Affirmative Action news





Click here to go to the NEW College Discussion Forum

Discus: College Admissions: 2002 - 2003 Archive: February 2003 Archive: Affirmative Action news
By me on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 09:05 pm: Edit

This June, the supreme court will determine the fate of Afirmative Action. This is big news for those applying to college next year. Post thoughts here

By Flagpeel on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 09:59 pm: Edit

Asians rejoice.

By jewish man on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 10:59 pm: Edit

dont rejoice quite yet

By ASIAN on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 11:06 pm: Edit

yes!
this sickening racial segregation should definitely be abolished!

By YAHOO!!!!!! on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 11:06 pm: Edit

TO all Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, Indian Americans etc. This is a great day to celebrate. No longer do you we have to worry about an inferior URM taking our well deserved spots.

By ... on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 11:57 pm: Edit

even if they do rule it out, how can we prevent it from happening? I mean, most likely we'd have to look at individual stats and compare. And even then, they could just say something like "oh we felt his essay conveyed more". I think its the colleges themselves that need to make the decision.

By heyppl on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 01:28 am: Edit

if they stop AA, who will benefit? like will it help jews?

By anti AA on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 01:49 am: Edit

To "...", they could stop affirmative action from happening, by not even including a box that asks for race.

By AA sux on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 10:15 am: Edit

they better abolish this unjust policy!

By me on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 10:24 am: Edit

It would help Jews because less qualified URMs would not be given our spots!

By disgruntled hispanic on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 10:53 am: Edit

Well ••••, there go my chances at the Ivies

By disbeliever on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 02:13 pm: Edit

me, show me the source where you heard this. I've talked to my friends, family and teachers and have even done a preliminary search on the internet about it, and no where can I find anything validating your claim. I would think abolishing affirmative action would be huge in the media right now.

I want to see the source. Give me a link to a news article or something; don't just post random info.

By your local mayor on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 02:38 pm: Edit

you don't know how to use www.google.com do ya?
This is the main case:

http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/12/02/scotus.affirmative.action/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A63231-2002Dec2&notFound=true

This is additional crap I found:

http://news.yahoo.com/fc?tmpl=fc&cid=34&in=us&cat=affirmative_action


here is some history behind Affirmative Action:

http://www.feminist.org/news/newsbyte/uswirestory.asp?id=7319

no, i'm not a feminist, i'm a shovenist-pig, hehe, i'm kidding.

By pãezinho on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 02:58 pm: Edit

shovenist?? oh my god..... are you spelling it like that on purpose?

By Sabzevarian (Sabzevarian) on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 03:12 pm: Edit

I think regardless of the ruling, the private universities, at least, can still do whatever the want right?

By ... on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 04:29 pm: Edit

bump

By Vizious (Vizious) on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 05:11 pm: Edit

Yea i would think that private universities could do what they want, as long as they dont receive government funding

By your local mayor on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 05:22 pm: Edit

no, i just don't know how to spell it because I DON"T CARE ABOUT THAT WORD!

By me on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 05:30 pm: Edit

Well...u guys are right if the university does not receive government money it can do whatever it wants. However, the fact is that most Universities (yes including the Ivies)do get government money. This would affect them big time.

By Eanderso1 on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 05:39 pm: Edit

People can always put down something like "President of Black Student Union" or write an essay about how some one was racist against you or anything like that... They'll find a way to find out....

By fsal on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 06:18 pm: Edit

Their last name.

By Nkemdilim Ezeife on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 01:03 am: Edit

Suggest another institution that will help more URM's enter higher education. Some of us, like me are not unqualified. No matter how good you all may think you are, there is someone out ther better than you regardless of their color or cultural background (BTW, I'm a Nigerian Amrican w/ 800 math 760 verbal 760 bio m 740 math 2c 680 writing blah blah etc. etc.)

By nyugrl07 on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 01:05 am: Edit

are u igbo Ezeife, i am too. last name is Ikwueme...

By An AA Indecisive on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 12:17 pm: Edit

I think they should do away with the race box all together. That would at least, make things APPEAR fairer.

By 1234567890 on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 06:49 pm: Edit

2-4-6-8 WE NEED TO INTEGRATE

No more AA, it is the most racists instituiton in American history since slavery. Legacies should stay because there is no race factor in legacies it is just judged on whether you are a son or daughter of an alumnus. If you are an African applicatant with a legacy, it is over, you are in and that is wrong, glad to see Bush pushing for the removal of AA

By Cara on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 10:11 pm: Edit

Hey, have anoy of ya'll read this week's Time. On the last page there's an essay about Bush and AA; it's priceless!

