<p>faggitis...you can't seriously be comparing the Asian American experience with the African American one, can you? Did you ever take an American history course or what?</p>
<p>well said db.</p>
<p>if uva disgusts the OP then i would more than happy to take his spot.</p>
<p>I'm not comparing the two, I'm saying that holding URMs to a different standard sends the wrong message. What employers do you know of that hire specifically for diversity? Probably not many. What I'm saying is that affirmative action hurts minorities because it deceives them into thinking that they will always be held to a different and lower standard in life, and when they graduate, they'll be unpleasantly surprised.</p>
<p>BTW yesyoucan: there are other URMs besides AAs whose historical experience in America is no worst than what asians have experienced.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What I'm saying is that affirmative action hurts minorities because it deceives them into thinking that they will always be held to a different and lower standard in life
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The impression I get is that of debt. "We're giving you the opportunity now, so that you may get out of your whole, find success, and repay us later." There are reasons after all, why college students take on debt. To break any vicious cycles, investment must come from somewhere.</p>
<p>faggitis...I'm talking about African Americans, not Asians...you seem quite patronizing toward minorities and not terribly knowledgeable. I wish you knew all the brilliant African Americans I know who attend UVA. They could think circles around you.</p>
<p>yeswecan- I'm not patronizing AAs at all, in fact the gov't ought to stop patronizing them thru affirmative action, which insults the intelligence of the smart AAs you mention. I mentioned asians and other URMS because I was responding to the original post about affirmative action and the only way to assess the merits of it is to look comparatively at the different groups affected by it. </p>
<p>galoisien - the "investment" theory is a noble one, but the return will never be greater than the investment because affirmative action by definition is taking slots that originally belonged to candidates equally or more qualified than the URM, so those denied candidates will be unable to contribute to the college despite having a higher return potential than the URM.</p>
<p>
[quote]
galoisien - the "investment" theory is a noble one, but the return will never be greater than the investment because affirmative action by definition is taking slots that originally belonged to candidates equally or more qualified than the URM, so those denied candidates will be unable to contribute to the college despite having a higher return potential than the URM.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You're viewing this as though academic performance is the only judge of merit. I'm not sure how you can assert that by "definition".</p>
<p>Also, calculate the opportunity costs of 1) the URM would not get to benefit his community versus 2) mainstream student whose culture generally values higher education anyway. Among disadvantaged groups, the marginal benefit per student is higher for a reason, simply because the mainstream student's culture and environment is already fairly saturated with education, but the student from a disadvantaged background might not.</p>
<p>And what about the affirmative action of our parents' generation? "...gender-based affirmative action hurt women because it deceived them into thinking that they will always be held to a different and lower standard in life"?</p>
<p>"1) the URM would not get to benefit his community versus 2) mainstream student whose culture generally values higher education anyway."</p>
<p>The problem here is that you cannot apply economic theory to quantify the benefit someone can contribute because its not quantifiable, instead you look to empirical examples to determine whether its fair. From my observations of ppl in my school, the URMs that go to the state's flagships and other prestigious schools ALL come from at least a middle class upbringing and was raised surrounded by mostly whites. These kids do not go home to a predominantly black ghetto; their friends and community is mostly white and values education, which means your first argument falls.</p>
<p>Second, its extremely unfair to label all non-URMs as "mainstream", coming from "a culture that values higher education anyway". I suggest you take a trip to visit the predominantly white towns on the West virginia/tennessee-virginia border. What about the white kid from a bust coal mining town who wants to break out of the cycle of poverty he's caught in? How would he feel towards URMs if he sees a better-off yet less qualified URM get into college whereas he doesn't? </p>
<p>In short, affirmative action favors privileged URMs over disadvantaged non-URMs to entrench racial hatred</p>
<p>galoisien, faggitis is right, your viewing race and minority status as the sole determinant of marginal benefit. there are many other factors to consider, including family income and structure. what if there was a white, middle class person who was brought up in a suffocatingly strict religious setting, one that shunned knowledge and cultural appreciation. wouldn't you agree that this person, who would most likely grow up to be emotionally crippled, would benefit as much, or more, from an education that would open their mind, and enable them to share their enlightenment with their community?</p>
<p>now to be fair, this person would never be enlightened if the school wasn't diverse in the first place, but diversity is not the same thing as having many different races. diversity is diversity of viewpoints and culture, not skin color. just being a "minority" is not basis enough.</p>
<p>
[quote]
but diversity is not the same thing as having many different races. diversity is diversity of viewpoints and culture, not skin color.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Duhh ... this was in fact the subject of my common app essay. You can't just stick ten different groups together and call it multicultural.</p>
<p>Don't preach to the choir pls. For a while I've suspected that the adcom picks real diversity over just skin colour, just from the people I've talked to. I don't know if you've actually really seen the student body here, e.g. eat, ride the bus, and live with them?</p>
<p>
[quote]
From my observations of ppl in my school,
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Anecdotal evidence != "empirical" evidence</p>
<p>It's your school. I don't know the specific school you went to, but chances are it's going to be a middle class or richer school, .... which is precisely why the tiny little sample you're citing doesn't reflect my overall argument.</p>
<p>
[quote]
there are many other factors to consider, including family income and structure.
