<p>Sentient & Hallucinations: Employers don't discriminate minority (underrepresented) candidates for jobs based on diplomas from ivy league or otherwise top 25 schools (this is referring to the point raised that employers don't want mnorities who didn't 'get in on their own merit'). First off, that is against all sorts of laws, and second of all, they just plain don't do it. If anything, employers actively search for minority employees. Sorry to be the one to say it, but there's affirmative action in the workplace too. I don't even know where that statement came from... has someone been making up facts? :) lol, jk.</p>
<p>"Is it wrong for employers to generalize while making decisions (especially when these generalizations are, in a sense, enacted by the federal government)? No...to argue that it is would be silly."</p>
<p>Hmmmm. Perhaps not. But can an informed decision really be even minimally based on why the employer THINKS an applicant was accepted to a college? </p>
<p>I mean, it's not so much that generalizing is bad. "This person went to Harvard, so they most likely have a good head on their shoulders" or "This person went to Wharton, so they must know something about business"--these are generalizations that aren't really harmful. But, "This person must have gotten into Harvard because of their urm status" is not really logical. Besides, isn't it less important to an employer why you got in, and more important what you accomplished while you were there? I mean, I don't know. I'd hope so.</p>
<p>Otherwise, I'm screwed, because I did NOT tell all of my schools my race, so in those cases urm status certainly couldn't have helped and I'd be cheated out of a job for nothing!</p>
<p>See what here lies
It implies much
Malevolence and despots
Playing with delicate fool-hardy minds
Look
Ere was here the battle of the plains(and I don't mean the prairies)
Tis still the same
Oh how the mighty have fallen
Never before so quickly
Symbolic of the fickle human-nature?</p>
<p>About Affirmative Action in the workplace: I am aware of this, and for some time, I even considered toning down my post because of this. What I feel, though, is that employers are forced by law to hire minorities, so the stereotypes employers feel toward minorities would be indicative of whether or not they would hire them. I might hire minorities for legal reasons, or even because of PR, but my perception of them (and thus, the general populace's perception...in this case, racism) would stay negative.</p>
<p>The examples of generalizing that you quoted were all positive. Negative generalizing can also hold some truth though. Most applicants think that people got into Harvard because of their URM status. Even the Supreme Court justices thought that most, if not all URMs needed affirmative action (this was the foundation of their case for affirmative action). Feeling that a URM got into Harvard because of being a URM is just as justified as thinking that one of the Bush twins got into Yale merely for being the daughter of George W. Bush. </p>
<p>If you did not tell schools your race, congratulations...although others may put you on the same ground as URMs who checked the dreaded box, I have more respect for you. You note that you did not tell ALL your schools your race. I'm not sure whether or not you told Harvard your race, but in this case, I don't want to make my post accusatory. I agree with affirmative action, in that it brings diversity to the college and makes the experience better for Asians, who seem to be dominating campuses. I don't agree with promoting the delusion that the majority of collegiate minorities jumped over the same academic hurdles as the "overrepresented minorities."</p>
<p>Whoa, this is getting totally off topic. Did all this start cause i said URM's don't have to be as brilliant as asians and whites?</p>
<p>Desi, were the numbers he put up that unrealistic?</p>
<p>A 1580+ is in the 99th percentile for the general population. URMs have lower SATs than the general population. It's logical to assume that (and lenient, even) only 1% of URMs have a 1600.</p>
<p>Getting 800x6 on SAT IIs are pretty rare. URM or not, it's very unlikely.</p>
<p>Having a 4.5+ GPA is also rare. In most schools that would put you at the top 4 - 5% of your class, URM or not. If you think that this number is unrealistic, you are implying that URMs are smarter than the general population.</p>
<p>Yes, he made up those numbers. But were those numbers that unrealistic? He made logical assumptions to get those statistics.</p>
<p>"you're soo freaking funny..it seems like you're about to have a heart attack..it's not that serious..but it's funny!..la di da...statistics my azz"</p>
<p>Again with the immature insults? When are you going to post things that actually discredit what he says?</p>
<p>well..first of all sentient..i'll type however the way i want to ..if you have a problem with it..ignore me ..simple!</p>
<p>"Having a 4.5+ GPA is also rare. In most schools that would put you at the top 4 - 5% of your class, URM or not. If you think that this number is unrealistic, you are implying that URMs are smarter than the general population."</p>