By MY2CNTS on Tuesday, January 21, 2003 - 11:03 pm: Edit

I think most of the people here are spending way too much time agonizing over AA. Minorities are not taking spots of better qualified applicants. There are no colleges losing students that they want to admit because of AA --- if you don't get in, its because they PREFERRED someone else, not because they were FORCED to take someone else. At the end of the day, colleges will only do what they deem to be in their own best interest, and unfortunately, that may mean that some schools are not looking for another 1600 SAT, another Asian, or even another kid from the Northeast in a given year. No matter how you slant it, social engineering is inherent in the admissions process. No court decision will change any admissions office from pursuing the student body composition they want to have. Furthermore, considering the totality of variables that admissions uses to select its incoming class, its really silly to think that the thousands non-URM rejects at selective schools were bumped because of a relatively small number of AA admits. Your spot is not being taken because of a URM, your spot is being taken because the school decided they did not want you. This AA debate is based more on hype and illusion that reality -- its blown entirely out of proportion. Too bad more people don't reserve the outrage directed at AA towards issues that are considerably more insidious in our educational system such as the extreme liberalism many students are forced to endure once they do get admitted.

By ihatemy2cnts on Wednesday, January 22, 2003 - 08:20 pm: Edit

MY2CNTS --
I read the first two sentences of your response and I immediately know you have no idea what you are talking about. The fact is under-qualified students ARE getting in over what are considered higher quality applicants. And isn't possible that the kid from the Northeast is Asian and did get a 1600 but was rejected or deferred because of a debased AA policy that will, in due time (like in a few weeks), be removed from universities nation wide.

MY2CNTS can suck it

By Cara on Wednesday, January 22, 2003 - 08:55 pm: Edit

Do you honestly think that all forms of AA will be removed before 2004 admissions?

By Mattymatt (Mattymatt) on Thursday, January 23, 2003 - 06:03 pm: Edit

For supposenly intelligent people the majority of you suprisingly appear rather dumb and ignorant. Every caucaion student in America right now should be holding their hands high in triumph. With the heavy pressure asserted on the Supreme Court by Bush, it appears as though this unjust policy will be nullified. Tough luck to all the minorities who took the easy road through addmissons.
And yes Affirmitive Action was abused, for example take University of Michigan. They accept students on a point policy, where a minority student would recieve more points than a white student with a 1600 sat

By incognito on Thursday, January 23, 2003 - 06:18 pm: Edit

Cara, no not all forms of AA will be removed befoer 2004 admissions. Listen, all of you. You are talking about abolishing AA (and i strongly agree with you). But there is another problem in the admissions that is worse then AA - legacies. Dont you think that legacies are worse (if not just as bad) then AA?? We should deal w/this problem before we go on to race.

Comments??

(and no, by the way: incognito is not a hispanic name. Actually, its an SAT word, so some of you should know it)

By hi on Thursday, January 23, 2003 - 08:31 pm: Edit

firstly, incognito, i suggest you learn the difference between "then" and "than." At least legacies provide money for the school so that the whole student population benefits. Whether anyone in society or at the school benefits from the presence of minorities is very controversial.

By incognito on Thursday, January 23, 2003 - 08:35 pm: Edit

well thanks a lot "hi." But just remember, we cant all be completely perfect () like you are!
And f*ck legacies. AA (although essentially groundless) is better to have than f*cking legacies

sincerely yours,
incognito

By I like legacy on Thursday, January 23, 2003 - 08:54 pm: Edit

AA violates the constitution, and is clearly prohibited in our nation's governing text. Legacy, on the other hand, is not in violation of any law or basic principle of democracy, as AA is. So, Incognito, you very obviously do NOT know what you are saying...

By incognito on Thursday, January 23, 2003 - 09:27 pm: Edit

F*ck you "I like legacy," because what I am saying is my OPINION. I think I know what i am saying becasue i am saying my OPINION, which i am sure i know much better then you do. As for legacy, how can you possibly tell me that it is OK (or even "democratic") for somebody to get accepted to a school, and not me, even though i have better grades then they do??

By incognito on Thursday, January 23, 2003 - 10:05 pm: Edit

I mean, lets say i'm more qualified then somebody else, and they get in because of something they're born with (their parents).

Now do you see how AA is a lot lile legacies?

By Lamar on Thursday, January 23, 2003 - 11:20 pm: Edit

I am of Caribbean descent (2nd generation), but was born and raised in London as were my parents. I am considered "English" or "British" regardless of my skin colour. My Ethnic background is an important part of my identity, but I don't consider it to be "African" just because I am Black.

In America it seams that ethnic background and nationality are all confused. What the **** is "African American?" I dislike this term especially as most of the "Black" American population who fit in to this category have little knowledge of African culture. Black Americans seem to be very different from Black Africans and Black Europeans in both their appearance and attitude. Obviously this is a very generalised opinion, after all Africa is so ethnically and culturally diverse.

