Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - I am the mother of an Asian American kid. She is smart, hard working and throws herself into her EC’s. She is doing incredibly well at school. Both she and I support affirmative action. We both understand why from a perspective of providing chances for black and brown (although not brown like her) kids to see themselves in these fields requires changing the makeup of the workforce being trained. That is all well and good. But it tone deaf of you to not appreciate that your (equally smart and talented) daughter has an advantage over mine and to complain about ignorant people’s diminishing of your daughter’s accomplishments. From a societal level, I support you. From a mom dealing with college apps for her brilliant kid, I would rather be in your place.

Do you have that same feeling about job applications? Internship selections? Pay? Loan applications? Would you rather be in her daughters shoes in any of those scenarios? How about when facing a jury of your peers? Oh I see, it’s only when it comes to college admissions and you have skin in the game. Tone deaf indeed.

DP. What makes you think an Asian woman is not discriminated against when it comes to jobs, internships and pay? Most Asians try to lead lives so they are not on the other side of a jury, ever.. so there's that. Maybe others should try that too. You are the one that seems to be tone deaf.

+ 1 million

Data perhaps? https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2018/asian-women-and-men-earned-more-than-their-white-black-and-hispanic-counterparts-in-2017.

cutoff the link https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2018/asian-women-and-men-earned-more-than-their-white-black-and-hispanic-counterparts-in-2017.htm

DP.. that data doesn't mean what you think it means.

They make more because they are more educated. Asian Americans are the most educated group in this country.

It doesn't mean they don't face discrimination in the workplace. You think the white good ol' boys network who use their legacy and family connections are eager to promote Asian American women to executive level positions? Ever heard of the bamboo ceiling? Please.

Perhaps the data would look differently if more of certain groups prioritized education.

I swear, some people need a basic course in data analysis.

I’m confused are URMs “taking” your daughter’s spot because they don’t prioritize education? And I asked if you were willing to trade spots with URMs because of pay, the data shows what it shows, by your logic white men are more educated than any other group because they’re paid more? Your bamboo struggle is real but not the struggle of other URMs?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - I am the mother of an Asian American kid. She is smart, hard working and throws herself into her EC’s. She is doing incredibly well at school. Both she and I support affirmative action. We both understand why from a perspective of providing chances for black and brown (although not brown like her) kids to see themselves in these fields requires changing the makeup of the workforce being trained. That is all well and good. But it tone deaf of you to not appreciate that your (equally smart and talented) daughter has an advantage over mine and to complain about ignorant people’s diminishing of your daughter’s accomplishments. From a societal level, I support you. From a mom dealing with college apps for her brilliant kid, I would rather be in your place.

Do you have that same feeling about job applications? Internship selections? Pay? Loan applications? Would you rather be in her daughters shoes in any of those scenarios? How about when facing a jury of your peers? Oh I see, it’s only when it comes to college admissions and you have skin in the game. Tone deaf indeed.

DP. What makes you think an Asian woman is not discriminated against when it comes to jobs, internships and pay? Most Asians try to lead lives so they are not on the other side of a jury, ever.. so there's that. Maybe others should try that too. You are the one that seems to be tone deaf.

+ 1 million

Data perhaps? https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2018/asian-women-and-men-earned-more-than-their-white-black-and-hispanic-counterparts-in-2017.

cutoff the link https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2018/asian-women-and-men-earned-more-than-their-white-black-and-hispanic-counterparts-in-2017.htm

What does this show other than on average Asian Americans are more highly educated than the general population. So the have higher average salaries. Fine. Do you really think that the stereotypes for Asian students (tryhards, robots, etc) don’t hold Asian women (or men) back when considered for leadership and leadership executive positions?

Honesty, people seem to have bought into the myth that because Asian Americans have figured out to rise in the rules set forth for them, they somehow face no discrimination. Which is just dumb. Doesn’t change the fact that colleges should balance their classes and trying to get a good mix of ethnicities is important for many many reasons.

Doesn’t seem to be holding back SE Asians any.

Anonymous wrote:I'm very pro Affirmative Action. I was a beneficiary of the programs in the 1980s and 1990s as a URM. Maybe it's that I went to HSP schools, but all of the AA kids around me were stellar students. Sure, some of us went to crap high schools that didn't offer all the great academic opportunities that the rich kids whose parents went to college received. But we were gunners and worked hard. We all had the innate talent and brain power to meet the school's standards in our classes. What I don't get are kids who have one URM parent, don't look like and aren't treated like a URM, live in a middle or UMC white neighborhood and have lots of resources, but they still can't perform. Some of these kids are getting admitted to selective colleges with crap grades and low test scores. My SAT score (only took it once, without studying) might have been in the bottom quartile of the entering class. But that was still a really quite high score, especially given that English was my second language and my mom didn't even graduate from high school. Now I'm seeing kids who call themselves Mike instead of Miguel who are too lazy to bother studying for the SAT even though their parents could easily pay for test prep. They have mediocre grades and don't take the most rigorous courses. Nonetheless, they're being admitted to decent competitive schools. That is just wrong. If I were those kids, I'd enter college "feeling pressure to prove" myself.

