Attention: Affirmative Action Haters

[Seraphthrone]

<p>affirmative action itself is a form of racism
we should treat everyone equally, doesn't matter black, white, yellow, green, or blue. </p>

<p>someone will say:"OK but black people have hard time", then how about help them to improve their conditions, instead of giving them lower standard.</p>

<p>i used to have a simile that treats college admission like a racing game. while a racer has better shoes and the other has worse shoes, should we shorten the distance for the racer who has worse shoes? Obviously no, but what we should do is to give that racer a better pair of shoes so that it's a fair competition that test both people's ability instead of both people's conditions.</p>

<p>same for college, we can give minority groups more chance to prepare for college, instead of lower standard.</p>

<p>some people will say"then who is responsible for such duty to help then?"
government should spend less money on war, rich people, military race, all those craps, so that it can spend more money on minority group, instead of let colleges/majority bear the duty of aiding minority groups</p>

<p>btw im aisan, so should be placed in minority group huh</p>

[ihavenolife]

<p>Tia said UC's are not diverse and boring environments because of 1-3% black students. That has got to be one of the most ignorant statements I have heard. Have you ever been to any of the UC's? Cal and LA are probably the most culturally diverse and liberal universities in this country, and they don't have affirmative action. Many UC's have high percentage of asians (overrepresented because a lot of them work so hard) and decent amount of hispanics because there are many asians and hispanics in California. But what about blacks? No. There really aren't that many. Most of them are clustered around the Los Angeles area. That explains the few percentage of blacks at UC. I know this is true because many colleges universities in the east coast states, such as Maryland, New Jersey, New York, and others, easily have around 15% of black students. Why? Because the east coast has a lot of black population.</p>

<p>So what was the main point of my post? DO NOT DISS UC's!!!! CALIFORNIA RULES!!</p>

[desichick]

<p>Seraphthrone , I totally agree with you. AA is certainly a devious form of racism. It, in a sense, depletes the purpose for which it was instituted. We should do something about reducing this racism, rather than exacerbating it.
I don't really have any strong feelings about the issue because it is circumstantial. </p>

<p>AA is making students of different ethnicities have an advantage over another one. Some people may believe that this is unfair as their race or ethnicity is not included in AA while others complain that AA is setting a race's standards low. </p>

<p>I am Indian, and in the American population I am considered a URM, but in the University and College Population I am not. Therefore, AA does hurt me as well as other Asian kids. </p>

<p>What really gets on my nerves is that some kids claim that URM's success is due to just their race. To the contrary it is their hard work. </p>

<p>AA is not as effective as it was say 30 years ago when the vast majority of the college population was dominated by a few singular races. </p>

<p>Also, with AA, colleges don't just look at race...they look at the whole package a student is bringing. </p>

<p>I believe that if you claim that a student is getting accepted simply due to their race then you are highly mistaken and somewhat ignorant, especially in this day and age.</p>

[oracle1]

<p>"I believe that if you claim that a student is getting accepted simply due to their race then you are highly mistaken and somewhat ignorant, especially in this day and age."</p>

<p>Frustrated and jealous are good adjectives, but certainly not ignorant or even all that wrong.</p>

[Karl_Marks]

<p>"What really gets on my nerves is that some kids claim that URM's success is due to just their race. To the contrary it is their hard work."</p>

<p>Success in what? Getting into college? And hard work....doesn't everyone work hard (for a top school)?</p>

<p>"Also, with AA, colleges don't just look at race...they look at the whole package a student is bringing."</p>

<p>Agreed, but race will be the most important factor for such an applicant. </p>

<p>"I believe that if you claim that a student is getting accepted simply due to their race then you are highly mistaken and somewhat ignorant, especially in this day and age."</p>

<p>This data would disagree:</p>

<p>The data from the study represent admissions disadvantage and advantage in terms of SAT points (on the old 1600-point scale):</p>

<p>Blacks: +230
Hispanics: +185
Asians: –50
Whites: No change</p>

<p>And what about the fact that minority (African-Americans) students at HYP tend to be in the higher income bracket? </p>

<p>AA should be based on income level/socioeconomic status, ain't nothing wrong with that.</p>

[funnylookinkid]

<p>I'm going to give my opinion on this.</p>

<p>First of all, to everyone saying "we all live in a colorless world!" blah blah blah, Affirmative Action has very little to do with any of the arguments that you AA haters are bringing to the table.</p>

