New TJ Lawsuit Filed 3/10/21 by Pacific Legal Foundation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine standing at the school house door telling a group of people that there are too many of them who are gifted and academically high achievers, so we are not going to accept their children into our program, even when we know they're deserving and qualified.

arguments like this are why fewer and fewer people sympathize with the folks running the poorly-named "coalition for tj". this is literally the best they can do, is some emotional appeal that borrows language from the civil rights movement as if having a smaller percentage of kids at tj is somehow comparable to being barred from receiving public education

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine standing at the school house door telling a group of people that there are too many of them who are gifted and academically high achievers, so we are not going to accept their children into our program, even when we know they're deserving and qualified.

arguments like this are why fewer and fewer people sympathize with the folks running the poorly-named "coalition for tj". this is literally the best they can do, is some emotional appeal that borrows language from the civil rights movement as if having a smaller percentage of kids at tj is somehow comparable to being barred from receiving public education

Right?? Unless the application numbers change dramatically, Asians are still almost certain to be a majority at TJ for several years. C4TJ - a group of folks whom you'd think would be well-versed in statistics - routinely cites manufactured numbers that suggest that 44% of the new TJ will be white - ignoring the fact that white kids don't apply to TJ anymore.

[Anonymous]

A lot of people don't apply to Harvard.

Logically, that means they would get in, but just quit applying?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people don't apply to Harvard.

Logically, that means they would get in, but just quit applying?

I mean, if the numbers of applicants from a certain demographic had dropped by 60% in the last decade while the draw area grew at a rapid rate, Harvard would probably respond in some way. Harvard also HAS responded in many ways to what was previously a much worse problem of poor representation from certain demos.

I love an opportunity to use a bad-faith metaphor to further prove my point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people don't apply to Harvard.

Logically, that means they would get in, but just quit applying?

I mean, if the numbers of applicants from a certain demographic had dropped by 60% in the last decade while the draw area grew at a rapid rate, Harvard would probably respond in some way. Harvard also HAS responded in many ways to what was previously a much worse problem of poor representation from certain demos.

I love an opportunity to use a bad-faith metaphor to further prove my point.

coalition for tj is embarrasing to asians

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people don't apply to Harvard.

Logically, that means they would get in, but just quit applying?

I mean, if the numbers of applicants from a certain demographic had dropped by 60% in the last decade while the draw area grew at a rapid rate, Harvard would probably respond in some way. Harvard also HAS responded in many ways to what was previously a much worse problem of poor representation from certain demos.

I love an opportunity to use a bad-faith metaphor to further prove my point.

So do whites need invitations to apply with instructions because they don't know how, or other public outreach to their "poorly represented demographic" per se? Or what is the reason you believe they aren't applying?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people don't apply to Harvard.

Logically, that means they would get in, but just quit applying?

I mean, if the numbers of applicants from a certain demographic had dropped by 60% in the last decade while the draw area grew at a rapid rate, Harvard would probably respond in some way. Harvard also HAS responded in many ways to what was previously a much worse problem of poor representation from certain demos.

I love an opportunity to use a bad-faith metaphor to further prove my point.

So do whites need invitations to apply with instructions because they don't know how, or other public outreach to their "poorly represented demographic" per se? Or what is the reason you believe they aren't applying?

If you’re reflective of the current culture there, I can’t see why anyone would apply

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people don't apply to Harvard.

Logically, that means they would get in, but just quit applying?

I mean, if the numbers of applicants from a certain demographic had dropped by 60% in the last decade while the draw area grew at a rapid rate, Harvard would probably respond in some way. Harvard also HAS responded in many ways to what was previously a much worse problem of poor representation from certain demos.

I love an opportunity to use a bad-faith metaphor to further prove my point.

So do whites need invitations to apply with instructions because they don't know how, or other public outreach to their "poorly represented demographic" per se? Or what is the reason you believe they aren't applying?

Based on the conversations I’ve had over the years, there are many reasons that they are hesitant about applying. The top ones are:
1) they want a well-rounded education and even though their kid is interested in STEM, they don’t believe that the school will foster their kid’s other interests
2) they hear rumors about the toxic and cutthroat environment and they don’t want that for their kid
3) they don’t believe TJ has good sports or arts extracurriculars
4) they think TJ hurts their kid’s chance of getting into a good college
5) sometimes, they just say flat out “it’s too Asian” - this is rare but it does happen

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people don't apply to Harvard.

Logically, that means they would get in, but just quit applying?

I mean, if the numbers of applicants from a certain demographic had dropped by 60% in the last decade while the draw area grew at a rapid rate, Harvard would probably respond in some way. Harvard also HAS responded in many ways to what was previously a much worse problem of poor representation from certain demos.

I love an opportunity to use a bad-faith metaphor to further prove my point.

