Update on Harvard Lawsuit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just happy that my Hispanic rising senior will get the benefit of being a URM before they change the rules.

I hope my Hispanic kids will attend the university they deserve based on their own merits, and thrive there, and be respected by the own accomplishments and work (including being fully bilingual).

I hope Harvard loses this case, as it'd help advance that hope.

Don't be foolish! For the sake of your kids, take advantage of AA while you can. Their heritage is part of their credential.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't care, do u?

Yes, i care about the equitable treatment of all applicants....what sort of mindless imbecile wouldn't?

This isn't about equitable treatment of all applicants, it's about keeping blacks and Hispanics out in favor of races that Trump has deemed preferable.

Try to keep up.....blacks and hispanics already get a significant handicap on admissions. The suit is about discrimination against qualified asian-american applicants.

If these plaintiffs prevail, the effect will be to disproportionately push blacks and Hispanics out of these schools. That's why so many Asian people are opposed to this lawsuit, because they don't want their admissions to come at the expense of disadvantaged groups, and even those who don't care about that per se know how bad a look it is for them.

Why is that? Stoping discriminating Asian students doesn't mean other groups have to be discriminated. It's strange to think a race-neutral policy will push blacks and latinos out.

Blacks and latinos currently are subjected to lower standards than the rest of the applicant pool so that the college can meet its racial quotas. If admissions were a true meritocracy like in Europe or to a lesser degree the UCal system, more asians would be admitted and fewer blacks and latinos would....because of, you know....qualifications.

Why do admissions have to be a "meritocracy"? Regurgitating answers, studying for hours, getting straight A's in school doesn't equate to success in college or the real world. It doesn't measure innovation, leadership skills or a vast multitude of other things that are more important than perfect test scores.

Indeed, why should academic merit be the sole criteria to an academic program? Why should how well you play basketball be the only factor in being picked to play for the NBA?

Look at the winners of the Intel Science competition. Those competitions aren't about who has the best test scores and grades. Not seeing many URM there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard and other top schools have always made it clear that they are looking at much more than just academics. Harvard is about creating leaders, not only academic scholars, so they need to look at far more than just test scores and grades.

Excellent job at stating the obvious. And bonus points for casual racism insinuating that Asians are only excellent at academics. Utter imbecile.

The car, plane, light bulb, internet, nuclear power all must have been invented by Asians. They are so smart

You're embarrassing yourself with your stupidity but you're likely too stupid to realize it. Oh, and if you have wifi in your trailer you might want to research gunpowder, the compass and printing

FFS, people getting into a pissing contest about which race is smarter.

In the US, every aspect of society - from politics to mainstream media - has been controlled by white people. So, it's kind of hard for non white people to take on leadership roles historically Bamboo ceiling is just one example. That is changing, slowly. Look at some of the leaders in high tech; more and more Asian Americans entering politics. More and more Asians in our media.

Asian American population is small, so it's kind of hard for Asian americans to stand out as leaders. Maybe Harvard should allow in more Asian Americans so more of them will be trained by Harvard to enter into leadership roles. Now, there's an equalizer. We have enough white people in leadership roles, many who are corrupt and inept.

there are less jews than asians in the us but there are a shit ton of jews in leadership positions.

how do you explain that?

And how long have the Jews been in the country compared to Asians? The Indians are just getting started. Come back in 20 years..

Also, some Jews look "white". If you look at Nathalie Portman for example, most people wouldn't even think "jewish". I had no idea she was until that incident with the fashion designer. Similar to Spanish people with blond hair and blue eyes. They may claim "hispanic" but c'mon those folks are white European, not "hispanic".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard and other top schools have always made it clear that they are looking at much more than just academics. Harvard is about creating leaders, not only academic scholars, so they need to look at far more than just test scores and grades.

Excellent job at stating the obvious. And bonus points for casual racism insinuating that Asians are only excellent at academics. Utter imbecile.

The car, plane, light bulb, internet, nuclear power all must have been invented by Asians. They are so smart

You're embarrassing yourself with your stupidity but you're likely too stupid to realize it. Oh, and if you have wifi in your trailer you might want to research gunpowder, the compass and printing

FFS, people getting into a pissing contest about which race is smarter.

In the US, every aspect of society - from politics to mainstream media - has been controlled by white people. So, it's kind of hard for non white people to take on leadership roles historically Bamboo ceiling is just one example. That is changing, slowly. Look at some of the leaders in high tech; more and more Asian Americans entering politics. More and more Asians in our media.