<p>I don't know where you guys are from but within NYC...urms do pretty well in school..our VD is an URM..and well maybe u guys just haven't been exposed to urms enough..where are you guys from?..how many percent are actually urms in your school?..i didnt refute anything sentient said about SATs..because again i dont think its about URM status..im not pro AA..i think its more an economic/social issue and its just been the case that most urms are below middleclass..and you just have to learn to take the sats..doesnt require much intelligence..i just think PEOPLE(white black green yellow orange) who are usually economically suffering..do worse..anyway this is going to go on forever and its pointless because its not like one of us are going to change our opinions..two different backgrounds..two different views..</p>
<p>it has nothing, at least minimal, to do with background. People keep saying that the urm's do badly cause they're poor, but i have seen no studies that can authenticate that statement.</p>
<p>it has nothing, at least minimal, to do with background. People keep saying that the urm's do badly cause they're poor, but i have seen no studies that can authenticate that statement.</p>
<p>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I'm a poor URM who used to do bad in school because I couldn't concentrate on an empty stomach. WIC just wasn't enough.</p>
<p>seth..listen you're never going to understand and i really dont care..where u come from..your background..your school ..it does matter..but if you cant see it..then oh well..i really don't care..im not trying to convince you or anyone else..because at the end of the day..i really don't care about any of you..that might sound mean..but thats the truth and i hope you guys feel the same way...that's why i find no point in debating on here..id rather just goo "ahh april 1st"..and calm my nerves on this site....thank you..come again!..(hnk..fabulous!!)</p>
<p>"well..first of all sentient..i'll type however the way i want to ..if you have a problem with it..ignore me ..simple!</p>
<p>"Having a 4.5+ GPA is also rare. In most schools that would put you at the top 4 - 5% of your class, URM or not. If you think that this number is unrealistic, you are implying that URMs are smarter than the general population."</p>
<p>I don't know where you guys are from but within NYC...urms do pretty well in school..our VD is an URM..and well maybe u guys just haven't been exposed to urms enough..where are you guys from?..how many percent are actually urms in your school?..i didnt refute anything sentient said about SATs..because again i dont think its about URM status..im not pro AA..i think its more an economic/social issue and its just been the case that most urms are below middleclass..and you just have to learn to take the sats..doesnt require much intelligence..i just think PEOPLE(white black green yellow orange) who are usually economically suffering..do worse..anyway this is going to go on forever and its pointless because its not like one of us are going to change our opinions..two different backgrounds..two different views.."</p>
<p>Just an FYI, a good quarter or chunk of my school is URM, not one of them is in the top 30 in my class(grade). Afaik, I don't think there are any URMs in the top 10 in any of the other classes either. I'm not being racist, thats simply how it is. Yes, we do have the occaisonal URM superstar, 2 years ago a URM went to Cornell, but most end up going to state schools or cc's afaik. </p>
<p>Anyways, you missed the entire point. The top 20 or so in a 500 person class is extremely hard to make, thats about 5% of people overall, including non URMs. Saying that the chances are better than 5% is basically saying that they do alot better than all the others, in which case I would have to ask, why are they called URMs if they do so well? Instead of using AA, are the colleges suddenly discriminating against them or something? Your logic doesn't make sense.</p>
<p>And if you don't try to refute my points, why do you insist on calling me racist?</p>
<p>this sexydesi doesn't have any logic in him/her/hermaphrodite. She/he/heshe is just angry cause he/she/heshe doesn't know what he/she/heshe is talking about. All i know is the shallow one here is he/she/heshe. whatever, i'm done with this thread. It was pointless from the beginning.</p>
<p>"it was pointless from the beginning"</p>
<p>wow didnt i say that a long time ago..okay them
"seth..listen you're never going to understand and i really dont care..where u come from..your background..your school ..it does matter..but if you cant see it..then oh well..i really don't care..im not trying to convince you or anyone else..because at the end of the day..i really don't care about any of you..that might sound mean..but thats the truth and i hope you guys feel the same way...that's why i find no point in debating on here..id rather just goo "ahh april 1st"..and calm my nerves on this site....thank you..come again!..(hnk..fabulous!!)"</p>
<p>yup that is what i said..it isnt me who is dragging this on..</p>
<p>thought you weren't gonna respond. Couldn't resist the temptation huh?
yup, tantalizing bait is hard ta avoid.</p>
<p>lol, the only reason I responded was to debunk desi's baseless accusations, which she refused to back up. I don't want people thinking I'm some racist redneck. Thats as far from the truth as possible. Yes, I'm out too. This time for real :-p.</p>
<p>so . . . anyway . . . back to the argument . . . </p>
<p>For those of us caught up in this lovely debate about race, I'm curious . . . show of hands . . . (segue into the original topic) . . . How many of us feel you REALLY have to be brilliant to get into Harvard?</p>
<p>*doesn't raise hand.</p>
<p>(It's fairly obvious who feels what but, humor me, will you?)</p>
<p>I think this one has run its course...</p>