Reply to Boy applicant pool has lower acceptance rate at LACs

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Boy applicant pool has lower acceptance rate at LACs"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The selective LACs are rejecting nine applicants or more for every one they accept. The rejection pool of boys and girls includes numerous highly qualified applicants. The idea that they are accepting un- or underqualified boys instead of qualified girls is ridiculous. They are simply accepting more qualified boys instead of qualified girls in order to achieve some semblance of gender balance - which by the way still usually favors girls 55 to 45. [b]No need to cry that girls are somehow getting shortchanged here[/b].[/quote]

I just read the whole thread. Where was the crying? Or anything resembling it? People are mostly sharing data.[/quote]

Constant repetition of “girls are more qualified, waaaah!”[/quote]

Fascinating that you read it that way. There is absolutely a different way to read those posts. [/quote]

In this thread the women are the female version of MAGAs who complain that unqualified minorities are stealing “their” admission slots.[/quote]

Except that’s not true. OP had a question that was based on an underlying assumption — an assumption that according to AOs and education journalists is faulty. PPs responded by pointing out what this assumption was, explaining what the data apparently say, then providing links to articles where this was discussed.

Interpret the posts however you want, but I’m telling you: there is absolutely a different way to read the conversation.
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics