I'm PP 20:39. I've got a high school junior who's getting caught up in this ridiculous frenzy. For what it's worth. I'm also a writer. I think she makes amazing points. The ones about her parents are spot on. So many top school applicants effectively have managers/personal assistants/chauffeurs in the wings. There is a spectrum of tiger moms. Even middling tiger moms are more effectual than detached parents like hers. The letter could help her career, if she wants to go into publishing (what's left of it), PR, advertising, etc.

Legacy and connected alums still matter. Connected alums champion applicants, too. (I've got two alums offering to recommend my child to their alma maters.)

The part about the headdress was crossing the line. That's where I lost all sympathy. She does sound racist. And saying if she had two moms she would get in? Really?!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought it was dumb. People who were better qualified or added diversity got in and she didn't.

So when people whine about how we can't help what race we were born, that applies here too, right? Because how can she help that she "didn't add enough diversity"? Isn't that a discrimination of its own?

No. White people are not under represented on college campuses.

The people who should be "represented" on college campuses are smart, well-rounded students, regardless of color.

Didn't someone famous say he wanted his children to be seen for the content of their character and not the color of their skin? Oh yeah...

Admissions officers disagree with you and believe the different perspectives brought by students with diverse backgrounds adds value to their education environment. But honestly, the little girl who wrote this sorry excuse for an op-ed didn't not get in because of the color of her skin.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought it was dumb. People who were better qualified or added diversity got in and she didn't.

So when people whine about how we can't help what race we were born, that applies here too, right? Because how can she help that she "didn't add enough diversity"? Isn't that a discrimination of its own?

No. White people are not under represented on college campuses.

The people who should be "represented" on college campuses are smart, well-rounded students, regardless of color.

Didn't someone famous say he wanted his children to be seen for the content of their character and not the color of their skin? Oh yeah...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought it was dumb. People who were better qualified or added diversity got in and she didn't.

So when people whine about how we can't help what race we were born, that applies here too, right? Because how can she help that she "didn't add enough diversity"? Isn't that a discrimination of its own?

No. White people are not under represented on college campuses.

Not very smart. I would not hire someone who wrote that.

Anonymous wrote:I thought it was dumb. People who were better qualified or added diversity got in and she didn't.

So when people whine about how we can't help what race we were born, that applies here too, right? Because how can she help that she "didn't add enough diversity"? Isn't that a discrimination of its own?

And, OMG, these people are attention whores. This is their house. Notice the publication: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204323904577038301146022524.html

Anonymous wrote:I find it interesting how the reactions are evenly split between those who thought she was funny and those who found her whiny and entitled. I thought her piece was highly relatable, as I have gone through the college admissions "lottery" with two of my kids already.

Agree.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I dont understand why this was published. It's not particularly interesting and not anything we haven't heard before. Is she an editor's kid?

I believe she's related to an editor in some way. Ironic that.

From an article about it:

In fact, the one notorious aspect of college admissions that virtually no one ever praises openly—the preferential treatment given to legacy applicants who are admitted to schools because of familial connections—Suzy Lee Weiss doesn't touch in her Wall Street Journal piece.

Perhaps her sister Bari Weiss, a former Wall Street Journal editorial features editor, talked her out of it.

And she thinks her sister is "sassy" -- https://twitter.com/bariweiss

Her sister probably has taken a fair amount of abuse as she locked her Twitter feed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I dont understand why this was published. It's not particularly interesting and not anything we haven't heard before. Is she an editor's kid?

I believe she's related to an editor in some way. Ironic that.

From an article about it:

In fact, the one notorious aspect of college admissions that virtually no one ever praises openly—the preferential treatment given to legacy applicants who are admitted to schools because of familial connections—Suzy Lee Weiss doesn't touch in her Wall Street Journal piece.

Perhaps her sister Bari Weiss, a former Wall Street Journal editorial features editor, talked her out of it.

I don't know. I was legacy at Harvard and Columbia - multiple generations of family who went to both - and I didn't even get waitlisted. I was a good candidate, not a great one, so the admissions team probably made the right decision. But I think legacy is fading as a foot in the door.

Just finished the article and wonder why it got so much attention. Very ho-hum, in my opinion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I dont understand why this was published. It's not particularly interesting and not anything we haven't heard before. Is she an editor's kid?

I believe she's related to an editor in some way. Ironic that.

From an article about it:

In fact, the one notorious aspect of college admissions that virtually no one ever praises openly—the preferential treatment given to legacy applicants who are admitted to schools because of familial connections—Suzy Lee Weiss doesn't touch in her Wall Street Journal piece.

Perhaps her sister Bari Weiss, a former Wall Street Journal editorial features editor, talked her out of it.

Anonymous wrote:I dont understand why this was published. It's not particularly interesting and not anything we haven't heard before. Is she an editor's kid?

I believe she's related to an editor in some way. Ironic that.

Anonymous wrote:I didn't find anything compelling in it either. It was a sad indictment of her parents and almost sounded like she should be accepted for breathing air. The last line was funny, but I find it odd. No idea why WSJ published such rubbish.

Probably figured it would follow her around and make her unemployable.