Just face it that most “African Americans and Asian Americans” are Americans just like those of you with European descent. In terms of your attitudes and experiences you are all more similar to each other than compared to a Nigerian, an Indian or a Scot. I hate the racial “Hating” between certain ethnic groups in America. It comes from all sides and is very irrational!

Why should skin colour or ethnicity even come into play on a college application? Admission could be monitored, separate from the application (possibly by sending our ethnic information to an independent body). If admission was “colour” blind, a fair statistical representation should then follow.

I’m not sure if I have made my position clear, but I would be happy to hear other opinions on this matter.

By incognito on Thursday, January 23, 2003 - 11:25 pm: Edit

You did make your point clear. Very well said, Lamar. I agree completely.

By I like legacy on Friday, January 24, 2003 - 07:25 pm: Edit

Incognito is stupid, that is my OPINION....

Postscript: Usually children of harvard grads are also smart and well educated and might be willing to donate money to make the university a better place. Tell me where in the constitution legacy is prohibited, because i can tell you where AA is...
I have no respect for dumb people like you, just jealous because your grades are ••••.

By america fair -not on Friday, January 24, 2003 - 09:17 pm: Edit

This world is so full of hate and some of you are contributing to that sick part of society. Just think--some of you will be in the professional world with all of your racist views. This world will never change. It is so easy to say nasty things and hide.

By meryl2218 on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 02:39 am: Edit

"I like Legacy", I think that incongito may have a point. Why are you just jumping on him/her like this? Legacies are not good, that is my opinion, and my grades are just fine.

By Nkemdilim Ezeife on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 12:14 pm: Edit

Yeah, I'm Igbo. Anyway, here's a link to the article about bush.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/printout/0,8816,409553,00.html

enjoy.

By tenisghs on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 12:59 pm: Edit

Why Whites Think Blacks Have No Problems

By Tim Wise, AlterNet
July 17, 2001

Just a few years ago, a public opinion poll indicated that only 6 percent of whites in the U.S. believed racism was still a "very serious" problem facing African Americans. While larger percentages believed racism to be somewhat of a problem, only this anemic share of the white community saw it as an issue of great importance.


When you consider that twice that number – or as many as 12 percent – have told pollsters they believe Elvis Presley is still alive, it becomes apparent that delusion has taken on a whole new meaning among the dominant racial majority. Apparently, it is easier for whites to believe that a pill-popping, washed-up lounge singer faked his own death and is playing midnight gigs at some tropical resort, than to believe what black folks say they experience every day.


It makes me think that if ignorance is indeed bliss, then my fellow whites must be among the happiest folks on the planet.


So it was no surprise to read that once again a poll has been released, indicating that whites by and large don't think racial discrimination remains a big problem, and that whites and blacks continue to view issues of racial equality far differently.


According to the recent Gallup Survey on "Black-White Relations," seven out of ten whites believe that blacks are treated equally in their communities: an optimism with which only 40 percent of blacks agree. Eight in ten whites say blacks receive equal educational opportunities, and 83 percent say blacks receive equal housing opportunities in their communities. Only a third of whites believe blacks face racial bias from police in their areas.


Despite the fact that half of all blacks say they have experienced discrimination in the past 30 days, whites persist in believing that we know their realities better than they do, and that black complaints of racism are the rantings of oversensitive racial hypochondriacs. Blacks, we seem to believe, make mountains out of molehills, for Lord knows we would never make a molehill out of a mountain!


That white perceptions of the extent of racial bias are rooted in a stupendous miasma of ignorance is made clear by a number of salient facts. First, as will be shown below, there is the statistical evidence indicating that equal opportunity is the stuff of fiction, not documentary; and secondly, the simple truth that white perceptions of racism's salience have always been splendidly naive. Indeed, as far back as 1963, before there was a Civil Rights Act to outlaw even the most blatant racial discrimination, 60 percent of whites said that blacks were treated equally in their communities. In 1962, only 8 years after the Brown decision outlawed segregation in the nation's schools (but well before schools had actually moved to integrate their classrooms), a stunning 84 percent of whites were convinced that blacks had equal educational opportunity. In other words, white denial of the racism problem is nothing new: it was firmly entrenched even when this nation operated under a formal system of apartheid.


Of course, this ignorance of the lived realities of black people is no surprise. Rather it is in large part the result of our isolation from African Americans in daily life.


More than 80 percent of whites live in virtually all-white neighborhoods, and nearly nine in ten white suburbanites live in communities with less than 1 percent black populations. What's more, only 12 percent of whites in law school today – who by historical standards have had more opportunity to mix with people of color than any generation before them – say they had significant interaction with blacks while growing up.


One can only expect this degree of isolation to lead to a skewed perception of what other people experience. After all, if one doesn't know many blacks, or personally witness discrimination, it is all the more likely that one will find the notion of widespread mistreatment hard to digest. Especially when one has been socialized to give more credence to what members of one's own group say, than what the racial "other" tells us is true.