Anonymous wrote:Well it is true that your kid might not have had to do so well to be admitted to those schools. That's the truth and why people say what they say.

That said, your kid sounds amazing. Congrats.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a URM from a first gen and low-income college family. I definitely had to be way better than everyone else to be considered as good as the white kids. If white people weren't so damn racist and didn't assume we aren't as smart and talented as they are (we're often even smarter and more talented) this wouldn't be an issue. I always just laugh to myself when white people underestimate me and I then leave them in the dust. That's what they get for thinking I don't deserve the degrees I earned from top schools.

You know who really needs to practice some self-doubt? White guys who get thrown into the smart people pool just because other people are lazy and don't vet them properly.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a URM from a first gen and low-income college family. I definitely had to be way better than everyone else to be considered as good as the white kids. If white people weren't so damn racist and didn't assume we aren't as smart and talented as they are (we're often even smarter and more talented) this wouldn't be an issue. I always just laugh to myself when white people underestimate me and I then leave them in the dust. That's what they get for thinking I don't deserve the degrees I earned from top schools.

You know who really needs to practice some self-doubt? White guys who get thrown into the smart people pool just because other people are lazy and don't vet them properly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - I am the mother of an Asian American kid. She is smart, hard working and throws herself into her EC’s. She is doing incredibly well at school. Both she and I support affirmative action. We both understand why from a perspective of providing chances for black and brown (although not brown like her) kids to see themselves in these fields requires changing the makeup of the workforce being trained. That is all well and good. But it tone deaf of you to not appreciate that your (equally smart and talented) daughter has an advantage over mine and to complain about ignorant people’s diminishing of your daughter’s accomplishments. From a societal level, I support you. From a mom dealing with college apps for her brilliant kid, I would rather be in your place.

Do you have that same feeling about job applications? Internship selections? Pay? Loan applications? Would you rather be in her daughters shoes in any of those scenarios? How about when facing a jury of your peers? Oh I see, it’s only when it comes to college admissions and you have skin in the game. Tone deaf indeed.

DP. What makes you think an Asian woman is not discriminated against when it comes to jobs, internships and pay? Most Asians try to lead lives so they are not on the other side of a jury, ever.. so there's that. Maybe others should try that too. You are the one that seems to be tone deaf.

+ 1 million

Data perhaps? https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2018/asian-women-and-men-earned-more-than-their-white-black-and-hispanic-counterparts-in-2017.

cutoff the link https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2018/asian-women-and-men-earned-more-than-their-white-black-and-hispanic-counterparts-in-2017.htm

What does this show other than on average Asian Americans are more highly educated than the general population. So the have higher average salaries. Fine. Do you really think that the stereotypes for Asian students (tryhards, robots, etc) don’t hold Asian women (or men) back when considered for leadership and leadership executive positions?

Honesty, people seem to have bought into the myth that because Asian Americans have figured out to rise in the rules set forth for them, they somehow face no discrimination. Which is just dumb. Doesn’t change the fact that colleges should balance their classes and trying to get a good mix of ethnicities is important for many many reasons.

Do you know what white supremacy is? The system isn't designed to help Asian Americans either. Reason why Asian Americans should be in solidarity with others facing rampant and systemic discrimination - and not try to compartmentalize grievance as it pertains to college admissions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - I am the mother of an Asian American kid. She is smart, hard working and throws herself into her EC’s. She is doing incredibly well at school. Both she and I support affirmative action. We both understand why from a perspective of providing chances for black and brown (although not brown like her) kids to see themselves in these fields requires changing the makeup of the workforce being trained. That is all well and good. But it tone deaf of you to not appreciate that your (equally smart and talented) daughter has an advantage over mine and to complain about ignorant people’s diminishing of your daughter’s accomplishments. From a societal level, I support you. From a mom dealing with college apps for her brilliant kid, I would rather be in your place.

Do you have that same feeling about job applications? Internship selections? Pay? Loan applications? Would you rather be in her daughters shoes in any of those scenarios? How about when facing a jury of your peers? Oh I see, it’s only when it comes to college admissions and you have skin in the game. Tone deaf indeed.

