Anonymous wrote:They can’t get rid of athletic preferences or they won’t be able to field a team. It makes no sense.

I still don’t see how colleges won’t be able to still keep doing it with.holistic admissions . The whole process is such a random crapshoot anyway,

Anonymous wrote:Good. As it should be. Get rid of all the hooks.
Although, you are incorrect, EA/ED won't be treated the same way as legacy, athletics, etc... Not analogous, and I despise ED
EA is open to all No issues there

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the interesting unintended consequence will be the explosion of women in selective colleges. Right now, women make up 60% of colleges students. It’s not exactly a shock that women also need better credential to get into non-engineering programs at selective colleges.

https://feed.georgetown.edu/access-affordability/women-increasingly-outnumber-men-at-u-s-colleges-but-why/

It will be interesting to watch UVA Arts & Sciences, WM, IVpvys etc become gender blind in admissions and hit 70% women. Because race, national origin, gender and religion are the big protected classes. It’s hard to imagine prohibiting consideration of race but allowing gender consideration.

It’s interesting to watch as women become more educated than men and less dependent on them. There is a society wide shift underway that is creating the Incels and MAGAs, who are pushing to legally restrict women. This decision will make womens power and mens resentment explode.

It will be interesting to watch all these college educated women start crying they can’t find a husband. Don’t expect men to GAF though.

Men at the bottom rung won’t find matches either. You can see what’s happening in China. Women at the top and men at the bottom will be unpartnered. I don’t see it as a bad thing. We need less people on Earth.

Yes but nobody cares about bottom-rung men, least of all college educated women, and such men are well aware nobody cares about them. Meanwhile the college girls will be wailing and crying and their sadz will be grist for NYT stories.

As I mentioned. No one is guaranteed a partner, life isn’t fair. In general in history there has always been a surplus of women over men. This issue used to be solved with higher status men having concubines or multiple wives. I am not fazed by this because this is just part of human history and with economic power comes other options than having to partner with a man.

So our educated daughters can look forward to being concubines now? 🙄🙄🙄

Nope. Because they are educated, they have options besides sex work to support themselves.

DP. What's the problem with "sex work"?

My body my choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the interesting unintended consequence will be the explosion of women in selective colleges. Right now, women make up 60% of colleges students. It’s not exactly a shock that women also need better credential to get into non-engineering programs at selective colleges.

https://feed.georgetown.edu/access-affordability/women-increasingly-outnumber-men-at-u-s-colleges-but-why/

It will be interesting to watch UVA Arts & Sciences, WM, IVpvys etc become gender blind in admissions and hit 70% women. Because race, national origin, gender and religion are the big protected classes. It’s hard to imagine prohibiting consideration of race but allowing gender consideration.

It’s interesting to watch as women become more educated than men and less dependent on them. There is a society wide shift underway that is creating the Incels and MAGAs, who are pushing to legally restrict women. This decision will make womens power and mens resentment explode.

It will be interesting to watch all these college educated women start crying they can’t find a husband. Don’t expect men to GAF though.

Men at the bottom rung won’t find matches either. You can see what’s happening in China. Women at the top and men at the bottom will be unpartnered. I don’t see it as a bad thing. We need less people on Earth.

Yes but nobody cares about bottom-rung men, least of all college educated women, and such men are well aware nobody cares about them. Meanwhile the college girls will be wailing and crying and their sadz will be grist for NYT stories.

As I mentioned. No one is guaranteed a partner, life isn’t fair. In general in history there has always been a surplus of women over men. This issue used to be solved with higher status men having concubines or multiple wives. I am not fazed by this because this is just part of human history and with economic power comes other options than having to partner with a man.

