I wish I weren't Asian

[fabrizio]

<p>lilybbloom,</p>

<p>
[quote]
I can't believe you people are saying that colleges shouldn't strive to have ethnic and cultural diversity.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, believe it.</p>

<p>Colleges should not strive to have ethnic and cultural diversity. The reason? It happens naturally, so there is no need to force it.</p>

<p>This is not 1954. We do not live in the era of Jim Crow, but some of you act as if Brown v. Board of Education never happened.</p>

<p>Regarding your comment on Hispanic, know that at least one admissions officer, who happens to post here, feels that Hispanic is a racial group, not an cultural label.</p>

<p>When people say that Hispanic is a race, I know that they are actually thinking of a cross between White (Spanish) and Native American. It just so happens that a lot of media personalities in South America (e.g. Gael Garc</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>lilybbloom,</p>

<p>
[quote]
The fact of the matter is, black and hispanic students tend to have lower SAT scores and less opportunities for extracurriculars than other students. You say the system should be based on socio-economic status. Fine. Asians would still be whining about being 'discriminated' against because they are too rich.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>OK, if Black and Hispanic students tend to have lower SAT scores and fewer opportunities for extracurricular involvement than their White and Asian peers, then the solution is not to give them preference for being Black and Hispanic. A solution could be outreach programs that offer SAT tutoring and community mentoring.</p>

<p>Are you familiar with the Hmong ethnic group? If you were, then you wouldn't associate Asian with "too rich."</p>

<p>I wish some American liberals would just fess up to their socialist sympathies. Life would be so much easier.</p>

[lilybbloom]

<p>Fabrizio,</p>

<p>First of all, Alfonso Cuaron and Gael Garcia Bernal are Mexican. Mexico is NOT in South America. Get your facts straight.</p>

<p>I grew up in Mexico. You don't need to tell me that there are white Mexicans, I know this better than anyone. All I'm trying to say is that the word 'hispanic' is not a racial term and shouldn't be understood as such. </p>

<p>I agree that all students should have those opportunities available to them. But until that day, AA is just a fact of life, whether its racial or socioeconomic.</p>

<p>Going back to the original topic of this thread, even <em>if</em> race wasn't taken into consideration, I think Asians would still be 'discriminated' against because it's true that many tend to have the same extracurriculars and go into the same fields, and universities want a diverse student body.</p>

[lilybbloom]

<p>::It happens naturally, so there is no need to force it.::</p>

<p>You don't seem to understand ... at present, it <em>wouldn't</em> happen naturally if universities didn't seek diversity. If universities were all out to get applicants with the best SAT scores and highest GPAs and most impressive extracurriculars, no matter what socioeconomic or racial background they come from, you would have a very boring student body. </p>

<p>I'm not even talking about AA here, I'm talking about holistic admissions in general. I certainly wouldn't have been admitted to NU based on my GPA and SAT scores, I fall right below the median. But obviously they saw something in my application that made me stand out -- perhaps the fact that I grew up in a foreign country and can speak 3 languages -- and hoped it would add an extra spark to their student body. Similarly, I have friends whose SAT scores were probably not amazing, but who excelled in debate or theater or something like that.</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>lilybbloom,</p>

<p>I accept the rebuke, and I agree with you that Hispanic is not a racial term.</p>

<p>Lots of things were "facts of life" not so long ago. Slavery, segregation, 'separate but equal,' apartheid, the list goes on. Labeling a current policy a "fact of life" not an excuse to support it.</p>

<p>Maybe Asians would be discriminated against in race-blind admissions. Maybe. But, the discrimination wouldn't be due to their race.</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>lilybbloom,</p>

<p>
[quote]

You don't seem to understand ... at present, it <em>wouldn't</em> happen naturally if universities didn't seek diversity. If universities were all out to get applicants with the best SAT scores and highest GPAs and most impressive extracurriculars, no matter what socioeconomic or racial background they come from, you would have a very boring student body.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, I do understand. Please take a look at the ethnic breakdown of Berkeley or LA. As parts of the UC system, neither campus uses race in admissions. Yet, the campuses are diverse - naturally.</p>

<p>Only a redemptive liberal (i.e. socialist incognito) would claim that a campus where there are more minorities than Whites is not diverse.</p>