Asian American population is small, so it's kind of hard for Asian americans to stand out as leaders. Maybe Harvard should allow in more Asian Americans so more of them will be trained by Harvard to enter into leadership roles. Now, there's an equalizer. We have enough white people in leadership roles, many who are corrupt and inept.

there are less jews than asians in the us but there are a shit ton of jews in leadership positions.

how do you explain that?

True.

Jews are a tiny minority but exercise disproportionate influence because they work damn hard.

I'd also like to point out that the Asian population was also incredibly small till fairly recently (a generation ago). Complaining that Asians had it hard because whites controlled all the roles overlooks that up through the 1980s the US was 80+ (and even approaching 90% in the 1920s-1960s) white. Well, d'oh.

Anyway, I am not sure if Asians have a problem today. Look at the ranks of leading doctors, lawyers, venture capitalists, business owners, there are now many, many, Asians. It takes a new wave of immigrants time to build their way up to the top. It always has. We forget that the Jews, Italians, Poles, etc, were once derided as non properly "white" ethnic groups and they worked their way to the top.

The African American experience, however, is indisputably different. It's more problematic. It's more complex. I am a bit on the fence on this because there are pros and cons to affirmative actions for African Americans but I've concluded that deeply flawed it is, it's likely better than the alternatives and so be it.

I do fully understand why Asian Americans may feel bitter to being held to the highest standards in the application pools for the top colleges and universities, but on the other hand, perhaps they should be thankful that they don't need affirmative action.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't care, do u?

Yes, i care about the equitable treatment of all applicants....what sort of mindless imbecile wouldn't?

This isn't about equitable treatment of all applicants, it's about keeping blacks and Hispanics out in favor of races that Trump has deemed preferable.

Try to keep up.....blacks and hispanics already get a significant handicap on admissions. The suit is about discrimination against qualified asian-american applicants.

If these plaintiffs prevail, the effect will be to disproportionately push blacks and Hispanics out of these schools. That's why so many Asian people are opposed to this lawsuit, because they don't want their admissions to come at the expense of disadvantaged groups, and even those who don't care about that per se know how bad a look it is for them.

Why is that? Stoping discriminating Asian students doesn't mean other groups have to be discriminated. It's strange to think a race-neutral policy will push blacks and latinos out.

Blacks and latinos currently are subjected to lower standards than the rest of the applicant pool so that the college can meet its racial quotas. If admissions were a true meritocracy like in Europe or to a lesser degree the UCal system, more asians would be admitted and fewer blacks and latinos would....because of, you know....qualifications.

Let's extend out the sterotype(s) Take a look at the winners of these science competitions, spellings bees, geography bee, other acadmemic compeitions. Are these the the smartest people? sure ok. Are these people going to bring in the most financial donations back to the univesrity heck no. This is what people don't understand. Universities are a business plain and simple they are trying to select a class that will generate the most successful people that will be more likely to donate money back to the university. Yes this means you have to be smart but not super super smart. Soft skills, confidence, charisma, and even empathy are much more important which is why admissions committees do holistic admissions instead of taking the people with the highest academic stats only. Some of those soft skills are especially prevelant amongst athletes which is why places like Harvard have athletics are one of their 4 big categories. It's all in the brief I post on page 4 I think.

Why do admissions have to be a "meritocracy"? Regurgitating answers, studying for hours, getting straight A's in school doesn't equate to success in college or the real world. It doesn't measure innovation, leadership skills or a vast multitude of other things that are more important than perfect test scores.

Indeed, why should academic merit be the sole criteria to an academic program? Why should how well you play basketball be the only factor in being picked to play for the NBA?

Look at the winners of the Intel Science competition. Those competitions aren't about who has the best test scores and grades. Not seeing many URM there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard and other top schools have always made it clear that they are looking at much more than just academics. Harvard is about creating leaders, not only academic scholars, so they need to look at far more than just test scores and grades.

Excellent job at stating the obvious. And bonus points for casual racism insinuating that Asians are only excellent at academics. Utter imbecile.

The car, plane, light bulb, internet, nuclear power all must have been invented by Asians. They are so smart

You're embarrassing yourself with your stupidity but you're likely too stupid to realize it. Oh, and if you have wifi in your trailer you might want to research gunpowder, the compass and printing

FFS, people getting into a pissing contest about which race is smarter.

