Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:very interesting article

http://nypost.com/2015/04/12/mindy-kalings-brother-explains-why-he-pretended-to-be-black/

Too bad you didn't get the response you were truly after rather than the insightful response from 08:29.

Why do you think that's too bad? Are you a race baiter, too?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:very interesting article

http://nypost.com/2015/04/12/mindy-kalings-brother-explains-why-he-pretended-to-be-black/

Too bad you didn't get the response you were truly after rather than the insightful response from 08:29.

Why do you think that's too bad? Are you a race baiter, too?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have Egyptian friends who were born in Egypt (you know, actual Africa). They always checked that they were African American.

Egyptians are not African-American. Most forms that have a blurb about this sort of thing say that African-Americans are people of sub-saharan african descent. Most Egyptian immigrants come from privileged backgrounds, and a lot of them appear to be white, and go through their entire lives basically as white people with a neat ethnic story. I'm Egyptian, and I'm white to the point of pale. These are precisely not the type of people that need affirmative action. That is my problem with affirmative action- you are giving some people a boost, and those people are going to have to do the rest themselves, but how do you know you are giving that advantage to someone who really even needs it? I went to an elite college, and quite frankly, most of the black kids were children of well-to-do African immigrants. At this point, shouldn't affirmative action be based on socioeconomic data that you can't change and not on whatever race you decide to be that day?

If they went by socioeconomic data the number of AAs at schools would plummet. Poor whites and Asians drastically outperform poor blacks, and there are many more poor whites than there are poor blacks. For example, the children of the poorest white families get the same SAT scores as the children of the most affluent black families.

1. Do you have a cite for this information? I think this is an exaggeration, at best. We all know there is a racial disparity but if it is that extreme then more drastic steps need to be taken. Affirmative action is like trying to fix a broken leg with a band aid in this respect. Also, what you appear to be saying is that poor black kids are completely UN-qualified and have no shot of getting into college period. What the people above are arguing is that affirmative action is a boost for minorities that are already qualified. Both of those ideas cannot be true. If, instead of looking just at some subjective idea about race, colleges looked at socioeconomic data, they'd get kids who are actually in need. If you are worried about minority kids being left out, they could target specific regions where there are high concentrations of poor minorities and make sure to admit a proportion of students that way. By specifically targeting racial categories, you get a bunch of rich minority kids who were going to figure out a way to get to college anyway.

They quit breaking out the race/income numbers in 2005, but the numbers are from that year. Look at the last bullet.

But there is a major flaw in the thesis that income differences explain the racial gap. Consider these three observable facts from The College Board's 2005 data on the SAT:

• Whites from families with incomes of less than $10,000 had a mean SAT score of 993. This is 129 points higher than the national mean for all blacks.

• Whites from families with incomes below $10,000 had a mean SAT test score that was 61 points higher than blacks whose families had incomes of between $80,000 and $100,000.

• Blacks from families with incomes of more than $100,000 had a mean SAT score that was 85 points below the mean score for whites from all income levels, 139 points below the mean score of whites from families at the same income level, and 10 points below the average score of white students from families whose income was less than $10,000.

WRT poverty, http://www.nccp.org/media/releases/release_34.html

Whites make up 42% of poor people, blacks 27%. That coupled with the stark differences in scores would lead to a very large reduction in the number of black students accepted at competitive colleges if only SES were taken into account.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have Egyptian friends who were born in Egypt (you know, actual Africa). They always checked that they were African American.

Egyptians are not African-American. Most forms that have a blurb about this sort of thing say that African-Americans are people of sub-saharan african descent. Most Egyptian immigrants come from privileged backgrounds, and a lot of them appear to be white, and go through their entire lives basically as white people with a neat ethnic story. I'm Egyptian, and I'm white to the point of pale. These are precisely not the type of people that need affirmative action. That is my problem with affirmative action- you are giving some people a boost, and those people are going to have to do the rest themselves, but how do you know you are giving that advantage to someone who really even needs it? I went to an elite college, and quite frankly, most of the black kids were children of well-to-do African immigrants. At this point, shouldn't affirmative action be based on socioeconomic data that you can't change and not on whatever race you decide to be that day?

If they went by socioeconomic data the number of AAs at schools would plummet. Poor whites and Asians drastically outperform poor blacks, and there are many more poor whites than there are poor blacks. For example, the children of the poorest white families get the same SAT scores as the children of the most affluent black families.

1. Do you have a cite for this information? I think this is an exaggeration, at best. We all know there is a racial disparity but if it is that extreme then more drastic steps need to be taken. Affirmative action is like trying to fix a broken leg with a band aid in this respect. Also, what you appear to be saying is that poor black kids are completely UN-qualified and have no shot of getting into college period. What the people above are arguing is that affirmative action is a boost for minorities that are already qualified. Both of those ideas cannot be true. If, instead of looking just at some subjective idea about race, colleges looked at socioeconomic data, they'd get kids who are actually in need. If you are worried about minority kids being left out, they could target specific regions where there are high concentrations of poor minorities and make sure to admit a proportion of students that way. By specifically targeting racial categories, you get a bunch of rich minority kids who were going to figure out a way to get to college anyway.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have Egyptian friends who were born in Egypt (you know, actual Africa). They always checked that they were African American.