Maybe not my daughter. But my son? Looks like a regular brown kid. He is not likely to be treated much differently than many others if he gets into a run in with police. He is Indian American.

Do you really think Asian Americans are given preferences in pay? Maybe true. Hasn’t seemed true in my career but maybe it’s a case of not knowing what I don’t know.

Internships and jobs? My kid will hopefully be competitor but do you really think she will be more competitive than a highly qualified URM from a top school? At our work place, we are faking over ourselves to find these candidates (as we should be).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - I am the mother of an Asian American kid. She is smart, hard working and throws herself into her EC’s. She is doing incredibly well at school. Both she and I support affirmative action. We both understand why from a perspective of providing chances for black and brown (although not brown like her) kids to see themselves in these fields requires changing the makeup of the workforce being trained. That is all well and good. But it tone deaf of you to not appreciate that your (equally smart and talented) daughter has an advantage over mine and to complain about ignorant people’s diminishing of your daughter’s accomplishments. From a societal level, I support you. From a mom dealing with college apps for her brilliant kid, I would rather be in your place.

Do you have that same feeling about job applications? Internship selections? Pay? Loan applications? Would you rather be in her daughters shoes in any of those scenarios? How about when facing a jury of your peers? Oh I see, it’s only when it comes to college admissions and you have skin in the game. Tone deaf indeed.

DP. What makes you think an Asian woman is not discriminated against when it comes to jobs, internships and pay? Most Asians try to lead lives so they are not on the other side of a jury, ever.. so there's that. Maybe others should try that too. You are the one that seems to be tone deaf.

+ 1 million

Data perhaps? https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2018/asian-women-and-men-earned-more-than-their-white-black-and-hispanic-counterparts-in-2017.

cutoff the link https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2018/asian-women-and-men-earned-more-than-their-white-black-and-hispanic-counterparts-in-2017.htm

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s hard. My husband and I are URM and people have always questioned the schools we went to, ivy and top 20. It almost feels like you have to work even harder to prove that you achieved anything on merit. As much assume affirmative action, we were both top of our respective high school class and he was top of his college class (phi beta kappa) before going to ivy law school with multiple ECs and national awards etc. Yet, people always assume that we only got there bc of affirmative action. Now, even in biglaw, it still doesn’t end. Other partners and associates can graduate from random place whereas every URM has to be from a better law school to be at the same firm. It never ends.

Bolded is the same for legacy admits, recruited athletes, regardless of whether they had stats etc. Welcome to the club.

I don't think these experiences are comparable. Once one has graduated, how would anyone know if the person was an athlete or legacy (assuming their name isn't Roosevelt, Obama, Harriman, etc.)? If one is a URM, I would assume the issue would extend far beyond university because people can see that you present as Black or your last name is "Latino" or whatever. I am a white lady who supports AA in college admissions and in hiring. But I imagine that one of the unintended consequences of AA is that snarky assumption that AA played a role in *everyone's* achievements if they are a URM. One shouldn't have to be a brilliant mind like Condoleezza Rice or Vernon Jordan to be assumed to be worthy of one's position in competitive environments.

If you have a quirky last name, and I Google your first and last name, your dad’s tech VP bio comes up. I search your dad’s name and it just so happens he went to the same college you attend! Then, I Google his full name, and it comes up pics of you and him at a “gala.” Legacy.

Rinse, repeat.

+1. And every former college athlete includes that information on his/her resume when looking for a job -- so that information extends beyond their college careers. Employers know full well athletes were favored in college admissions.

So what you are saying is that legacy and athlete status is a matter of pride, not a matter of shame.

I'll say it slowly ... prospective employers know that college athletes were favored in undergraduate admissions. Might be a matter of pride or shame for the athlete -- but the employers' perception still exists and can affect job prospects.

Uh no. Americans revere athletes. Having been one is a plus in many workplaces too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s hard. My husband and I are URM and people have always questioned the schools we went to, ivy and top 20. It almost feels like you have to work even harder to prove that you achieved anything on merit. As much assume affirmative action, we were both top of our respective high school class and he was top of his college class (phi beta kappa) before going to ivy law school with multiple ECs and national awards etc. Yet, people always assume that we only got there bc of affirmative action. Now, even in biglaw, it still doesn’t end. Other partners and associates can graduate from random place whereas every URM has to be from a better law school to be at the same firm. It never ends.

Bolded is the same for legacy admits, recruited athletes, regardless of whether they had stats etc. Welcome to the club.