<p>Universities would not have "very boring student [bodies] if they sought applicants with strong test scores, high GPAs, and records of excellence in certain extracurriculars, whether the activity is athletic, academic, or arts-oriented. Rather, these universities would have very dynamic student bodies bursting with diversity of opinion, thought, and talent.</p>

<p>Holistic admissions is fine with me as long as race isn't considered. It is a factor irrelevant to participation in university programs, therefore it should not be considered. If we consider race, then why not body-fat percentage, hair color, eye color, religious preference, sexual orientation, and so forth?</p>

<p>Your trilingualism is certainly out of the ordinary. I assume you wrote an excellent essay about that, and thus your admission to NU (Northwestern?) was based on your merit.</p>

[epiphany]

<p>QUOTE:
"(not necessarily me b/c i f**ked up the app/interview)...."</p>

<p>This is the key phrase is post 579.</p>

<p>QUOTE:
"You don't seem to understand ... at present, it <em>wouldn't</em> happen naturally if universities didn't seek diversity. If universities were all out to get applicants with the best SAT scores and highest GPAs and most impressive extracurriculars, no matter what socioeconomic or racial background they come from, you would have a very boring student body."</p>

<p>Yes. That's why admissions is the way it is.</p>

<p>Finally, One More Time:
Re, recent posts, students are niether admitted nor denied, more considered or less considered, based on TENDENCIES of their group of identification. Thus, an individual applicant is not punished because it's supposedly "a well-known fact" that his or her "group" has "lower" SAT scores or GPA's. Groups have nothing to do with it. Nor is there an assumption -- regardless of one quote of one admissions rep quite some time ago, at one Ivy -- that an entire group should be punished because of perceptions of any "tendencies" in a particular group. Your "group" of identification does not hinder you, in admissions. And the only way your group identification helps you, is if/when it gets you a more in-depth consideration of your application on the grounds of very small representation in your ethnic group. It neither guarantees an admission, "forgives" under-qualification, nor "shaves points off" automatically if you're Asian.</p>

[Drosselmeier]

<p>
[quote]
If we consider race, then why not body-fat percentage, hair color, eye color, religious preference, sexual orientation, and so forth?

[/quote]
None of these groups have been enslaved by law in America, and deliberately held back since 1619. Only blacks have been. For this reason race matters very much. Of course it is not the genetic expression of racial characteristics that matters. What matters is the treatment, by the majority group, of people possessing those racial characteristics. The legacy of that treatment is still in full force today, even</a> among young people. And it affects everything. When a black kid begins as a wee infant, he begins to breathe in this legacy. He takes it inside himself, and depending upon how his parents handle it, it can mean the difference between his growing up surrounded by optimism or by little at all. More often than not, he grows up with far less optimism than most. That means that in some areas, blacks will be represented in disproportionately lower numbers than when compared to other groups. We often like to dismiss this claim by pointing out how blacks exist in disproportionately higher numbers in certain sports and genres of music. But there is a reason for it, and it has to do with historic opportunity influenced by race. Race is still at work, shaping the future of America. Where blacks are concerned, it is a more negative influence than for any other group.</p>

<p>Because of this, it really pains me to see some black</a> kid like this being dismissed as just an unfortunate casualty of bad parenting, as if his race has had no affect at all on his current circumstances.</p>

<p>"I hate being blunt, but me and my sister come from the bottom of America…"</p>

<p>Race is all in this thing. I mean it is just thick with it! Over the years I have seen many kids like this, just too many, and when you look at their histories you can see lines of ill-treatment and despair stretching clean back to Jim Crow and even to slavery. I have seen so many of them that in some cases all you need to do is tell me where they grew up, and I can tell you tons about their people and upbringing. The patterns are all so clear and consistent. These kids know they are the bottom of America. Even when their parents make money and become “Middle Class” they still know they are somehow at the bottom. Yet, inexplicably, out of this mess you occasionally get a kid like this one. I don’t understand it really. Shoot. The common and most understandable thing for this kid to do is just give up and sell drugs, have sex, father kids indiscriminately, go for immediate pleasures, at best join the military. But no, I see these kids sharing an oddly calm, unyielding tone as they handle some of the worst of circumstances imaginable. Its like there is this genetic trait of indomitableness that just pops up from time-to-time and causes these kids to keep moving forward no matter what. I know everybody disagrees with me on linking AA to the past, and that really is fine, but I still think it should be linked to the past. I think what Affirmative Action should do is take a close look at these kinds of kids, to recognize that they have this indomitable trait. Yes. We want to do a cultural "Darwin thing" on these particular kids, deliberately putting selective pressure on them over a long time, so that they pass to their kids the same optimism that causes them to keep looking up. We did a "Darwin thing" against them for almost four centuries, and it ultimately put them where they are. We should do one to help them get out.</p>