So do whites need invitations to apply with instructions because they don't know how, or other public outreach to their "poorly represented demographic" per se? Or what is the reason you believe they aren't applying?

If you’re reflective of the current culture there, I can’t see why anyone would apply

BINGO

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people don't apply to Harvard.

Logically, that means they would get in, but just quit applying?

I mean, if the numbers of applicants from a certain demographic had dropped by 60% in the last decade while the draw area grew at a rapid rate, Harvard would probably respond in some way. Harvard also HAS responded in many ways to what was previously a much worse problem of poor representation from certain demos.

I love an opportunity to use a bad-faith metaphor to further prove my point.

So do whites need invitations to apply with instructions because they don't know how, or other public outreach to their "poorly represented demographic" per se? Or what is the reason you believe they aren't applying?

If you’re reflective of the current culture there, I can’t see why anyone would apply

It would make for a hell of a strategy, wouldn’t it? Come on this board and just demonstrate the racism and condescension that exists in the TJ environment so that people are turned off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people don't apply to Harvard.

Logically, that means they would get in, but just quit applying?

I mean, if the numbers of applicants from a certain demographic had dropped by 60% in the last decade while the draw area grew at a rapid rate, Harvard would probably respond in some way. Harvard also HAS responded in many ways to what was previously a much worse problem of poor representation from certain demos.

I love an opportunity to use a bad-faith metaphor to further prove my point.

So do whites need invitations to apply with instructions because they don't know how, or other public outreach to their "poorly represented demographic" per se? Or what is the reason you believe they aren't applying?

If you’re reflective of the current culture there, I can’t see why anyone would apply

It would make for a hell of a strategy, wouldn’t it? Come on this board and just demonstrate the racism and condescension that exists in the TJ environment so that people are turned off.

No, sorry, I'm not a TJ grad or TJ parent. I'm not Asian either. But I did get into a top computer science college, in the honors program, without suing anyone or having my mommy help me. I navigated it myself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine standing at the school house door telling a group of people that there are too many of them who are gifted and academically high achievers, so we are not going to accept their children into our program, even when we know they're deserving and qualified.

arguments like this are why fewer and fewer people sympathize with the folks running the poorly-named "coalition for tj". this is literally the best they can do, is some emotional appeal that borrows language from the civil rights movement as if having a smaller percentage of kids at tj is somehow comparable to being barred from receiving public education

PP here. I'm an educator who's worked with special needs kids a long time and not "borrowing" anything. I strongly believe that every child should be able to access the education that best fits his/her needs. If a child is gifted and functions academically at a very high level, then that child should be able to access the available programs in a given district. No program should be limited by a quota or demographics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine standing at the school house door telling a group of people that there are too many of them who are gifted and academically high achievers, so we are not going to accept their children into our program, even when we know they're deserving and qualified.

It would be abhorrent if that were happening. What is actually happening is that people are standing at the school house door saying "there are groups of people who are systematically excluded from this school but who are also gifted and academically high achievers, and we are going to make room for them in part by expanding the overall size of each incoming class".

Again, just because it impacts you doesn't mean it's about you.

If you go from a policy which allows a particular group to assert its rights to one which does not allow them to assert its rights, AND a policy disproportionately affects that group, AND preexisting racism against that group exists, then that unambiguously allows for racism directed against that group, which basically guarantees that racism is a motive. Just because not about you to everyone doesn't mean it's not about you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine standing at the school house door telling a group of people that there are too many of them who are gifted and academically high achievers, so we are not going to accept their children into our program, even when we know they're deserving and qualified.

arguments like this are why fewer and fewer people sympathize with the folks running the poorly-named "coalition for tj". this is literally the best they can do, is some emotional appeal that borrows language from the civil rights movement as if having a smaller percentage of kids at tj is somehow comparable to being barred from receiving public education

The ignorance in this rebuttal is jaw-dropping. Is this appeal to emotion the best you can do? I mean you're literally doing exactly what you're accusing that other poster of doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine standing at the school house door telling a group of people that there are too many of them who are gifted and academically high achievers, so we are not going to accept their children into our program, even when we know they're deserving and qualified.

It would be abhorrent if that were happening. What is actually happening is that people are standing at the school house door saying "there are groups of people who are systematically excluded from this school but who are also gifted and academically high achievers, and we are going to make room for them in part by expanding the overall size of each incoming class".

Again, just because it impacts you doesn't mean it's about you.

If you go from a policy which allows a particular group to assert its rights to one which does not allow them to assert its rights, AND a policy disproportionately affects that group, AND preexisting racism against that group exists, then that unambiguously allows for racism directed against that group, which basically guarantees that racism is a motive. Just because not about you to everyone doesn't mean it's not about you.

OK, what rights are not allowed to be asserted?