In the US, every aspect of society - from politics to mainstream media - has been controlled by white people. So, it's kind of hard for non white people to take on leadership roles historically Bamboo ceiling is just one example. That is changing, slowly. Look at some of the leaders in high tech; more and more Asian Americans entering politics. More and more Asians in our media.

Asian American population is small, so it's kind of hard for Asian americans to stand out as leaders. Maybe Harvard should allow in more Asian Americans so more of them will be trained by Harvard to enter into leadership roles. Now, there's an equalizer. We have enough white people in leadership roles, many who are corrupt and inept.

there are less jews than asians in the us but there are a shit ton of jews in leadership positions.

how do you explain that?

True.

Jews are a tiny minority but exercise disproportionate influence because they work damn hard.

I'd also like to point out that the Asian population was also incredibly small till fairly recently (a generation ago). Complaining that Asians had it hard because whites controlled all the roles overlooks that up through the 1980s the US was 80+ (and even approaching 90% in the 1920s-1960s) white. Well, d'oh.

Anyway, I am not sure if Asians have a problem today. Look at the ranks of leading doctors, lawyers, venture capitalists, business owners, there are now many, many, Asians. It takes a new wave of immigrants time to build their way up to the top. It always has. We forget that the Jews, Italians, Poles, etc, were once derided as non properly "white" ethnic groups and they worked their way to the top.

The African American experience, however, is indisputably different. It's more problematic. It's more complex. I am a bit on the fence on this because there are pros and cons to affirmative actions for African Americans but I've concluded that deeply flawed it is, it's likely better than the alternatives and so be it.

I do fully understand why Asian Americans may feel bitter to being held to the highest standards in the application pools for the top colleges and universities, but on the other hand, perhaps they should be thankful that they don't need affirmative action.

well, according to some people Asian Americans don't contribute to society and don't take leadership positions so that's why they are not as "attractive" to Ivies.

Obviously, there are many Asian Americans who are not only innovative but do take on leadership roles. It does indeed take time. The problem with the admissions is that Asian Americans have to have everything that a URM or white student has, PLUS more. That is where the discrimination comes in. Why does one group of students have to outperform in EVERY way compared to another group? How is that fair?

As my white DH says, Asian Americans are a victim of their own success. I suppose if the group wasn't as successful, over represented in elite universities, then maybe Asian American students would also be held to a lower standard like the others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard and other top schools have always made it clear that they are looking at much more than just academics. Harvard is about creating leaders, not only academic scholars, so they need to look at far more than just test scores and grades.

Excellent job at stating the obvious. And bonus points for casual racism insinuating that Asians are only excellent at academics. Utter imbecile.

The car, plane, light bulb, internet, nuclear power all must have been invented by Asians. They are so smart

You're embarrassing yourself with your stupidity but you're likely too stupid to realize it. Oh, and if you have wifi in your trailer you might want to research gunpowder, the compass and printing

FFS, people getting into a pissing contest about which race is smarter.

In the US, every aspect of society - from politics to mainstream media - has been controlled by white people. So, it's kind of hard for non white people to take on leadership roles historically Bamboo ceiling is just one example. That is changing, slowly. Look at some of the leaders in high tech; more and more Asian Americans entering politics. More and more Asians in our media.

Asian American population is small, so it's kind of hard for Asian americans to stand out as leaders. Maybe Harvard should allow in more Asian Americans so more of them will be trained by Harvard to enter into leadership roles. Now, there's an equalizer. We have enough white people in leadership roles, many who are corrupt and inept.

there are less jews than asians in the us but there are a shit ton of jews in leadership positions.

how do you explain that?

And how long have the Jews been in the country compared to Asians? The Indians are just getting started. Come back in 20 years..

east asians have beenfor 150+ years. Remember who built the railroad?

Jews are in leadership positions because they have the intellectual firepower of asians coupled with superior verbal and interpersonal skills.

Though I can start to see indians slowly joining the ranks of jewish success - albeit not as high in concentration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard and other top schools have always made it clear that they are looking at much more than just academics. Harvard is about creating leaders, not only academic scholars, so they need to look at far more than just test scores and grades.

Excellent job at stating the obvious. And bonus points for casual racism insinuating that Asians are only excellent at academics. Utter imbecile.

The car, plane, light bulb, internet, nuclear power all must have been invented by Asians. They are so smart

You're embarrassing yourself with your stupidity but you're likely too stupid to realize it. Oh, and if you have wifi in your trailer you might want to research gunpowder, the compass and printing

FFS, people getting into a pissing contest about which race is smarter.

