failures

Foreigners and their descendants? And exactly how are you not the descendent of a foreigner?

[Anonymous]

Blacks make up a far smaller proportion of "college ready" graduating Seniors each year, as measured (with a very low bar) on the ACT; Whites and Asians outpace their share of the population. So, elite schools will reflect this to some extent.

Or, white and Asian kids spend more time and money on test prep, tutoring and taking the test multiple times.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If lots of people were doing this, the numbers of Black, Hispanic, and Native students at top schools would be much higher.

As the numbers remain quite paltry, I’m assuming either most people are being honest, or these liar kids can’t get in even when they lie because they aren’t up to standard whatever the box they check.

Good point. It's hard to find a non-HBCU with higher than 7% Black/AA students. Most are in the 5% range. (Currrent US Black population is about 13%)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Blacks make up a far smaller proportion of "college ready" graduating Seniors each year, as measured (with a very low bar) on the ACT; Whites and Asians outpace their share of the population. So, elite schools will reflect this to some extent.

Or, white and Asian kids spend more time and money on test prep, tutoring and taking the test multiple times.

So?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If lots of people were doing this, the numbers of Black, Hispanic, and Native students at top schools would be much higher.

As the numbers remain quite paltry, I’m assuming either most people are being honest, or these liar kids can’t get in even when they lie because they aren’t up to standard whatever the box they check.

Good point. It's hard to find a non-HBCU with higher than 7% Black/AA students. Most are in the 5% range. (Currrent US Black population is about 13%)

That's exactly right, but beyond people not lying much, that stat is also an indication that people have been drinking the racist KoolAid that somehow their precious students are losing spots to Black students. AA opened the door for everyone. People have no sense of history. Pretty much nobody, including Jews, were admitted to major universities at pace with their percentage before affirmative action. Blacks have largely Not been the greatest beneficiaries of that policy. You know who gets affirmative action. Men. If colleges were honest about qualifications and merit, the vast majority would be 75-80% female.

[Anonymous]

It definitely happens. Back when I was applying to college in the early 2000s I had a good friend who had a set of grandparents who immigrated to Argentina from Europe during WWII and then moved to the US about 15 years later. My friend claimed on her college applications that she was Latino even though she knew her grandparents stint in Argentina hardly made her Latino. I think it may happen more with people who feel some tangential claim to a different race/ethnicity, like my friend. Look at Hilaria Baldwin. She speaks with a Spanish accent and she grew up in Boston and was educated at private schools in Massachusetts, all of her children have Spanish names, she pretended on television to forget the word cucumber and then said "how you say?" I mean... It's absurd, but it happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who lies about their race or anything else on a college application or job application or whatever is giving up way more than they're gaining. Why would anyone give up their integrity for ANY reason, let alone one that will make no difference in their future happiness or success?

Colleges should not discriminate based on race in the first place.
That's evil.

So basically, "I don't like what I perceive someone else to be doing, so I can do whatever I want in response."

That kind of rationale has led to all sorts of evil through the ages.

Whereas “others do evil to me but I do nothing in response” only leads to good outcomes for the victims. 🙄

Fair point. What I should have said is that you're wrong about colleges discriminating on the basis of race, if you're defining 'discriminating' as deliberate exclusion. There are no evil plans being executed by admissions offices.

So discrimination is totally fine if it’s the obvious byproduct of a policy?

'Discrimination' is used in different ways by different people and in different situations. If you're using the word to mean deliberate exclusion of a group of people by college admissions offices, then you're wrong. To be more specific, fewer people of one race being admitted to a college as a byproduct of another race being given some preference due to horrific mistreatment historically is not a racist policy. It's the natural outcome in a zero-sum game.

It's moot anyway. Not being admitted to any given college isn't doing anyone any harm. The slightly less selective college they get into is just as capable of giving them the education they need.

You are probably not following the Supreme Court case.
College admissions offices are deliberately lowering percentage of a group of people with bullshit insulting scores on kindness courage likability.

It's the 21st century. We don't need racism in the academic fields.

Regardless of what SCOTUS decides, what is happening is not 'racism'. For it to be racism, there would have to be hundreds of people in an admissions office colluding to exclude a specific group with every one of them capable of keeping the secret and none of them having the spine to go public. And those admissions offices include people of all races and backgrounds, and have people on staff whose job it is to ensure racism doesn't happen. And actually, it's thousands of people who would have to be keeping the secret, because while Harvard and UNC are named in lawsuits, the same thing is happening at all universities. Affirmative action may be found to be unconstitutional by this very biased court, but it is not a racist policy.

It is absolutely possible, and even probable, that what we are seeing is racism. Yes, hundreds of people in admissions offices can definitely have a racist bias against Asians. We see it here in this forum all the time - the attitude that Asians are just boring grade-grubbers and exam-crammers. Admissions officers are very much in the DCUM demographic and I venture to guess that they think the same way.

Furthermore, you are ignoring unconscious bias and systemic racism. Don't you believe those are actual things? I bet that if you do, you think they only operate against blacks, but it is very obvious they operate against Asians in this case.

Last but not least, the courts have found in other cases that it doesn't even matter if there isn't a conscious, racist conspiracy. If your practices have a disproportionately adverse effect on a minority even though your rules are formally race-neutral then you are discriminating by race and that is wrong. And there is no doubt that current admissions practices have a disproportionately adverse effect on Asians.

