Admitting you are Asian (college apps)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To quote a good friend: my child would not want to attend a school where their race is a strike against them.

Also, on interview it will be apparent.

Last but not least, don’t you want your child to be proud of who they are? Dońt teach them to deny their heritage.

For all of these reasons, my child marked Asian on her applications.

(If anything, I think it helped her. She was looking at SLAC’s and many of them struggle with diversity)

I don't think this has anything to do with not being proud of their heritage. It's about avoiding the Asian penalty in schools that in effect have one. Your DD's school clearly didn't have one. Other school in effect do.

But you are literally advising them to pretend, on paper, that they are a different race. You are saying deny who you are. I would never advise my child (who is chinese) to do that. But then again, I put their self esteem over rankings and status.

The thing is that if admissions offices were not hopelessly racist, there would be no need for them to know the applicant's race.

You are hopelessly deaf to the argument that colleges seek diverse communities. Hopelessly.

But then again, you probably think your kid is a failure if they get a B and attend anything but an Ivy league college. We all have our blind spots.

Idiot, when you discriminate against Asian Americans and force them to get higher scores just to get in, it will lead to more high-stats Asians getting into these colleges rather than more 'well-rounded' or lower scoring Asians (that perhaps you kid could compete with).

Employers and grad-schools are not stupid. At this point they have a clear preference for Asian Americans because they've realized that many public state schools have Asian American students that have far more raw intelligence than white kids in the Ivies.

Ultimately it hurts everyone involved, and white American students will be discriminated against in the job market if they are deserving of the spot - simply because the employer realizes they received an undeserved helping hand in getting into college. This already happens with African Americans.

Talking about one racial group having more "raw intelligence" than another is about THE most racist belief you can hold. Game over. You win (for being the world class racist)

Who is saying that one racial group has more raw intelligence than another racial group?

I'm saying employers believe that Asian American kids from public universities have higher raw intelligence than White American kids from Ivies. This is not a difficult concept to understand.

Ivies signal intelligence to some extent.
Usually, a student from an Ivy would be considered to be more intelligent/capable than a student from a public university.

This is no longer true for Asian American students vs. white students. Because the Ivies have discriminated against Asian students, a lot of these students end up going to Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan etc. An employer views the signal of an Asian American from these public universities to be much higher than a white student from the Ivies (especially due to legacy preferences, donor preferences, sports scholarship, etc.)

This is crazy talk. As an employer I would view an Asian applicant good at rote tasks. I consider AA, white, hispanic and Asian to be of equal intelligence. Asians I would consider better at rote tasks.

That only proves yourself to be an idiot. Asians have excelled throughout STEM degrees, which are anything but rote - they require problem solving.

But of course, you seem like the typical useless administrator/bureaucrat so being an idiot is to be expected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To quote a good friend: my child would not want to attend a school where their race is a strike against them.

Also, on interview it will be apparent.

Last but not least, don’t you want your child to be proud of who they are? Dońt teach them to deny their heritage.

For all of these reasons, my child marked Asian on her applications.

(If anything, I think it helped her. She was looking at SLAC’s and many of them struggle with diversity)

I don't think this has anything to do with not being proud of their heritage. It's about avoiding the Asian penalty in schools that in effect have one. Your DD's school clearly didn't have one. Other school in effect do.

But you are literally advising them to pretend, on paper, that they are a different race. You are saying deny who you are. I would never advise my child (who is chinese) to do that. But then again, I put their self esteem over rankings and status.

The thing is that if admissions offices were not hopelessly racist, there would be no need for them to know the applicant's race.

You are hopelessly deaf to the argument that colleges seek diverse communities. Hopelessly.

But then again, you probably think your kid is a failure if they get a B and attend anything but an Ivy league college. We all have our blind spots.

Idiot, when you discriminate against Asian Americans and force them to get higher scores just to get in, it will lead to more high-stats Asians getting into these colleges rather than more 'well-rounded' or lower scoring Asians (that perhaps you kid could compete with).

Employers and grad-schools are not stupid. At this point they have a clear preference for Asian Americans because they've realized that many public state schools have Asian American students that have far more raw intelligence than white kids in the Ivies.