Of course, I'm not suggesting that every time a black person says they have been discriminated against that they are, in fact, correct. Individuals, after all, can misperceive certain situations. But the reality of individual misperception should not lead to the widespread white belief in mass black delusion, which is virtually the only way one can read the Gallup figures.


For so many whites to believe that blacks have equal opportunity, is not only to discount a few claims of discrimination that may be without merit: rather, it is to reject the broad swath of claims that virtually every African American can bring forth from their personal mental rolodex. Fact is, if even one-tenth of the black claims of discrimination were accurate, this would translate into well over 1.75 million instances of anti-black racial bias every single month, based on survey data. Unfortunately, it is doubtful the numbers are this small.


Though the Gallup survey didn't address racial discrimination in the labor market, there is little question that when whites say blacks are treated equally, they are also assuming this to be true for the world of work. But what is the reality? According to a recent study by the Russell Sage Foundation, even though blacks search for work longer and often more aggressively than whites, they are between 36-44 percent less likely to be hired for jobs in mostly white suburbs, even when their experience and qualifications are equal to their white counterparts. White males with a high school diploma are just as likely to have a job, and tend to earn just as much as black males with college degrees, and on average, even when age, experience, education and other relevant factors are considered, blacks average at least 10 percent less pay than similar whites.


As for education, the picture is much the same. Although formal segregation is illegal, de facto segregation remains a reality thanks to "ability tracking," which has less to do with actual ability, and more to do with racial and class bias against children of color and those from low-income families. Beginning as early as kindergarten, teachers and counselors separate students based on so-called cognitive skill levels, despite evidence that the tests used to determine these skill levels are inaccurate predictors of ability and terribly biased against students from non-dominant cultural backgrounds.


Even when black students show potential that is equal to or above that of whites, they are 40 percent less likely to be placed in advanced or accelerated classes, according to the head of the College Board. Despite evidence of ability, blacks are 2.5 times more likely to be placed in remedial or low-track classes, where they will typically be taught by the least qualified teachers, be given less challenging material to learn, and receive on average nearly 40 hours less actual instruction annually.


So too is educational inequity fostered by unequal discipline, meted out in a racially disparate manner. Even though black and white rates of school rule infractions are roughly equal, black students are twice as likely as whites to be suspended or expelled. Blacks are half of all students suspended or expelled for weapons violations, even though self-report surveys indicate whites are just as likely to bring weapons to school, and white males are actually twice as likely as black males to do so. Since blacks are more likely to be suspected – thanks to common stereotypes about violence and delinquency – they are the ones who get searched and caught, but this hardly means they break the rules more often.


According to studies by the Applied Research Center, the disproportionate rate of black suspensions is the result of greater punishment given for subjective infractions like "defying authority," or "attitude problems," both of which are perceived as more threatening when coming from black students than whites.


As for housing, white confidence in equal opportunity makes for nice wishful thinking, but hardly comports with reality. Virtually every study on housing bias in rental and mortgage markets for the past three decades has found evidence of substantial ongoing discrimination. According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, there may be as many as 2 million instances of racial housing bias each year, and as many as half of all blacks may face discrimination when trying to rent an apartment or purchase a home.


According to the Boston Federal Reserve Bank, blacks are 56 percent more likely than whites to be rejected for a mortgage loan, even after controlling for 38 factors that could explain higher rejection rates for blacks – including issues of credit history, collateral, and income. Nationwide, mortgage loan rejection rates for the highest income group of blacks is roughly the same as the rejection rates for the lowest income whites.


Finally, white protestations that blacks receive equal treatment from police in their communities, is nothing short of laughable. A look at police prosecution of the war on drugs alone gives the lie to white claims of equal law enforcement. Though blacks are only 14 percent of illegal drug users, they are 35 percent of those arrested for possession. In many communities, including some of the ones where whites claim there is no bias in policing, blacks face arrest rates for drugs that are five, ten, even twenty times higher than the rates for whites, despite roughly equal rates of drug usage.


Though a slim majority of whites admit that racial profiling – one clear example of unequal treatment – does happen, apparently few believe it happens where they live. Yet in state after state, studies have found a disproportionate rate of highway and surface street stops of vehicles driven by blacks, and searches of cars driven by blacks, above and beyond the rates of black traffic infractions, which otherwise might create reasonable cause.


In New York City, from 1997-1998, the NYPD's Street Crimes Unit stopped and frisked 135,000 people: 85 percent of whom were people of color. Only 4500 persons were ultimately arrested and prosecuted, meaning that over 95 percent of those harassed were innocent. Interestingly, whites who were stopped were significantly more likely to be found with drugs or other contraband, indicating that not only was this policy of racial stops and searches a biased one, but it failed the test as valid crime control on its own merits as well.