<p>AA is based on taking an ethnic group in the United States, and measuring their socioeconomic status and rate of education among those groups. This is why Affirmative Action deals with underrepresented minorities -- not the Asians, or the Indians, etc. Because STASTICALLY, which is what all of you WANT the college admissions process to be but bash AA, Asians, Indians and Caucasians have more degrees and better paying jobs than do Hispanics, Native Americans or African Americans.</p>

<p>Affirmative action has very little to do with past racism. In theory and on paper, yes, it does -- but that's to please anyone who doesn't like the idea. Seemingly putting racism and past wounds makes it all better. Incorrect. AA simply puts people on a level playing field.</p>

<p>When it comes down to it, it varies from institution to institution. Don't like schools that give special attention to minorities? Don't apply there. It's as simple as that. Ethnicity is a FACTOR in the college admissions process -- why should the fact that you have 50 points higher on an exam that measures nothing but an ability to stand a prolonged testing period take precedence over the fact that among my race and among my generation of family members, they have not had the opportunity to go to college? Why should the fact that you have some sort of "STORY" or some sort of "GOOD CHARACTER" take precedence over the fact that MY good character is breaking stereotypes and making something of myself?</p>

<p>Jealousy is the key here. There are many factors to the admissions process. The point when college admissions becomes solely based on statistics and nothing more is the point when all of it goes downhill. Some of the most intellectually sound people I know are bad writers and hate math -- so because they have bad stats, you should automatically get in? Screw that. Anyone who argues that college admissions should be based on statistics and character -- reevaluate your argument, because that's exactly what AA does. It takes the statistics and balances them with another set of statistics and it takes into account the character of an applicant by recognizing that they've overcome obstacles to break societal molds.</p>

<p>Point being: get over it. It's here to stay.</p>

[bearcats]

<p>" Point being: get over it. It's here to stay."</p>

<p>Good for california and michigan..hopefully more states are going to be smart like them..oh..and texas for that matter</p>

[Karl_Marks]

<p>"Point being: get over it. It's here to stay."</p>

<p>Brilliant point. I never thought of that.</p>

<p>"they have not had the opportunity to go to college? Why should the fact that you have some sort of "STORY" or some sort of "GOOD CHARACTER" take precedence over the fact that MY good character is breaking stereotypes and making something of myself?"</p>

<p>"they've overcome obstacles to break societal molds."</p>

<p>Saying you have to "overcome" sounds like you're steroetyping as well.</p>

<p>And using your logic, I guess racial profiling is okay?</p>

<p>"Ethnicity is a FACTOR in the college admissions process -- why should the fact that you have 50 points higher on an exam that measures nothing but an ability to stand a prolonged testing period take precedence over the fact that among my race and among my generation of family members"</p>

<p>I hate the SAT as much as anyone, but that is ridiculous. Nothing but an ability to stand a prolonged testing period? That is absolutely ridiculous. And yes, race should be more impotant than performance.</p>

<p>"...and measuring their socioeconomic status"</p>

<p>Agreed, AA should be based on socioeconomic status. </p>

<p>And I'm a minority as well, to deflect potential ad hominem arguments.</p>

[Akajjred]

<p>
[quote]
I just read a post by a black female about two minutes ago. She had high test scores, was valedictorian of her class, and had seemingly excellent EC's. Someone posted "you will get in just because you're Black." I'm tired of coming on this website and seeing such ignorant, racist comments as the one mentioned above. If people actually read up on college admissions, they would find out that 1/3 of the students at ivy league schools do not belong there. not because they are black, but because they are legacy or they bought their way into the school. If people are going to come onto this board and complain about affirmative action, then they better start complaining about things such as underqualified athletes, rich kids, and legacies. If everyone is so ****ed off about not getting into HYP, then maybe you should have worked harder. Don't blame it on a minority student that worked probably just as hard as you did. Blame it on the rich student that bought their way into college with mommy and daddy's money. Studies have shown that when working in a more diverse environment, one becomes more well-rounded and intellectual. It is a shame that minority students that get into great schools, even ivy league schools, are accused of simply getting in because they are URM. If you have a problem with it, go take it up with your state government or the national government. This is not the place to discredit someone's achievements through high school simply because you are bitter. Get a grip and have some respect for people that worked just as hard as you did.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hold on one second. I am firmly anti-AA. Why? Because it is a racist system that uses race rather than background to determine diversity. Who should get into Harvard a poor white kid that worked his ass off to get good grades and SATs, while working after school, or a rich URM that got everything they wanted like other rich kids? Affirmative action should be based on socio-economic diversity. I thought the Civil Rights Act established racial EQUALITY? Well that would mean that everyone was given the same opportunity, no one was given an advantage. That simply isn't the case. Blacks, hispanics, and other URMs can get into college easier. How much different are wealthy and intelligent blacks and whites? Not very in my experience, doesn't create much diversity. How much different are a rich white kid and a poor white kid? VERY DIFFERENT. How much different are a rich white kid and a poor black kid? Very different. Race has nothing to do with it. Just because you are black doesn't mean you have had less opportunities. You are the racist for supporting a policy that says poor smart white kids aren't as deserving of an education as a smart rich black kid.</p>