Ultimately it hurts everyone involved, and white American students will be discriminated against in the job market if they are deserving of the spot - simply because the employer realizes they received an undeserved helping hand in getting into college. This already happens with African Americans.

Talking about one racial group having more "raw intelligence" than another is about THE most racist belief you can hold. Game over. You win (for being the world class racist)

Who is saying that one racial group has more raw intelligence than another racial group?

I'm saying employers believe that Asian American kids from public universities have higher raw intelligence than White American kids from Ivies. This is not a difficult concept to understand.

Ivies signal intelligence to some extent.
Usually, a student from an Ivy would be considered to be more intelligent/capable than a student from a public university.

This is no longer true for Asian American students vs. white students. Because the Ivies have discriminated against Asian students, a lot of these students end up going to Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan etc. An employer views the signal of an Asian American from these public universities to be much higher than a white student from the Ivies (especially due to legacy preferences, donor preferences, sports scholarship, etc.)

This is crazy talk. As an employer I would view an Asian applicant good at rote tasks. I consider AA, white, hispanic and Asian to be of equal intelligence. Asians I would consider better at rote tasks.

A bit off topic but this kind of talk is a perfect example of how in the current political climate it is almost taboo to stereotype AA and Hispanics the way Asian stereotypes roll off unnoticed.

+1 it's like saying I only consider white people good at sales jobs since they like to talk and party a lot. Or that AA aren't good at jobs requiring complex skills which is why many don't get CS degrees even as so many colleges lower their standards to accept them.

See how stereotyping works?

I see that moron not as a sales type party goer but as the modern day Archie Bunker. The only good thing about Archie Bunkers is that they are old enough to be dead soon. It’s unfortunate but their ideas die only when they become goners themselves.

[Anonymous]

In response to an earlier comment in this thread,

"I don’t see a ton of Asian CEOs, senators or finance guys ect running America. If your talking about Stem where Asians are mostly employees and not public facing the majority of Asians are not in the high ranking positions. Many are trapped in jobs doing the science/math with few opportunities to lead."

I thought I would point out that the CEOs of Google, Microsoft, IBM, and Adobe are all Indian-Americans, as are the CEOs of Mastercard and Deloitte. If one ventures across the Atlantic, the CEOs of both Novartis and Dageo are Indian-Americans. Until 2019, the CEO of Pepsico was also an Indian-American. A small sample no doubt, but certainly a noteworthy one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In response to an earlier comment in this thread,

"I don’t see a ton of Asian CEOs, senators or finance guys ect running America. If your talking about Stem where Asians are mostly employees and not public facing the majority of Asians are not in the high ranking positions. Many are trapped in jobs doing the science/math with few opportunities to lead."

I thought I would point out that the CEOs of Google, Microsoft, IBM, and Adobe are all Indian-Americans, as are the CEOs of Mastercard and Deloitte. If one ventures across the Atlantic, the CEOs of both Novartis and Dageo are Indian-Americans. Until 2019, the CEO of Pepsico was also an Indian-American. A small sample no doubt, but certainly a noteworthy one.

That’s kinda like going over to China, Korea, Japan and seeing that all the CEOs are Asians. None are whites, so...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In response to an earlier comment in this thread,

"I don’t see a ton of Asian CEOs, senators or finance guys ect running America. If your talking about Stem where Asians are mostly employees and not public facing the majority of Asians are not in the high ranking positions. Many are trapped in jobs doing the science/math with few opportunities to lead."

I thought I would point out that the CEOs of Google, Microsoft, IBM, and Adobe are all Indian-Americans, as are the CEOs of Mastercard and Deloitte. If one ventures across the Atlantic, the CEOs of both Novartis and Dageo are Indian-Americans. Until 2019, the CEO of Pepsico was also an Indian-American. A small sample no doubt, but certainly a noteworthy one.

If Indian-Americans aren’t Asians, what are they? Are they whites? Blacks? I am just confused.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In response to an earlier comment in this thread,

"I don’t see a ton of Asian CEOs, senators or finance guys ect running America. If your talking about Stem where Asians are mostly employees and not public facing the majority of Asians are not in the high ranking positions. Many are trapped in jobs doing the science/math with few opportunities to lead."