So our educated daughters can look forward to being concubines now? 🙄🙄🙄

Nope. Because they are educated, they have options besides sex work to support themselves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the interesting unintended consequence will be the explosion of women in selective colleges. Right now, women make up 60% of colleges students. It’s not exactly a shock that women also need better credential to get into non-engineering programs at selective colleges.

https://feed.georgetown.edu/access-affordability/women-increasingly-outnumber-men-at-u-s-colleges-but-why/

It will be interesting to watch UVA Arts & Sciences, WM, IVpvys etc become gender blind in admissions and hit 70% women. Because race, national origin, gender and religion are the big protected classes. It’s hard to imagine prohibiting consideration of race but allowing gender consideration.

It’s interesting to watch as women become more educated than men and less dependent on them. There is a society wide shift underway that is creating the Incels and MAGAs, who are pushing to legally restrict women. This decision will make womens power and mens resentment explode.

It will be interesting to watch all these college educated women start crying they can’t find a husband. Don’t expect men to GAF though.

Men at the bottom rung won’t find matches either. You can see what’s happening in China. Women at the top and men at the bottom will be unpartnered. I don’t see it as a bad thing. We need less people on Earth.

Yes but nobody cares about bottom-rung men, least of all college educated women, and such men are well aware nobody cares about them. Meanwhile the college girls will be wailing and crying and their sadz will be grist for NYT stories.

As I mentioned. No one is guaranteed a partner, life isn’t fair. In general in history there has always been a surplus of women over men. This issue used to be solved with higher status men having concubines or multiple wives. I am not fazed by this because this is just part of human history and with economic power comes other options than having to partner with a man.

So our educated daughters can look forward to being concubines now? 🙄🙄🙄

Anonymous wrote:

If women don’t need men for economic support and can have children without a romantic partner, why are they crying?

LOL you can pretend educated professional women don’t want a suitable husband (meaning, education and salary at least equal to theirs and preferably much superior) but the reality is that they do, and they’ll be big mad when they can’t find one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am fine with that. College admissions needs a massive overhaul.

Depending on what the Supreme Court says, one of the biggest changes will be elimination of any sort of “Women in STEM” outreach programs, preferences, or scholarships.

Be careful what you (ignorantly) wish for.

Then the same would go for the preference boys currently get for anything other than engineering and cs.

Neither has to happen as gender/sex aren’t subject to strict scrutiny like race is. That’s intermediate scrutiny, if memory serves.

Ask VMI how this is going to go.

Well, first you are going to have to define how you define gender. How do you factor in the non binary applicants, or the trans applicant?

Race is even a more anti-scientific concept; I wonder why Asian Americans with dark skin don't simply mark Black in their applications.

It worked for Mindy Kaling's brother.

https://www.cnn.com/2015/04/07/living/feat-mindy-kaling-brother-affirmative-action/index.html

Fascinating read, I had no idea

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the interesting unintended consequence will be the explosion of women in selective colleges. Right now, women make up 60% of colleges students. It’s not exactly a shock that women also need better credential to get into non-engineering programs at selective colleges.

https://feed.georgetown.edu/access-affordability/women-increasingly-outnumber-men-at-u-s-colleges-but-why/

It will be interesting to watch UVA Arts & Sciences, WM, IVpvys etc become gender blind in admissions and hit 70% women. Because race, national origin, gender and religion are the big protected classes. It’s hard to imagine prohibiting consideration of race but allowing gender consideration.

It’s interesting to watch as women become more educated than men and less dependent on them. There is a society wide shift underway that is creating the Incels and MAGAs, who are pushing to legally restrict women. This decision will make womens power and mens resentment explode.

It will be interesting to watch all these college educated women start crying they can’t find a husband. Don’t expect men to GAF though.

Men at the bottom rung won’t find matches either. You can see what’s happening in China. Women at the top and men at the bottom will be unpartnered. I don’t see it as a bad thing. We need less people on Earth.

Yes but nobody cares about bottom-rung men, least of all college educated women, and such men are well aware nobody cares about them. Meanwhile the college girls will be wailing and crying and their sadz will be grist for NYT stories.

As I mentioned. No one is guaranteed a partner, life isn’t fair. In general in history there has always been a surplus of women over men. This issue used to be solved with higher status men having concubines or multiple wives. I am not fazed by this because this is just part of human history and with economic power comes other options than having to partner with a man.