I don't think these experiences are comparable. Once one has graduated, how would anyone know if the person was an athlete or legacy (assuming their name isn't Roosevelt, Obama, Harriman, etc.)? If one is a URM, I would assume the issue would extend far beyond university because people can see that you present as Black or your last name is "Latino" or whatever. I am a white lady who supports AA in college admissions and in hiring. But I imagine that one of the unintended consequences of AA is that snarky assumption that AA played a role in *everyone's* achievements if they are a URM. One shouldn't have to be a brilliant mind like Condoleezza Rice or Vernon Jordan to be assumed to be worthy of one's position in competitive environments.

If you have a quirky last name, and I Google your first and last name, your dad’s tech VP bio comes up. I search your dad’s name and it just so happens he went to the same college you attend! Then, I Google his full name, and it comes up pics of you and him at a “gala.” Legacy.

Rinse, repeat.

+1. And every former college athlete includes that information on his/her resume when looking for a job -- so that information extends beyond their college careers. Employers know full well athletes were favored in college admissions.

So what you are saying is that legacy and athlete status is a matter of pride, not a matter of shame.

I'll say it slowly ... prospective employers know that college athletes were favored in undergraduate admissions. Might be a matter of pride or shame for the athlete -- but the employers' perception still exists and can affect job prospects.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s hard. My husband and I are URM and people have always questioned the schools we went to, ivy and top 20. It almost feels like you have to work even harder to prove that you achieved anything on merit. As much assume affirmative action, we were both top of our respective high school class and he was top of his college class (phi beta kappa) before going to ivy law school with multiple ECs and national awards etc. Yet, people always assume that we only got there bc of affirmative action. Now, even in biglaw, it still doesn’t end. Other partners and associates can graduate from random place whereas every URM has to be from a better law school to be at the same firm. It never ends.

Bolded is the same for legacy admits, recruited athletes, regardless of whether they had stats etc. Welcome to the club.

I don't think these experiences are comparable. Once one has graduated, how would anyone know if the person was an athlete or legacy (assuming their name isn't Roosevelt, Obama, Harriman, etc.)? If one is a URM, I would assume the issue would extend far beyond university because people can see that you present as Black or your last name is "Latino" or whatever. I am a white lady who supports AA in college admissions and in hiring. But I imagine that one of the unintended consequences of AA is that snarky assumption that AA played a role in *everyone's* achievements if they are a URM. One shouldn't have to be a brilliant mind like Condoleezza Rice or Vernon Jordan to be assumed to be worthy of one's position in competitive environments.

If you have a quirky last name, and I Google your first and last name, your dad’s tech VP bio comes up. I search your dad’s name and it just so happens he went to the same college you attend! Then, I Google his full name, and it comes up pics of you and him at a “gala.” Legacy.

Rinse, repeat.

+1. And every former college athlete includes that information on his/her resume when looking for a job -- so that information extends beyond their college careers. Employers know full well athletes were favored in college admissions.

So what you are saying is that legacy and athlete status is a matter of pride, not a matter of shame.

I'll say it slowly ... prospective employers know that college athletes were favored in undergraduate admissions. Might be a matter of pride or shame for the athlete -- but the employers' perception still exists and can affect job prospects.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s hard. My husband and I are URM and people have always questioned the schools we went to, ivy and top 20. It almost feels like you have to work even harder to prove that you achieved anything on merit. As much assume affirmative action, we were both top of our respective high school class and he was top of his college class (phi beta kappa) before going to ivy law school with multiple ECs and national awards etc. Yet, people always assume that we only got there bc of affirmative action. Now, even in biglaw, it still doesn’t end. Other partners and associates can graduate from random place whereas every URM has to be from a better law school to be at the same firm. It never ends.

Bolded is the same for legacy admits, recruited athletes, regardless of whether they had stats etc. Welcome to the club.

I don't think these experiences are comparable. Once one has graduated, how would anyone know if the person was an athlete or legacy (assuming their name isn't Roosevelt, Obama, Harriman, etc.)? If one is a URM, I would assume the issue would extend far beyond university because people can see that you present as Black or your last name is "Latino" or whatever. I am a white lady who supports AA in college admissions and in hiring. But I imagine that one of the unintended consequences of AA is that snarky assumption that AA played a role in *everyone's* achievements if they are a URM. One shouldn't have to be a brilliant mind like Condoleezza Rice or Vernon Jordan to be assumed to be worthy of one's position in competitive environments.

If you have a quirky last name, and I Google your first and last name, your dad’s tech VP bio comes up. I search your dad’s name and it just so happens he went to the same college you attend! Then, I Google his full name, and it comes up pics of you and him at a “gala.” Legacy.

Rinse, repeat.

+1. And every former college athlete includes that information on his/her resume when looking for a job -- so that information extends beyond their college careers. Employers know full well athletes were favored in college admissions.

So what you are saying is that legacy and athlete status is a matter of pride, not a matter of shame.