Of course, I hardly expect the facts to matter much, as an awful lot of white folks seem impervious to them. When it comes to racial realities, the levels of ignorance are so ingrained as to be almost laughable. Perhaps that's why 12 percent of whites actually say blacks are a majority of the nation's population, and why most whites believe blacks are a third of the nation's population, instead of the thirteen percent they actually represent. We seem to see black people everywhere, and apparently we see them doing quite well.


Apparently, we even see them as our buddies. 75 percent of whites in one recent poll indicated that they had multiple close black friends. Sounds great, until you realize that 75 percent of white Americans represents about 145 million people. 145 million who say they have multiple black friends, despite the fact that there are only 35 million black people to go around.


Which means one of two things: either whites are clueless about black people, friendships, or both; or black folks are mighty damned busy, running from white house to white house to white house, being our friends. In which case, we can put away all that nonsense about blacks "taking our jobs." After all, how could blacks have time to work at all, what with all the backyard barbecues they're attending at the houses of their white pals? Hell, maybe Elvis will even invite them all to Graceland when he makes his triumphant return to Memphis.

By tenisghs on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 01:31 pm: Edit

To Lamar -
I am of Caribbean descent (2nd generation), but was born and raised in London as were my parents. I am considered "English" or "British" regardless of my skin colour. My Ethnic background is an important part of my identity, but I don't consider it to be "African" just because I am Black.
=================================================
Lamar, you are obviously ignorant of American history. Do you know black people's position in American society? It's a LONG and UGLY past. Most black Americans do not know what ancestral part of Africa their descendants came from. We only know that Africa is our "motherland." Most black Americans are descendants of slaves in the South, including my family.

In America it seams that ethnic background and nationality are all confused. What the **** is "African American?" I dislike this term especially as most of the "Black" American population who fit in to this category have little knowledge of African culture. Black Americans seem to be very different from Black Africans and Black Europeans in both their appearance and attitude. Obviously this is a very generalised opinion, after all Africa is so ethnically and culturally diverse.
==================================================
Read my earlier statement.
--
Just face it that most “African Americans and Asian Americans” are Americans just like those of you with European descent. In terms of your attitudes and experiences you are all more similar to each other than compared to a Nigerian, an Indian or a Scot. I hate the racial “Hating” between certain ethnic groups in America. It comes from all sides and is very irrational!
=================================================
When you're ignorant of blacks' position in America, you spew stupid sh*t like above. Please get a book on American Jim Crow apartheid in your local bookstore. You will then understand the pain black Americans had to suffer and endure for the past 300 years. No matter what blacks did, even if blacks had equal or superior qualifications than whites like Dubya, they were turned DOWN because of the color of their skin. This system STILL continues today.

Blacks in America might be "American" but American white folks will not embrace black people as their own if you throw crime, education, and other controversial issues into the pot. In America, I am BLACK. Overseas, I am American. I suggest you read Tim Wise's articles, especially "School Shootings and White Denial". If you want to read them, I can give you PLENTY of links.
--
Why should skin colour or ethnicity even come into play on a college application? Admission could be monitored, separate from the application (possibly by sending our ethnic information to an independent body). If admission was “colour” blind, a fair statistical representation should then follow.
=================================================
Since you are British, you are obviously ignorant of the American racial "apartheid" system. If you have the chance to read American history, please do. "Race Color-blind" systems will not do sh*t since people will still discriminate applicants by the spelling of their names, cultural extracurriulars, etc. To deny race is to say that racial problems do not exist in this country. Even Bush's top percentage plans hurt white applicants who attend competitive all-white schools who probably have better credentials than underfunded high schools schools.

Most of these posters on this board live in communities that are 80-100% WHITE. Does that seem like cultural interaction with blacks and hispanics? Hell no.

P.S. Read Tim Wise's "Why Whites Think Blacks Have No Problems"
And Lamar, if you look like a black male, no matter what you tell people you are British-this or Caribbean-that, people will JUDGE YOU as a BLACK MALE. When you go to college, please take an African-American studies course to understand the history of black Americans in this country. It's an excellent course to diversify your mind.

By Nkemdilim Ezeife on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 01:33 pm: Edit

Thank you for this article. Whites and Asians and suburbanites need more interaction with blacks and African-Americans and people outside of their own race, ethnicity, or social group.

By asdf on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 01:37 pm: Edit

Tenisghs, get a life. You do nothing else but talk about AA.

By cookie on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 01:54 pm: Edit

Tenisghs, you always get the best info. Ezeife, thanks for the article and I'm Igbo too.

By Asian on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 01:55 pm: Edit

I'm an asian male, but I've been to college and the most important aspect of it was the socialization and I definately appreciated the fact that people had different backgrounds and heritages. Race does exist and you can learn a lot from being around other races.