So our educated daughters can look forward to being concubines now? 🙄🙄🙄

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the interesting unintended consequence will be the explosion of women in selective colleges. Right now, women make up 60% of colleges students. It’s not exactly a shock that women also need better credential to get into non-engineering programs at selective colleges.

https://feed.georgetown.edu/access-affordability/women-increasingly-outnumber-men-at-u-s-colleges-but-why/

It will be interesting to watch UVA Arts & Sciences, WM, IVpvys etc become gender blind in admissions and hit 70% women. Because race, national origin, gender and religion are the big protected classes. It’s hard to imagine prohibiting consideration of race but allowing gender consideration.

It’s interesting to watch as women become more educated than men and less dependent on them. There is a society wide shift underway that is creating the Incels and MAGAs, who are pushing to legally restrict women. This decision will make womens power and mens resentment explode.

It will be interesting to watch all these college educated women start crying they can’t find a husband. Don’t expect men to GAF though.

Men at the bottom rung won’t find matches either. You can see what’s happening in China. Women at the top and men at the bottom will be unpartnered. I don’t see it as a bad thing. We need less people on Earth.

Yes but nobody cares about bottom-rung men, least of all college educated women, and such men are well aware nobody cares about them. Meanwhile the college girls will be wailing and crying and their sadz will be grist for NYT stories.

As I mentioned. No one is guaranteed a partner, life isn’t fair. In general in history there has always been a surplus of women over men. This issue used to be solved with higher status men having concubines or multiple wives. I am not fazed by this because this is just part of human history and with economic power comes other options than having to partner with a man.

If women don’t need men for economic support and can have children without a romantic partner, why are they crying?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the interesting unintended consequence will be the explosion of women in selective colleges. Right now, women make up 60% of colleges students. It’s not exactly a shock that women also need better credential to get into non-engineering programs at selective colleges.

https://feed.georgetown.edu/access-affordability/women-increasingly-outnumber-men-at-u-s-colleges-but-why/

It will be interesting to watch UVA Arts & Sciences, WM, IVpvys etc become gender blind in admissions and hit 70% women. Because race, national origin, gender and religion are the big protected classes. It’s hard to imagine prohibiting consideration of race but allowing gender consideration.

It’s interesting to watch as women become more educated than men and less dependent on them. There is a society wide shift underway that is creating the Incels and MAGAs, who are pushing to legally restrict women. This decision will make womens power and mens resentment explode.

It will be interesting to watch all these college educated women start crying they can’t find a husband. Don’t expect men to GAF though.

Men at the bottom rung won’t find matches either. You can see what’s happening in China. Women at the top and men at the bottom will be unpartnered. I don’t see it as a bad thing. We need less people on Earth.

Yes but nobody cares about bottom-rung men, least of all college educated women, and such men are well aware nobody cares about them. Meanwhile the college girls will be wailing and crying and their sadz will be grist for NYT stories.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the interesting unintended consequence will be the explosion of women in selective colleges. Right now, women make up 60% of colleges students. It’s not exactly a shock that women also need better credential to get into non-engineering programs at selective colleges.

https://feed.georgetown.edu/access-affordability/women-increasingly-outnumber-men-at-u-s-colleges-but-why/

It will be interesting to watch UVA Arts & Sciences, WM, IVpvys etc become gender blind in admissions and hit 70% women. Because race, national origin, gender and religion are the big protected classes. It’s hard to imagine prohibiting consideration of race but allowing gender consideration.

It’s interesting to watch as women become more educated than men and less dependent on them. There is a society wide shift underway that is creating the Incels and MAGAs, who are pushing to legally restrict women. This decision will make womens power and mens resentment explode.

It will be interesting to watch all these college educated women start crying they can’t find a husband. Don’t expect men to GAF though.

Men at the bottom rung won’t find matches either. You can see what’s happening in China. Women at the top and men at the bottom will be unpartnered. I don’t see it as a bad thing. We need less people on Earth.