"If your practices have a disproportionately adverse effect on a minority even though your rules are formally race-neutral then you are discriminating by race and that is wrong. And there is no doubt that current admissions practices have a disproportionately adverse effect on Asians."

So what you propose we do is change it so that admission practices instead have a disproportionately adverse effect on blacks? Despite the Civil Rights Act, blacks have been stuck with sub-par educational opportunities for centuries when compared to other races. The likelihood that an extremely capable black student won't have access to a superior high school education (and before) is significantly higher than it is for other races. So you want to base college admission solely on numbers and not take any of that into account?

Right now, blacks are admitted to universities that would not admit a non-black student with the same profile - that is, they are disproportionately advantaged. Meanwhile, Asians are denied admission to universities that would admit a non-Asian student with the same profile - that is, they are disproportionately disadvantaged. If you just "let the chips fall where they may" - do not take race into account - then blacks will lose their disproportionate advantage and Asians will lose their disproportionate disadvantage. Removing the artificial black advantage would not create a "disproportionately adverse" effect on blacks - they'd simply have to go to the schools that fit their numbers. This is not a form of adversity, that's the way the system should work.

"So you want to base college admission solely on numbers and not take any of that into account?" -- Yes. The system right now is deeply stupid and dishonest, and the only way to eliminate and stop the games that both applicants and colleges are playing is to take race off the table.

It’s hardly dishonest. They’re completely transparent about what they are doing. You just don’t like what they do. You think college admissions is some reward for what a student achieves in high school. It’s not nor has it ever been that way. You don’t seem to have a problem with legacy, athletics, donors or any of the other factors they consider. Picking on URMs simply demonstrates you don’t like URMs.

+1. I would lump URM status, child or a donor, and legacy in the same group. You were born that way. Although I really think athletics are in different bucket because you need to work to be a good athlete like you need to work to be a good musician or a good artist or a good debater. It's talent, but also a lot of work. Dismantling AA is more likely to undercut legacy preference and then the only people who benefit are the children and grandchildren of large donors, so basically everyone loses.

[Anonymous]

First Gen And Low Income or simply Low Income is the only affirmative action that makes sense to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I knew a lot of people personally who did. One kid of white South Africans said AA. One half Moroccan kid said AA. Lots of kids who had something like 1/8 heritage in Spain or Portugal said Hispanic.

The Moroccan kid and South African kid ARE African-American. They are not, however, black. If the school wanted to know if they were black, they should have asked that. And the 1/8 heritage kid from Spain IS Hispanic. If the school wanted to know if their ancestry is from Latin America, they should ask that. The person with Portuguese heritage should not be checking off Hispanic as people from Portugal speak Portuguese not Spanish, and are, therefore, not Hispanic.

You are WRONG. The U.S. has an official definition for African-American (as it does for other races, and ethnicities).
Your approach of "technically correct" is false. It is not up to people to make up their own definitions of African-American.

It is like if someone who originated from India and is 1st generation American said they were "American Indian".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is the data:

https://thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/education/577722-more-than-a-third-of-white-students-lie-about-their/

My guess is that they mostly put Hispanic.

I thought Hispanic % was said to be pretty high at some of the colleges.

Yeah, a friend of my son has an Hispanic mother ... whose family has been in the United States since the late 1800s. The father is a WASP who attended Columbia and HBS. Meanwhile the boy is checking the Hispanic box and applying to Harvard and Yale while my slightly-better-stats kid is focused on, like, Villanova.

It's so frustrating to see people abuse the system. I wish there was a way for colleges to distinguish (and who knows; maybe they do.)

Simple

Latinos should not get any affirmative action

It should be for ados blacks only.

Latinos scam this so hard.

I ask for test scores and transcripts when I hire and I definitely am more willing to bend for black kids (it’s pretty easy also to tell ados from 1st and 2nd gen African/Dominicans when you see their names, ask where they went to high school, make small talk about hobbies, music, sports during the interview process etc)

You sound like a nativist bigot.

Latinos have actually struggled for centuries here, you know the US stole their lands in many states? And their language has been forbidden for decades in states like CA?

If blacks and Native Americans get AA, Latinos deserve it too.

Nah you gotta be enslaved for centuries to get AA but if you want to put on the chains so you can deserve it too, go right ahead.

Tell us again how Obama or Harris' ancestors were enslaved by centuries? It's more like their families were doing the enslaving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I knew a lot of people personally who did. One kid of white South Africans said AA. One half Moroccan kid said AA. Lots of kids who had something like 1/8 heritage in Spain or Portugal said Hispanic.

The Moroccan kid and South African kid ARE African-American. They are not, however, black. If the school wanted to know if they were black, they should have asked that. And the 1/8 heritage kid from Spain IS Hispanic. If the school wanted to know if their ancestry is from Latin America, they should ask that. The person with Portuguese heritage should not be checking off Hispanic as people from Portugal speak Portuguese not Spanish, and are, therefore, not Hispanic.

You are WRONG. The U.S. has an official definition for African-American (as it does for other races, and ethnicities).
Your approach of "technically correct" is false. It is not up to people to make up their own definitions of African-American.

It is like if someone who originated from India and is 1st generation American said they were "American Indian".

DP: this is very funny. First PP is absolutely correct, but you're attacking him for making things up by mentioning some non-sensical madeup definition observed by some in this country.