By l on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 02:06 pm: Edit

We will be rid of AA anyways. The original intent of AA was to level the playing field for minorities. After it's all equal, AA will have to be taken out.

By woninIL on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 02:18 pm: Edit

AA allows less qualified students in schools and less qualified adults into job opportunities.

Of course it matters-these schools and places of employment are under horrific pressure to show diversity-they jump at the opportunity to employ someone of a minority group. I've been frustrated by it careerwise but I dont blame my employer. I blame the policy and I hope for my childrens sake it is abolished across the board!

Legacy? There are other colleges out there besides the Ivies, guys. AA affects them all;legacy is an issue in only a few!

By incognito on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 02:24 pm: Edit

I understand that. I dont like lagacies in general (despite the fact that my father went to Cornell)

By tenisghs on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 06:02 pm: Edit

From Asian -
I'm an asian male, but I've been to college and the most important aspect of it was the socialization and I definately appreciated the fact that people had different backgrounds and heritages. Race does exist and you can learn a lot from being around other races.
==============================================
A true person that is not in denial!

By tenisghs on Saturday, January 25, 2003 - 06:27 pm: Edit

Tenisghs, get a life. You do nothing else but talk about AA.
--------------------------------------------

In reference to "Why Whites Think Blacks Have No Problems"
Hey, asdf, 215 million whites and 35 million blacks. Dayum, black people are "quite busy" and not "lazy" taking white people's spots away! LOLOL

By tenisghs on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 03:10 pm: Edit

University of Michigan states...

“In our undergraduate admission system, fully 110 points out of 150 are given for academic factors including grades, test scores and cirriculum,” President Coleman says in a statement. “We only count 12 points for test scores, but that is because we value high school grades to a much greater extent—they can earn up to 80 points.

“We consider many other factors as well. Race is one of those, but a student who is socioeconomically disadvantaged also can earn 20 points (students cannot earn 20 points for both factors, however). Geographic diversity is also important, and a student from Michigan’s upper peninsula, for example, earns 16 points. We also consider leadership, service, and life experiences, among other elements.”

By HAHA on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 06:45 pm: Edit

TenisGHS says.....

BLABLABLABBALBABLABALABALBABLABLABLBLALBALBALBLABLBLALBALBALBLABLBLABLBALBLA. Thanks for the enlightenment.

By A minority on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 07:46 pm: Edit

When Tensighs brought you an article that shut all these prejudiced people, u guys couldnt say anything except insult him( I GUESS U DONT HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY).
AA was implemented to level the playing field but look around the level is still not the same.

Its true most of the people that post on this board are white, asian and live in suburbia....prolly have 3 black kids in their High School...and just cuz u say hi to them makes u think u kno a black person.
Colleges wont accept a minority who is a moron....minority IS NOT the only factor...although most of u guys are looking at it like that.
You may think u r more qualified because u got 1500 in SAT wit 3.9 GPA but then let me ask u how come some get rejected with 1600 SAT... they were apparently more qualified since they got higher SAT SO WHY DONT THEY GET ACCEPTED?

Another question....Most of you live in a homogeneous areas and apparently do not want that to change. How come?

Do you think its fair that minorities are judged throughout their life even if they got the same qualifications?

Cmon people use common sense.... I certainly do NOT AGREE with minorities USING AA as a crutch to get into college. I am black, I have done my best, tried to take advantage of the things that were available to me however I go to a school where we dont even have a gym and my friend was shot and killed. the public schools in my city did little to give minorities in par with their "counterparts" by the time they graduate...
i worked my ass off....and i still didnt get as much as some asians and whites? so obviously I am behind in High school....so instead of trying to catch up in college....ill be forced to go to a college where i will be less qualified by the time i reach he workforce. Is that fair? I didnt have money for SAT classes. and guess what? the school system is D.C public schools....and what is the % of minorities in DC about 60 to 70 percent. Go to a private school in DC and YOU WILL SEE that 90% or more is white.

I want you to think about what i wrote... I understand it is frustrating to think the "unfairness" of AA. But CMON yall..

I have applied to Ivies and to state schools...I hope AA can give a little more chance to get in those school....I wont even apply if i had 900 SAT--I dont think a minority who hasnt tried his/her best should get in but overcoming many disadvantages by being a minority should be a factor

Oh PLZ dont judge my spelling, grammar...this is not the issue and apparently am not trying to prove how good my writing is. I can write appropriately if I want. so dont be givin me all this bull shyt about whether i can spell rite or not.

By asdf on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 07:49 pm: Edit

"Apparently, we even see them as our buddies. 75 percent of whites in one recent poll indicated that they had multiple close black friends. Sounds great, until you realize that 75 percent of white Americans represents about 145 million people. 145 million who say they have multiple black friends, despite the fact that there are only 35 million black people to go around."