[/quote]
</p>
<p><em>rolleyes</em></p>
<p>And this particular student just happens to think UVA should ignore that, right?? </p>
<p>(Newsflash: Not everyone on CC is prosperous or has two parents...but I like how you made that assumption anyway.) </p>
<p>
[quote]
I suggest you take a trip to visit the predominantly white towns on the West virginia/tennessee-virginia border. What about the white kid from a bust coal mining town who wants to break out of the cycle of poverty he's caught in? How would he feel towards URMs if he sees a better-off yet less qualified URM get into college whereas he doesn't?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Except I see such people at UVA?</p>
<p>One of my parliamentary debate teammates just happened to be a girl from southwestern Virginia close to the Kentucky border and speaks with a really noticeable drawl. Now as far as her economic and family situation goes, I can't say that her family came from a long history of working in coal mines ... but maybe you should know that UVA does pay attention to these things, and all these other factors.</p>
<p>I don't know -- there's this property that can be ascribed to policies called "not being mutually exclusive"??</p>
<p>I didn't read every single post in here but first off, I completely disagree with affirmative action. I think affirmative action would be fairer, although still not fair, if it was based off of socioeconomic status. I'm about 2/3 of the way through Malcolm Gladwell's new book Outliers and in it he talks about how parenting styles can be split into 2 categories: those associated with middle-upper class families where parents teach their kids to be more assertive, resulting in more go-getters, and the lower class families where parents don't take as vested an interest in developing their children into more get-it-done, successful people. He shows a definitive correlation between class and those two distinct parenting styles and I think the latter definitely puts kids at a disadvantage. Gladwell also makes the case that through much of the way we have cutoffs for gifted programs, etc, we ignore a large part of the talented pool in the world because those that may show some initial advancement get better treatment early on and have a significant advantage over those that may well have been just as, if not more, gifted because the latter never got the appropriate attention to begin with and fall further and further behind. Because of that, it would make much more sense, in my opinion, to base affirmative action off of socioeconomic status rather than minority status. Those who argue that minorities deserve preferential treatment for PAST wrongs have a flawed thought process, in my mind. All this being said, even basing affirmative action off of socioeconomic status is unfair because you are punishing some people with better stats for having received an advantage in life by letting those who have been disadvantaged (in many cases not really.. minority status does not equal automatic disadvantage..socioeconomic status usually does though) get in with less merit.</p>
<p>sounds like a lot of people out there feel slighted... worried someone else is getting something they deserve more. I don't feel that way. One of the best things about UVA is its attempt to have a diverse student body. I have yet to meet anyone I feel is unqualified to be here. Perhaps people should worry less about others' qualifications and worry more about their own. I am done with this thread.</p>
<p>galoisien your pretty thick, thats not what i was saying at all.</p>
<p>^yeah, none of my arguments have really gone answered. Just strawmanning and more strawmanning</p>
<p>It's not that we are worried about other people's qualifications, it is that we don't believe that any race should be given more of an advantage over another. If UVA is so worried about having a diverse body, isn't that a slap in the face for minorities. So UVA doesn't believe certian minorites are academically capable to compete against Caucasions? HAHAHAHA. Give that one a good ponder.</p>
<p>Maybe you should actually look at what I'm trying to say rather than use your own fallacies, Fallacy? :)</p>
<p>Here's a question to you all:</p>
<p>Have you actually visited Grounds? Eaten in or slept in its community? Ridden one of our busses, perhaps? Witnessed a class, or visited one of the libraries? I don't know, maybe actually <em>interacted</em> with the student body? </p>
<p>Oh you haven't? Fine. Maybe you will see the reason why I'm using one-liners then. </p>
<p>I actually don't care much for class racial diversity data. It doesn't mean anything to me. But on the other hand, the University it seems has tried its best to get <em>interesting</em> people with valuable skillsets and experiences, academic or otherwise. I don't know if "holistic evaluation" means anything to you. You should also perhaps consider how the University envisions an applicant will turn out in his or her fourth year (it involves some stretching).</p>
<p>And you know, the only people where I've suspected of being admitted under some form of affirmative action (individually) are some of the athletes. But you know, they're athletes and all. (You try playing in the NCAA or ACC while juggling school at the same time?) And even then they make intellectually sharp (and verbally sharp) dormmates and classmates.</p>
<p>galoisien, your posts sometimes puzzle and even annoy me. This one I like. Well said.</p>
<p>galoisien, you clearly aren't familiar with how varsity athletes are admitted to UVa (which happens to have "rigorous" standards compared to other D1 universities). Let me assure you, the bar isn't very high. Many of the athletes who attend this university and major in challenging subjects like anthropology wouldn't have been admitted without their athlete status, even with UVa's robust affirmative action efforts. Check out some stats of football or basketball players on rivals.com and prepare to be shocked.</p>