I thought I would point out that the CEOs of Google, Microsoft, IBM, and Adobe are all Indian-Americans, as are the CEOs of Mastercard and Deloitte. If one ventures across the Atlantic, the CEOs of both Novartis and Dageo are Indian-Americans. Until 2019, the CEO of Pepsico was also an Indian-American. A small sample no doubt, but certainly a noteworthy one.

PP is counting Indians as “honorary” whites.

[Anonymous]

Sorry, I thought this was obvious, but in case it's not: Indian-Americans are of Asian origin. If one wants to be more precise, they are of South Asian origin, as mentioned in an earlier post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I thought this was obvious, but in case it's not: Indian-Americans are of Asian origin. If one wants to be more precise, they are of South Asian origin, as mentioned in an earlier post.

I think what the previous poster meant is non-white Asians, non-white Hispanics, non-white Blacks who become successful become honorary whites. Those who don’t, I guess they remain where they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To quote a good friend: my child would not want to attend a school where their race is a strike against them.

Also, on interview it will be apparent.

Last but not least, don’t you want your child to be proud of who they are? Dońt teach them to deny their heritage.

For all of these reasons, my child marked Asian on her applications.

(If anything, I think it helped her. She was looking at SLAC’s and many of them struggle with diversity)

I don't think this has anything to do with not being proud of their heritage. It's about avoiding the Asian penalty in schools that in effect have one. Your DD's school clearly didn't have one. Other school in effect do.

But you are literally advising them to pretend, on paper, that they are a different race. You are saying deny who you are. I would never advise my child (who is chinese) to do that. But then again, I put their self esteem over rankings and status.

The thing is that if admissions offices were not hopelessly racist, there would be no need for them to know the applicant's race.

You are hopelessly deaf to the argument that colleges seek diverse communities. Hopelessly.

But then again, you probably think your kid is a failure if they get a B and attend anything but an Ivy league college. We all have our blind spots.

Idiot, when you discriminate against Asian Americans and force them to get higher scores just to get in, it will lead to more high-stats Asians getting into these colleges rather than more 'well-rounded' or lower scoring Asians (that perhaps you kid could compete with).

Employers and grad-schools are not stupid. At this point they have a clear preference for Asian Americans because they've realized that many public state schools have Asian American students that have far more raw intelligence than white kids in the Ivies.

Ultimately it hurts everyone involved, and white American students will be discriminated against in the job market if they are deserving of the spot - simply because the employer realizes they received an undeserved helping hand in getting into college. This already happens with African Americans.

Talking about one racial group having more "raw intelligence" than another is about THE most racist belief you can hold. Game over. You win (for being the world class racist)

Who is saying that one racial group has more raw intelligence than another racial group?

I'm saying employers believe that Asian American kids from public universities have higher raw intelligence than White American kids from Ivies. This is not a difficult concept to understand.

Ivies signal intelligence to some extent.
Usually, a student from an Ivy would be considered to be more intelligent/capable than a student from a public university.

This is no longer true for Asian American students vs. white students. Because the Ivies have discriminated against Asian students, a lot of these students end up going to Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan etc. An employer views the signal of an Asian American from these public universities to be much higher than a white student from the Ivies (especially due to legacy preferences, donor preferences, sports scholarship, etc.)

This is crazy talk. As an employer I would view an Asian applicant good at rote tasks. I consider AA, white, hispanic and Asian to be of equal intelligence. Asians I would consider better at rote tasks.

That only proves yourself to be an idiot. Asians have excelled throughout STEM degrees, which are anything but rote - they require problem solving.

But of course, you seem like the typical useless administrator/bureaucrat so being an idiot is to be expected.

If you look at MIT an institution recruiting highly intelligent, high achieving and creative students 41% of their student body is Asian, 42% white, 10% AA 14% Hispanic 11% international. The total exceeds 100 because of students who fit into more than one category (eg multiracial students). Anyway MIT obviously does not think that Asian students are mostly good at “rote” tasks. I have no doubt that is what some employers think but it is simply not true and it is rank racism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To quote a good friend: my child would not want to attend a school where their race is a strike against them.

Also, on interview it will be apparent.

Last but not least, don’t you want your child to be proud of who they are? Dońt teach them to deny their heritage.

For all of these reasons, my child marked Asian on her applications.