Tim Wise's logic is flawed. You can still have multiple black friends even if there aren't as many blacks as whites. It's not as if there's only one black person for each white person.

If blacks are going to refuse to accept the fact that some other races want to make friends with them, then its their loss.

By your local mayor on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 07:49 pm: Edit

screw affirmative action!


vote for me in the next election!

By asdf on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 07:51 pm: Edit

"Go to a private school in DC and YOU WILL SEE that 90% or more is white."

Why else are whites called the majority in this country??? Your argument doesn't mean anything.

By your local mayor on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 10:06 pm: Edit

wow, there are 90% whities in a private school in DC, what the h e ll does that have to do with the price of chicken in china?

Vote for me in the next election!

By meryl on Wednesday, January 29, 2003 - 10:08 pm: Edit

mayor: I'm going to vote for you darling. I love you too much not too. Heavens bless you!

By smarterthan uwhitie on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 12:47 pm: Edit

Look idiot....if you go to a public school.....the majority of the students are minorities, however higher quality private schools have 90% white kids---see how minorities r at a disadvantage u idiot.

All of you are racist white kids.... greedy too!

By meryl on Thursday, January 30, 2003 - 01:06 pm: Edit

...not that your making any preconceived judgments or anything...

By a on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 01:03 pm: Edit

bump

By Mr0range (Mr0range) on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 04:01 pm: Edit

I go to a high school that is, by a slim margin, more black than white. I can tell you that most of my high school, both white and black, will not be applying to college. We have maybe 3-4 kids a year apply to Ivy schools.

AA, while obviously unconstitutional, also just doesn't plain make sense. I would argue that minorities who have the stats to get into an Ivy League school, even with AA, have not been disadvantaged any more than many of the students in my high school-black, white, and a mix of other minorities-and are probably much better off.

To tenisghs - blacks were oppressed 300 years ago. Were you yourself oppressed any more than I? I seriously doubt it. Comparing the entire white population (its been scientifically proven that there is no such thing as different human 'races' per se) to someone like George W. is also entirely false. He is one of America's elite. Every country has them. The opportunities in my life pale in comparison to those available to Dubya and his family. So he got into Yale on a legacy.. so what. There are millions of others who won't.

Half of my family emigrated from Italy to the US three generations ago, and that entire side of the family is college educated. My grandparents were regular working class people and put 4 children through college, 1 of them being my dad who went to William and Mary. My family was disadvantaged at one point in history, but I myself do not claim to have been handicapped by this. Yes, this example is a far cry from what African Americans endured in the past, but at this point in time, at least where I live, minorities are not 'oppressed' any more than any other population. In fact, at my school, I am considered a minority.

The point that I am trying to make from all this, is that every population, be it white, black, hispanic, or asian, will have an unequal balance of opportunity at times. To give one type of person an unfair advantage over someone else of better qualifications, whatever "race," is not only wrong, but unconstitutional.

By dj cosine on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 02:59 am: Edit

Mr orange, your family, no matter how italian and ethnic, was still white, yes they were no doubt disadvantaged, but you're crazy if you think hudreds of years of bondage, institutionalized, codified, and socially acceptable racism twards blacks is even close to some sort of similarity.

"at my school i am considered a minority" the priveleged minority no doubt. there is a difference between being in school as a mnority, and living your life as a minority, you ought to acknowledge privelege. you can';t take AA away because geting rid of it would literally turn back the hands of time. those pushig for its abolition have no proactive solution in mind to the problem of racial discrimination, and porr primary education. one must take a step in the other direction and go frther than AA, making substantive changes in the education of young miorities and the poor. When your parents tax brackets no longer decide the quality of your education, may you then call AA unfair.

By 2u on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 12:55 pm: Edit

My2cents is so correct. Even without AA, some whites or Asians with 1600 SAT or all A's on transcript will still be denied admissions. Schools want to maintain diversity in their intitutions. There is only space available for a finite number of applicants. White females benefit greatly from AA just as other URM. At my school, 90% white, 3 white males(MN semi, top 1% of class,EC exceptional, top 1% test scores) were denied admissions to an Ivy over 1 black female with stellar scores & GPA, 2 white females with subpar GPA and so so scores but one is an athlete and the other is a legacy. Stop!!! using blacks as an excuse for not being admitted. It's not always the black persons fault. Admissin slots aren't guarenteed to anyone. Blacks happen to be represented in miniscule numbers at most of these institutions. People like George Bush are such hypocrits. He definitely was not ivey material with GPA of C in high school and test scores of low 500's verbal and low 600's math, C avg. at Yale and Harvard MBA program. With so many great schools in the US, whites & asians should stop belly aching about being denied admissions into 1 or 2. And please, stop whining and laying all of your admissions problems on blacks.