<p>AA ought not help unqualified kids get ahead. It selects kids who have the guts to keep pushing and succeeding despite the past and the present it affects. I am saying that AA should cause special focus to be trained on kids like this, to see how their stories fit together in history. The kid mentioned above has AP grades and SAT scores the meaning of which will differ from those of some other kid, even another poor kid. While I do not think his meaning should automatically win out above others (this student may simply not have the minimum academic requirements to handle certain environments), I do think our nation’s institutions ought not just throw him to chance or to cold statistics, as if our nation’s history on race is irrelevant where he is concerned. A holistic treatment would see his grades, his chutzpah, his socio-economic status, all in context of the racial history that influences that status even to this very day.</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>Drosselmeier,</p>

<p>As far as Turner County goes, I asked a resident of that area, and she said that it was by choice; the students themselves traditionally decided to have separate proms. It was their choice.</p>

<p>
[quote]
When a black kid begins as a wee infant, he begins to breathe in this legacy.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, he does not. If he breathes this legacy you speak of, it starts when people look at him as inferior, a legacy maintained by modern affirmative action.</p>

<p>Race is a factor irrelevant to participation in the programs of a university. It doesn't get any simpler than that. But, if you'd like to make it relevant for preferential treatment, hey - I guess I'll just have to use my vote to counter yours.</p>

<p>It's a matter of values. I believe that Blacks deserve equal treatment, but you seem to feel that they deserve preferential treatment based on what happened centuries ago, a compensation of sorts.</p>

<p>Drosselmeier, a repeated theme in your posts regarding affirmative action and the past is the continued negative connotations of being Black.</p>

<p>If this is case, then why does Senator Barack Obama choose to be African-American? Why does James Blake choose to be African-American? Why does Juan Williams choose to be African-American?</p>

<p>Obama and Blake are mixed. Both could claim to be White, but they chose the Black label. Williams is a Panamanian national, but he also chooses to go by the African-American affiliation.</p>

<p>For people who could choose otherwise, it sure doesn't seem that Black is something to be ashamed about.</p>

[airjordan917]

<p>wow! u guys r really in something....</p>

<p>but, juz wanna say, im Asian, and i'm VERY proud of it!!! proud of bieng different and the intelligent group, although im not quite....</p>

<p>i hate maths, can't stand sciences
i will be doing theology in college</p>

<p>my parents ARE really pushy, but, you know, juz not ma style</p>

<p>ASIANS ROCK!!!!!</p>

[k_amp_s]

<p>UCLAri -
[quote]
]This is true. But the backlash against Asians, in general, seems to be less severe.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I would say that this is presently the case for a no. of reasons, including: (1) Asians are still a relatively small minority, (2) Asians, more so than any other group, have assimilated into the general (white-dominated) culture, (3) Asians are made up of many diverse cultures/languages and don't have a monolithic shared cultural identity/language that many Hispanics have (while there are distinct cultural differences btwn a Dominican and a Peruvian or even a Dominican and a Haitian, they, nevertheless, do share many commonalities as well).</p>

<p>However, a century or so ago - the backlash against Asians was quite severe leading to the Chinese Exclusian Act, the Gentlemen's Agreement w/ Japan, etc. - and maybe things would be different if Asian immigrants were arriving on the US shore in as large nos. as Mexicans or Hispanics (on a more micro level - there has been "white flight" from towns/suburbs that have "tipped the balance" w/regard to having a large influx of Chinese, Korean, Viet, etc. homeowners, and this isn't different from what is seen with "white flight" with regard to increasing nos. of black or Hispanic homeowners.</p>