In the US, every aspect of society - from politics to mainstream media - has been controlled by white people. So, it's kind of hard for non white people to take on leadership roles historically Bamboo ceiling is just one example. That is changing, slowly. Look at some of the leaders in high tech; more and more Asian Americans entering politics. More and more Asians in our media.

Asian American population is small, so it's kind of hard for Asian americans to stand out as leaders. Maybe Harvard should allow in more Asian Americans so more of them will be trained by Harvard to enter into leadership roles. Now, there's an equalizer. We have enough white people in leadership roles, many who are corrupt and inept.

there are less jews than asians in the us but there are a shit ton of jews in leadership positions.

how do you explain that?

And how long have the Jews been in the country compared to Asians? The Indians are just getting started. Come back in 20 years..

east asians have beenfor 150+ years. Remember who built the railroad?

Jews are in leadership positions because they have the intellectual firepower of asians coupled with superior verbal and interpersonal skills.

Though I can start to see indians slowly joining the ranks of jewish success - albeit not as high in concentration.

do you remember learning about the chinese exclusion act, and the fact that Asian Americans weren't allowed to become citizens?

Asian Americans experienced exclusion by law from the United States between 1880 and 1965, and were largely prohibited from naturalization until the 1940s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_immigration_to_the_United_States

Also, most of the Asian immigrants back then went to live in CA, and there are tons of Asian American elected leaders in CA. I'm from there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am just happy that my Hispanic rising senior will get the benefit of being a URM before they change the rules.

I hope my Hispanic kids will attend the university they deserve based on their own merits, and thrive there, and be respected by the own accomplishments and work (including being fully bilingual).

I hope Harvard loses this case, as it'd help advance that hope.

Don't be foolish! For the sake of your kids, take advantage of AA while you can. Their heritage is part of their credential.

Of course heritage is important. But there are multiple ways colleges can assess what each student brings to the table, for example speaking Spanish or Chinese or Vietnamese, rather than simply discriminate against some kids because or their race or ethnicity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard and other top schools have always made it clear that they are looking at much more than just academics. Harvard is about creating leaders, not only academic scholars, so they need to look at far more than just test scores and grades.

Excellent job at stating the obvious. And bonus points for casual racism insinuating that Asians are only excellent at academics. Utter imbecile.

The car, plane, light bulb, internet, nuclear power all must have been invented by Asians. They are so smart

You're embarrassing yourself with your stupidity but you're likely too stupid to realize it. Oh, and if you have wifi in your trailer you might want to research gunpowder, the compass and printing

FFS, people getting into a pissing contest about which race is smarter.

In the US, every aspect of society - from politics to mainstream media - has been controlled by white people. So, it's kind of hard for non white people to take on leadership roles historically Bamboo ceiling is just one example. That is changing, slowly. Look at some of the leaders in high tech; more and more Asian Americans entering politics. More and more Asians in our media.

Asian American population is small, so it's kind of hard for Asian americans to stand out as leaders. Maybe Harvard should allow in more Asian Americans so more of them will be trained by Harvard to enter into leadership roles. Now, there's an equalizer. We have enough white people in leadership roles, many who are corrupt and inept.

there are less jews than asians in the us but there are a shit ton of jews in leadership positions.

how do you explain that?

And how long have the Jews been in the country compared to Asians? The Indians are just getting started. Come back in 20 years..

east asians have beenfor 150+ years. Remember who built the railroad?

Jews are in leadership positions because they have the intellectual firepower of asians coupled with superior verbal and interpersonal skills.

Though I can start to see indians slowly joining the ranks of jewish success - albeit not as high in concentration.

do you remember learning about the chinese exclusion act, and the fact that Asian Americans weren't allowed to become citizens?

Asian Americans experienced exclusion by law from the United States between 1880 and 1965, and were largely prohibited from naturalization until the 1940s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_immigration_to_the_United_States

Also, most of the Asian immigrants back then went to live in CA, and there are tons of Asian American elected leaders in CA. I'm from there.

continuing...

During this period, Asian immigrants continued to face racial discrimination. In addition to first-generation immigrants whose permanent ineligibility for citizenship curtailed their civil and political rights, second-generation Asian Americans (who formally had birthright citizenship) continued to face segregation in schools, employment discrimination, and prohibitions on property and business ownership.[

But yea, they should still hold a large percentage of leadership positions. There's no excuse. Just like there's no excuse for Black people to still be underachieving in academic. /s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard and other top schools have always made it clear that they are looking at much more than just academics. Harvard is about creating leaders, not only academic scholars, so they need to look at far more than just test scores and grades.