By sotrue on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 01:00 pm: Edit

So True. I can't wait to see AA gone because when all of the top schools have majority Asian population, Whites will run out of excuses. the comparision is alway made between whites, blacks and hispanics. What about the huge educatonal gap between whites and asians. Whites fall behind Asians in every subject and on every standrdized test. If colleges decided to take people who excel the most, their schools would be mostly comprised of Asians and then whites would be relegated to the 2nd tier colleges.

By SSE on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 04:45 pm: Edit

I hate to inform you of this but the average Asian person's SAT isn't too much higher than the average White person's SAT. On average, Asian people perform 30 points higher on the Math section and 30 points lower on the Verbal section. Here are the national averages from the College Board:

http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/news_info/cbsenior/yr2002/pdf/graph10.pdf

In addition to this, if you look at the statistics of the University of California system (I chose this system because California has both a great deal of Asian people and Caucasian people), there exists little to no disparity between the average GPA of an Asian person versus a White person.

I think you are encouraging the type of attitude that encourages people of different races _not_ to get along. There is no "superior race" that is going to take over every university in the United States. People who are qualified to go to college come from a variety of different ethnic and socioeconomic groups. That being said, I think that Affirmative Action should have more to do with socioeconomic status than ethnicity. After all, the argument being made on the part of Affirmative Action really comes down to to the assumption that people in minority groups have less money than White people. While this stereotype may be based on the semblance of truth, it is also skewed and inaccurate; poor and disadvantaged people come from a variety of ethnic groups. Our focus should be on helping people who have achieved the highest level possible on their economic level. Our focus should _not_ be enforcing stereotypes and racial boundaries. Does anyone else see the distinction?

By 8 on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 05:34 pm: Edit

SSE, i think the "national" average would be the same. But i think the averages in schools like Berkeley might be different. You're right, there is no superior race. Thus everyone should have an equal chance of getting in. A lot of the more qualified asians apply to top notch schools because there's this mentality that you bring in honor if you go to a top notch school. Bill Gates is much smarter than a lot of asians, but an equivalently smart asian would have been scorned for leaving school to build an empire. That's the only differene i see.

I don't think AA is fair. For the fact that a lot of people who get in because of it fall out. Letting them in just to fall out don't increase their success rate later on in life. There's a better solution, we just have to recognize that AA is not the solution so organizers can actually try to find a better solution.

By Mr0range (Mr0range) on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 06:19 pm: Edit

dj cosine, i dont think you even understood my post

AA, first of all, is unconstitutional, which is pretty much the best argument there is in our DEMOCRATIC nation. Second of all, there are many whites in my school who are just as disadvantaged as 'minorities.' Yes, while I myself might be part of a privileged minority, there many other whites in the same 'tax brackets' as minorities. There are disadvantaged people of every color in the US. There is no economic system that can prevent this. What does slavery and bondage in the 1800s have to do with being admitted to college in the year 2003? Not a damn thing. And don't give me this 'years of socially acceptable racism' BS. None of that was our generation. I encounter more 'reverse-racism' or whatever you want to call it in my school than discrimination against minorities. Anyway, the minorities that have the scores to get into the good schools WITH the help of AA are most likely LESS disadvantaged than many other minorities AND whites. All AA does is give certain people an unfair advantage who do not deserve it. If a minority has the scores to get into a school on his or her own two feet, and are admitted because diversity is needed, all the more power to him or her. But AA is complete BS.

btw, read SSE's post. I totally agree. I would not really have much of a problem with AA if it were based on financial status rather than ethnicity.

By TexChica on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 06:25 pm: Edit

Hey, y'all are making some good arguments on both sides, but does anyone actually have any breaking news, as the title of this forum suggests?

By Nkemdilim on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 06:30 pm: Edit

Every culture and society will have disadvantaged people regardless of what you do. It just happens to be very disproportionate in the case of URM's (There may be more disadvantaged white people than blacks and other minorities combined, but that's to be expected when they are 2/3 of the population. There is a much larger *percentage* of disadvantaged minorities which is why they still need help to reduce the proportions of disadvanteged minorities.) Even though finances play a larger role is disadvantagement, ethnicity is still a factor. You can't deny that America is still a white society.

By cookie on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 06:34 pm: Edit

Hey, Nkemdilim. What college are u going to?

By cookie on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 06:44 pm: Edit

I remember when I went to Nigeria too. I was ten years old. It's the coolest country in the world.

By Nkemdilim on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 08:02 pm: Edit

I wouldn't exactly say coolest with all of the government corruption there now. I don't know what college I'll go to yet because the acceptances and merit scholarships keep on coming in. It's why I didn't apply to any Ivy League school.


Report an offensive message on this page    E-mail this page to a friend
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.

Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only
Administer Page