Egyptians are not African-American. Most forms that have a blurb about this sort of thing say that African-Americans are people of sub-saharan african descent. Most Egyptian immigrants come from privileged backgrounds, and a lot of them appear to be white, and go through their entire lives basically as white people with a neat ethnic story. I'm Egyptian, and I'm white to the point of pale. These are precisely not the type of people that need affirmative action. That is my problem with affirmative action- you are giving some people a boost, and those people are going to have to do the rest themselves, but how do you know you are giving that advantage to someone who really even needs it? I went to an elite college, and quite frankly, most of the black kids were children of well-to-do African immigrants. At this point, shouldn't affirmative action be based on socioeconomic data that you can't change and not on whatever race you decide to be that day?

If they went by socioeconomic data the number of AAs at schools would plummet. Poor whites and Asians drastically outperform poor blacks, and there are many more poor whites than there are poor blacks. For example, the children of the poorest white families get the same SAT scores as the children of the most affluent black families.

Anonymous wrote:I have Egyptian friends who were born in Egypt (you know, actual Africa). They always checked that they were African American.

Egyptians are not African-American. Most forms that have a blurb about this sort of thing say that African-Americans are people of sub-saharan african descent. Most Egyptian immigrants come from privileged backgrounds, and a lot of them appear to be white, and go through their entire lives basically as white people with a neat ethnic story. I'm Egyptian, and I'm white to the point of pale. These are precisely not the type of people that need affirmative action. That is my problem with affirmative action- you are giving some people a boost, and those people are going to have to do the rest themselves, but how do you know you are giving that advantage to someone who really even needs it? I went to an elite college, and quite frankly, most of the black kids were children of well-to-do African immigrants. At this point, shouldn't affirmative action be based on socioeconomic data that you can't change and not on whatever race you decide to be that day?

I have Egyptian friends who were born in Egypt (you know, actual Africa). They always checked that they were African American.

Anonymous wrote:Did you read the follow up articles? The guy applied, and was rejected, to dozens of medical schools. When he decided to run this little experiment, he still got rejection after rejection. Finally, a single acceptance came in, but clearly this guy was not a great candidate for med school - no matter how he presented himself. Rather than accepting that fact, the decided to blame reserve racism instead - easier on the ego.

The point he was hoping to make would have been more compelling if he had received mostly rejections as an Indian candidate and then mostly acceptances as a Black candidate. The one-off change doesn't tell us much of anything.

There are quite good calculators on line for predicting your admission chances to medical school, and I have to say I was kind of shocked just how much of a difference race makes in the calculator's analysis. A black student and white applicant with similar GPA and MCAT have very different outcomes.

(I support affirmative action, by the way, I just don't think we need to pretend that it is ambiguous whether it can substantially alter the odds of someone getting into a good school).

Anonymous wrote:His sister, Mindy Kaling (The Mindy Project) TV show was a product of NBC's diversity writing program which she had no problem taking advantage of and grateful for the opportunity.

It was reported that she doesn't speak to this brother. Apparently she has known for a long time that he is an arsehole.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:08:29-- Two points
1- How many medical schools need to accept you in order to become a doctor? The important difference is admitted/not admitted, not few admissions/lots of admissions.

2- There is no such thing as "reverse racism". It is just racism. Racism can be directed at any race, not just the ones you have in mind.

The "test" was flawed because he applied in two separate admissions cycles to two different sets of schools. There's nothing to say that he wouldn't have been accepted in the second admissions cycle (to a less prestigious school than he applied to in the first cycle) even if he'd presented himself as Indian.

Different years, different pool of candidates, different calibre of schools. And he STILL only got into one medical school.

he didn't apply to the same schools. And, he was still rejected by all, but one, that he applied. And then he flunked out of that one lone school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His sister, Mindy Kaling (The Mindy Project) TV show was a product of NBC's diversity writing program which she had no problem taking advantage of and grateful for the opportunity.

So?

Part of the guy's argument in the link is that affirmative action makes everyone resent you and think you're less qualified, but I don't think that's something people generally think about MK

That's just it. The diversity writing program may have given MK an opportunity, but she still had to prove herself. Affirmative action isn't going to give you a hit show -- either viewers like you or they don't.

+1. Exactly. You don't pay (academically), you don't stay.

Anonymous wrote:08:29-- Two points
1- How many medical schools need to accept you in order to become a doctor? The important difference is admitted/not admitted, not few admissions/lots of admissions.

2- There is no such thing as "reverse racism". It is just racism. Racism can be directed at any race, not just the ones you have in mind.

The "test" was flawed because he applied in two separate admissions cycles to two different sets of schools. There's nothing to say that he wouldn't have been accepted in the second admissions cycle (to a less prestigious school than he applied to in the first cycle) even if he'd presented himself as Indian.

Different years, different pool of candidates, different calibre of schools. And he STILL only got into one medical school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His sister, Mindy Kaling (The Mindy Project) TV show was a product of NBC's diversity writing program which she had no problem taking advantage of and grateful for the opportunity.

So?

Part of the guy's argument in the link is that affirmative action makes everyone resent you and think you're less qualified, but I don't think that's something people generally think about MK

That's just it. The diversity writing program may have given MK an opportunity, but she still had to prove herself. Affirmative action isn't going to give you a hit show -- either viewers like you or they don't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His sister, Mindy Kaling (The Mindy Project) TV show was a product of NBC's diversity writing program which she had no problem taking advantage of and grateful for the opportunity.

So?

Part of the guy's argument in the link is that affirmative action makes everyone resent you and think you're less qualified, but I don't think that's something people generally think about MK

Anonymous wrote:His sister, Mindy Kaling (The Mindy Project) TV show was a product of NBC's diversity writing program which she had no problem taking advantage of and grateful for the opportunity.

So?