(If anything, I think it helped her. She was looking at SLAC’s and many of them struggle with diversity)

I don't think this has anything to do with not being proud of their heritage. It's about avoiding the Asian penalty in schools that in effect have one. Your DD's school clearly didn't have one. Other school in effect do.

But you are literally advising them to pretend, on paper, that they are a different race. You are saying deny who you are. I would never advise my child (who is chinese) to do that. But then again, I put their self esteem over rankings and status.

The thing is that if admissions offices were not hopelessly racist, there would be no need for them to know the applicant's race.

You are hopelessly deaf to the argument that colleges seek diverse communities. Hopelessly.

But then again, you probably think your kid is a failure if they get a B and attend anything but an Ivy league college. We all have our blind spots.

Idiot, when you discriminate against Asian Americans and force them to get higher scores just to get in, it will lead to more high-stats Asians getting into these colleges rather than more 'well-rounded' or lower scoring Asians (that perhaps you kid could compete with).

Employers and grad-schools are not stupid. At this point they have a clear preference for Asian Americans because they've realized that many public state schools have Asian American students that have far more raw intelligence than white kids in the Ivies.

Ultimately it hurts everyone involved, and white American students will be discriminated against in the job market if they are deserving of the spot - simply because the employer realizes they received an undeserved helping hand in getting into college. This already happens with African Americans.

Talking about one racial group having more "raw intelligence" than another is about THE most racist belief you can hold. Game over. You win (for being the world class racist)

Who is saying that one racial group has more raw intelligence than another racial group?

I'm saying employers believe that Asian American kids from public universities have higher raw intelligence than White American kids from Ivies. This is not a difficult concept to understand.

Ivies signal intelligence to some extent.
Usually, a student from an Ivy would be considered to be more intelligent/capable than a student from a public university.

This is no longer true for Asian American students vs. white students. Because the Ivies have discriminated against Asian students, a lot of these students end up going to Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan etc. An employer views the signal of an Asian American from these public universities to be much higher than a white student from the Ivies (especially due to legacy preferences, donor preferences, sports scholarship, etc.)

This is crazy talk. As an employer I would view an Asian applicant good at rote tasks. I consider AA, white, hispanic and Asian to be of equal intelligence. Asians I would consider better at rote tasks.

That only proves yourself to be an idiot. Asians have excelled throughout STEM degrees, which are anything but rote - they require problem solving.

But of course, you seem like the typical useless administrator/bureaucrat so being an idiot is to be expected.

If you look at MIT an institution recruiting highly intelligent, high achieving and creative students 41% of their student body is Asian, 42% white, 10% AA 14% Hispanic 11% international. The total exceeds 100 because of students who fit into more than one category (eg multiracial students). Anyway MIT obviously does not think that Asian students are mostly good at “rote” tasks. I have no doubt that is what some employers think but it is simply not true and it is rank racism.

Same with Caltech, 40%+ Asians.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why MIT and Caltech are consider more serious than Ivy+.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My D is Asian. She’s doing fine at an Ivy living her dream.

your dream

Now we know your kids didn’t make it, it’s my kid’s dream.

My kids are in kindergarten. Is it when you started to tell them what their dream is?

Not PP. How do you know that it's not the daughter's dream?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To quote a good friend: my child would not want to attend a school where their race is a strike against them.

Also, on interview it will be apparent.

Last but not least, don’t you want your child to be proud of who they are? Dońt teach them to deny their heritage.

For all of these reasons, my child marked Asian on her applications.

(If anything, I think it helped her. She was looking at SLAC’s and many of them struggle with diversity)

I don't think this has anything to do with not being proud of their heritage. It's about avoiding the Asian penalty in schools that in effect have one. Your DD's school clearly didn't have one. Other school in effect do.

But you are literally advising them to pretend, on paper, that they are a different race. You are saying deny who you are. I would never advise my child (who is chinese) to do that. But then again, I put their self esteem over rankings and status.

The thing is that if admissions offices were not hopelessly racist, there would be no need for them to know the applicant's race.

You are hopelessly deaf to the argument that colleges seek diverse communities. Hopelessly.

But then again, you probably think your kid is a failure if they get a B and attend anything but an Ivy league college. We all have our blind spots.

Idiot, when you discriminate against Asian Americans and force them to get higher scores just to get in, it will lead to more high-stats Asians getting into these colleges rather than more 'well-rounded' or lower scoring Asians (that perhaps you kid could compete with).