[ihavenolife]

<p>First off, I am not entirely against affirmative action nor am I entirely supportive of it.</p>

<p>Everyone by now would agree that affirmative action 30 years ago was considered "morally correct" and, was widely supported. However American society today is much different from 30 years ago. </p>

<p>I believe affirmative action should be based on socioeconomic status. A rich black kid shouldn't get an advantage over a poor white kid or a Vietnamese boat refugee. The original purpose for affirmative action is to give ECONOMIC ( I REPEAT, ECONOMIC) opportunity to the minorities because they were disadvantaged and many of them were poor. So basically, AA exists because much of minorities in this country are poor.</p>

<p>If money was the real reason, then shouldn't AA be based on your financial status, instead by the color of your skin? Yes. That would be fair and ideal. But why aren't colleges and universities doing that?</p>

<p>Because most colleges and universities want ETHNIC AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY, NOT POOR PEOPLE. They don't want too many people poor because they would have a HARD TIME PAYING THEIR TUITION. And universities like UC's don't need affirmative action to get diversity because California is already such a diverse state. However, for other universities in other states, there is less diversity. Thus, they keep affirmative action to enforce it. </p>

<p>So my point was that, AA should be based on socioeconomic disadvantage, but a lot of universities don't do that because they don't want too many poor people who can't pay their bills. There are only a few universities who really help poor people (such as Harvard because they're RICH and have a lot of money left over). </p>

<p>Yea I know, this whole topic sucks. There seems to be no real solution to this.</p>

[confused_student]

<p>I think some people are missing the point of the OP.</p>

<p>The comment the post was in a response to was one that said "You'll get in because you're black."</p>

<p>That is racist.</p>

<p>The person in question was not just black, but also VERY qualified. The post, though, implies that any black person can get into Harvard "just because they're black"...or worse, that if you're black and applying to Harvard and don't get int, that there must be something wrong with you.</p>

<p>Well, maybe there is something wrong with the Asian kids who don't get in, too...</p>

[ihavenolife]

<p>Hmm, I see. So the OP was just tired of ignorant people who doubt the ability of minorities and racist people who think that if black kids got into Harvard, the sole reason for it would be affirmative action. </p>

<p>confused<em>student, your name should be changed to understanding</em>student.</p>

[Runawa]

<p>Shoebox Said:</p>

<p>
[Quote]
on a side note, i have a friend who had a 3.5 HS GPA, 1280 (somewhere around there) SAT, pretty good ECs (interned during second semester for senator kennedy, class VP 2 yrs, involved in rotary commitee, various other community service organizations)...got into (hold your breath): Penn, Cornell, Darmouth, Duke, VT, UVA, and William&Mary...
want to know why? black female who is technically a political refugee from Somalia, moved to Kenya at 4, then US at 7, not a US citizen

[/Quote]
</p>

<p>Let's set the record straight. I did not have that GPA or that SAT score when I applied to college. In fact, I don't know where you got those numbers from. To say that my extra-curriculars were "pretty good" is a huge understatements, and the items you list don't even begin to scratch the surface. </p>

<p>And actually, africans are overrepresented in college campuses and don't receive the preferential treatment that african-americans do. I was an international applicant, and if anything, I lifted up their international countries represented number. How is that different from a student who gets in because he or she is from Alaska? So yes, while I don't deny I got some preferential treatment due to my being a political refugee, to attribute it my admissions to my being "black" is both erroneous AND slanderous. </p>

<p>PS, I love how there are so many people eager to attack AA but remain silent...or not as eager to attack...legacy admits, faculty's kids admits, rich kid "developmental" admits, and international kids. </p>

<p>PSS: I did not get into Cornell. However, I DID get into Georgetown, UNC Chapel Hill, and Wellesley. Just one more thing you were wrong about.</p>

[pagEL60]

<p>A few pages back, affirmative action was said to help people that didn't have the opportunity (socioeconomic), not because their race. So would a middle-class black, with an 1800 SAT score, going to a private school trump a low-income white/asian, with a 2200+ SAT score, coming from an inner-city school? The black student would have obviously had more "opportunities" but still have the advantage over the white and asian student b/c of affirmative action. Now, how is that fair?</p>