Excellent job at stating the obvious. And bonus points for casual racism insinuating that Asians are only excellent at academics. Utter imbecile.

The car, plane, light bulb, internet, nuclear power all must have been invented by Asians. They are so smart

You're embarrassing yourself with your stupidity but you're likely too stupid to realize it. Oh, and if you have wifi in your trailer you might want to research gunpowder, the compass and printing

FFS, people getting into a pissing contest about which race is smarter.

In the US, every aspect of society - from politics to mainstream media - has been controlled by white people. So, it's kind of hard for non white people to take on leadership roles historically Bamboo ceiling is just one example. That is changing, slowly. Look at some of the leaders in high tech; more and more Asian Americans entering politics. More and more Asians in our media.

Asian American population is small, so it's kind of hard for Asian americans to stand out as leaders. Maybe Harvard should allow in more Asian Americans so more of them will be trained by Harvard to enter into leadership roles. Now, there's an equalizer. We have enough white people in leadership roles, many who are corrupt and inept.

there are less jews than asians in the us but there are a shit ton of jews in leadership positions.

how do you explain that?

And how long have the Jews been in the country compared to Asians? The Indians are just getting started. Come back in 20 years..

Also, some Jews look "white". If you look at Nathalie Portman for example, most people wouldn't even think "jewish". I had no idea she was until that incident with the fashion designer. Similar to Spanish people with blond hair and blue eyes. They may claim "hispanic" but c'mon those folks are white European, not "hispanic".

i guess you haven't been around many jewish people. natalie portman looks hella jewish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard and other top schools have always made it clear that they are looking at much more than just academics. Harvard is about creating leaders, not only academic scholars, so they need to look at far more than just test scores and grades.

Excellent job at stating the obvious. And bonus points for casual racism insinuating that Asians are only excellent at academics. Utter imbecile.

The car, plane, light bulb, internet, nuclear power all must have been invented by Asians. They are so smart

You're embarrassing yourself with your stupidity but you're likely too stupid to realize it. Oh, and if you have wifi in your trailer you might want to research gunpowder, the compass and printing

FFS, people getting into a pissing contest about which race is smarter.

In the US, every aspect of society - from politics to mainstream media - has been controlled by white people. So, it's kind of hard for non white people to take on leadership roles historically Bamboo ceiling is just one example. That is changing, slowly. Look at some of the leaders in high tech; more and more Asian Americans entering politics. More and more Asians in our media.

Asian American population is small, so it's kind of hard for Asian americans to stand out as leaders. Maybe Harvard should allow in more Asian Americans so more of them will be trained by Harvard to enter into leadership roles. Now, there's an equalizer. We have enough white people in leadership roles, many who are corrupt and inept.

there are less jews than asians in the us but there are a shit ton of jews in leadership positions.

how do you explain that?

And how long have the Jews been in the country compared to Asians? The Indians are just getting started. Come back in 20 years..

Also, some Jews look "white". If you look at Nathalie Portman for example, most people wouldn't even think "jewish". I had no idea she was until that incident with the fashion designer. Similar to Spanish people with blond hair and blue eyes. They may claim "hispanic" but c'mon those folks are white European, not "hispanic".

i guess you haven't been around many jewish people. natalie portman looks hella jewish.

Since a lot of non jewish folks are not regularly around jewish people, no, we can't always tell. To me, she's white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't care, do u?

Yes, i care about the equitable treatment of all applicants....what sort of mindless imbecile wouldn't?

This isn't about equitable treatment of all applicants, it's about keeping blacks and Hispanics out in favor of races that Trump has deemed preferable.

Try to keep up.....blacks and hispanics already get a significant handicap on admissions. The suit is about discrimination against qualified asian-american applicants.

If these plaintiffs prevail, the effect will be to disproportionately push blacks and Hispanics out of these schools. That's why so many Asian people are opposed to this lawsuit, because they don't want their admissions to come at the expense of disadvantaged groups, and even those who don't care about that per se know how bad a look it is for them.

Why is that? Stoping discriminating Asian students doesn't mean other groups have to be discriminated. It's strange to think a race-neutral policy will push blacks and latinos out.