Employers and grad-schools are not stupid. At this point they have a clear preference for Asian Americans because they've realized that many public state schools have Asian American students that have far more raw intelligence than white kids in the Ivies.

Ultimately it hurts everyone involved, and white American students will be discriminated against in the job market if they are deserving of the spot - simply because the employer realizes they received an undeserved helping hand in getting into college. This already happens with African Americans.

Talking about one racial group having more "raw intelligence" than another is about THE most racist belief you can hold. Game over. You win (for being the world class racist)

Who is saying that one racial group has more raw intelligence than another racial group?

I'm saying employers believe that Asian American kids from public universities have higher raw intelligence than White American kids from Ivies. This is not a difficult concept to understand.

Ivies signal intelligence to some extent.
Usually, a student from an Ivy would be considered to be more intelligent/capable than a student from a public university.

This is no longer true for Asian American students vs. white students. Because the Ivies have discriminated against Asian students, a lot of these students end up going to Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan etc. An employer views the signal of an Asian American from these public universities to be much higher than a white student from the Ivies (especially due to legacy preferences, donor preferences, sports scholarship, etc.)

This is crazy talk. As an employer I would view an Asian applicant good at rote tasks. I consider AA, white, hispanic and Asian to be of equal intelligence. Asians I would consider better at rote tasks.

That only proves yourself to be an idiot. Asians have excelled throughout STEM degrees, which are anything but rote - they require problem solving.

But of course, you seem like the typical useless administrator/bureaucrat so being an idiot is to be expected.

If you look at MIT an institution recruiting highly intelligent, high achieving and creative students 41% of their student body is Asian, 42% white, 10% AA 14% Hispanic 11% international. The total exceeds 100 because of students who fit into more than one category (eg multiracial students). Anyway MIT obviously does not think that Asian students are mostly good at “rote” tasks. I have no doubt that is what some employers think but it is simply not true and it is rank racism.

all those Asian Am. kids at Caltech and Cal must be only good at rote tasks, too.

Oh, and all those As. Am. kids who win national science competitions must also only know how to do rote tasks.

Ivy leagues must only want rote task people since they accept an outsized ratio of Asian Am. compared to every other racial group in the US.

Yep. Asian Am. are only good for rote tasks. LOL

[Anonymous]

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Would you be okay with job applicants of certain racial backgrounds being less likely to get jobs than equally qualified candidates of different backgrounds because the company desires diverse employees? I'm not necessarily arguing against what you're saying. Just curious.

Not the PP, but yes, I would be comfortable with the following: Two equally qualified candidates, one of whom is demographically similar to existing staff, and one of whom represents an identity not currently represented. The latter gets the job on the basis of bringing a new perspective, which can only be good for business.

How dare you imply that someone's race is tied to their ''perspective.''

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s so sad that an Asian kid feels the need to hide identity because of discrimination. I’m white and I’m very empathetic to this. I’m sorry OP.

There is nothing inherently wrong with discrimination. When you choose a salad as your side, you discriminate against the French fries. That isn’t the issue.

I have no problem with colleges that desire a diverse student body effectively putting a cap on how many students of a similar background they will accept.

So you see nothing wrong with Harvard in the old days capping Jewish students to 2%

Nope. That’s about the proportion to society, right?

Right.

Tell me, oh Wise. How about the NFL and NBA? We need 2% Jewish players proportional to society?

And I’m 5’2” white women. I’m discriminated against in NBA.

You're not discriminated against in the WNBA, you will simply fail to meet the requirements. Asian American students do not fail to meet the requirements, they overwhelmingly exceed them.

Most people applying to top institutions are qualified. The act of admissions is inherently discriminatory. That doesn’t make it wrong or illegal.

If there is a basketball tryout where a white kid is ripping up the court while an Asian kid is barely making the the minimum, and the coach ends up picking the Asian kid because there are already too many white kids on the team, that's discriminatory.

Terrible analogy. Everyone applying to Harvard has the stats. To make this analogy, everyone at basketball tryouts is equally good.

And yes, the final selection is at the coach’s discretion. Which is inherently discriminatory. So what. It doesn’t mean anything wrong happened. It means the coach made a choice.