Blacks and latinos currently are subjected to lower standards than the rest of the applicant pool so that the college can meet its racial quotas. If admissions were a true meritocracy like in Europe or to a lesser degree the UCal system, more asians would be admitted and fewer blacks and latinos would....because of, you know....qualifications.

Why do admissions have to be a "meritocracy"? Regurgitating answers, studying for hours, getting straight A's in school doesn't equate to success in college or the real world. It doesn't measure innovation, leadership skills or a vast multitude of other things that are more important than perfect test scores.

Indeed, why should academic merit be the sole criteria to an academic program? Why should how well you play basketball be the only factor in being picked to play for the NBA?

Look at the winners of the Intel Science competition. Those competitions aren't about who has the best test scores and grades. Not seeing many URM there.

Competitions like Intel do correlate to opportunity and resources. Many URM may not have the same opportunity or resources to participate. They may not have mentors. That is the value of bringing kids without opportunity or resources to elite schools. To give them the things they need to flourish that they would not otherwise get.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard and other top schools have always made it clear that they are looking at much more than just academics. Harvard is about creating leaders, not only academic scholars, so they need to look at far more than just test scores and grades.

Excellent job at stating the obvious. And bonus points for casual racism insinuating that Asians are only excellent at academics. Utter imbecile.

The car, plane, light bulb, internet, nuclear power all must have been invented by Asians. They are so smart

You're embarrassing yourself with your stupidity but you're likely too stupid to realize it. Oh, and if you have wifi in your trailer you might want to research gunpowder, the compass and printing

FFS, people getting into a pissing contest about which race is smarter.

In the US, every aspect of society - from politics to mainstream media - has been controlled by white people. So, it's kind of hard for non white people to take on leadership roles historically Bamboo ceiling is just one example. That is changing, slowly. Look at some of the leaders in high tech; more and more Asian Americans entering politics. More and more Asians in our media.

Asian American population is small, so it's kind of hard for Asian americans to stand out as leaders. Maybe Harvard should allow in more Asian Americans so more of them will be trained by Harvard to enter into leadership roles. Now, there's an equalizer. We have enough white people in leadership roles, many who are corrupt and inept.

there are less jews than asians in the us but there are a shit ton of jews in leadership positions.

how do you explain that?

True.

Jews are a tiny minority but exercise disproportionate influence because they work damn hard.

I'd also like to point out that the Asian population was also incredibly small till fairly recently (a generation ago). Complaining that Asians had it hard because whites controlled all the roles overlooks that up through the 1980s the US was 80+ (and even approaching 90% in the 1920s-1960s) white. Well, d'oh.

Anyway, I am not sure if Asians have a problem today. Look at the ranks of leading doctors, lawyers, venture capitalists, business owners, there are now many, many, Asians. It takes a new wave of immigrants time to build their way up to the top. It always has. We forget that the Jews, Italians, Poles, etc, were once derided as non properly "white" ethnic groups and they worked their way to the top.

The African American experience, however, is indisputably different. It's more problematic. It's more complex. I am a bit on the fence on this because there are pros and cons to affirmative actions for African Americans but I've concluded that deeply flawed it is, it's likely better than the alternatives and so be it.

I do fully understand why Asian Americans may feel bitter to being held to the highest standards in the application pools for the top colleges and universities, but on the other hand, perhaps they should be thankful that they don't need affirmative action.

well, according to some people Asian Americans don't contribute to society and don't take leadership positions so that's why they are not as "attractive" to Ivies.

Obviously, there are many Asian Americans who are not only innovative but do take on leadership roles. It does indeed take time. The problem with the admissions is that Asian Americans have to have everything that a URM or white student has, PLUS more. That is where the discrimination comes in. Why does one group of students have to outperform in EVERY way compared to another group? How is that fair?

As my white DH says, Asian Americans are a victim of their own success. I suppose if the group wasn't as successful, over represented in elite universities, then maybe Asian American students would also be held to a lower standard like the others.

The arrogance is stunning and I have heard it from so many posters here. I guess it’s not ok to stereo type Asians as being “robots” but it’s perfectly fine to stereotype whites as stupid and lazy and URM as unqualified. Stereotypes are all over the place. If you are opposed to them, you shouldn’t be using them either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Democrat, but if the administration and the courts end race-based admission preferences, I will be thrilled. The current affirmative action situation for so-called URMs is bullshit. And congrats to Betsy DeVos for bringing more balance and sanity to college star chambers.

Cool story, bro.