<p>lilybloom -
[quote]
You all need to lose your sense of entitlement. It boils down to this: Colleges need diversity. Yes, ETHNIC diversity. They need whites, blacks, hispanics and every other ethnic group in the U.S., and if it makes it harder for Asians to get into Princeton, then so be it. If you have a 4.0 and a 2400 on your SAT, you will get into a good school that will prepare you for life and success. It might not be Harvard or Yale. No one is entitled to an education at Harvard or Yale.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So explain why Jews make up nearly 40% of the student body at some Ivies and 26% of the overall Ivy student body - is this "diversity" (esp. since Jews only make up 1.5% of the college applicant pool)?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Life isn't fair? Tell that to the inner-city kid who barely has enough to eat for breakfast before taking the SAT. Tell that to the kid who can't afford to waste any time on extracurriculars because they have to work 2 jobs to help out their family.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And there aren't poor Asians or whites? Asians actually have one of the higher poverty rates (not to mention cultural/language barriers for new immigrants) and numerically, there are more poor whites than any other group.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Uhhh ... why exactly should we? Hispanic does not refer to racial group, it refers to the peoples of Latin America. I grew up in Mexico. Many of my friends there are of purely Spanish origin and are what you would call 'white'. They are still hispanic. If they were applying to college in the U.S., they would put down 'hispanic.' There's no arguing there.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So why should the elite, white Hispanics get an advantage when they are already from the advantaged class? Aren't you always making an issue about the those that are "entitled"?</p>

<p>And speaking of ignorance - yes, while Hispanic is not a racial group, there is a lot of racial differentiation within the Hispanic community - TV/film/entertainment is dominated by whites; beaches in Brazil (technically not Hispanic, but part of the overall "Latin culture") and Argentina are separated by class and skin-color; black Hispanics refuse to acknowledge that they are black b/c of the negative connotations; many Mexicans, including Pres. Fox, failed to see the racist connotations of the series of "Sambo" (historical, stereotypical black caricature) stamps issued by the Mexican Postal Service; etc.</p>

<p>epiph -
[quote]
"You don't seem to understand ... at present, it <em>wouldn't</em> happen naturally if universities didn't seek diversity. If universities were all out to get applicants with the best SAT scores and highest GPAs and most impressive extracurriculars, no matter what socioeconomic or racial background they come from, you would have a very boring student body.</p>

<p>Yes. That's why admissions is the way it is.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So if "diversity" is so important, explain the astronomically high % of Jews at Ivy League universities - something that you have repeatedly FAILED to do.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Finally, One More Time:
Re, recent posts, students are niether admitted nor denied, more considered or less considered, based on TENDENCIES of their group of identification. Thus, an individual applicant is not punished because it's supposedly "a well-known fact" that his or her "group" has "lower" SAT scores or GPA's. Groups have nothing to do with it. Nor is there an assumption -- regardless of one quote of one admissions rep quite some time ago, at one Ivy -- that an entire group should be punished because of perceptions of any "tendencies" in a particular group. Your "group" of identification does not hinder you, in admissions. And the only way your group identification helps you, is if/when it gets you a more in-depth consideration of your application on the grounds of very small representation in your ethnic group. It neither guarantees an admission, "forgives" under-qualification, nor "shaves points off" automatically if you're Asian.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Really? Then explain why the % of Asians at Stanford and Cal remained the same **over a period where the no. of Asian **applicants increased three-fold? Cal subsequently apologized for trying to "cap" Asian enrollment and Stanford quietly changed their admissions process.</p>

<p>Explain why the top universities/grad schools chase after the top URM candidates - including "wining and dining them" and why URMs, despite having materially lower qualifications, have a significantly higher admit rate.</p>

<p>Explain why public universities (like UoM, Cal/UT schools) upon being barred from considering race as a factor by the courts, scrambled to find new ways to maintain their URM representation - such as guaranteeing admissions for the top 10% and moving to a more "holistic" admissions process?</p>

<p>As usual, you have come up w/ NOTHING substantial and have only reiterated your personal conjecture.</p>

[UCLAri]

<p>k&s,</p>

<p>I know all about that history-- heck, I taught it last quarter. But much has changed since the turn of the 20th century. Asians are portrayed in an overwhelmingly more positive light than they were during the era of Chiang Monlin. Thank goodness!</p>

<p>But today, it's hard to argue that Latinos are treated better than Asians by the media and society in general. This is, of course, just my opinion based on observation and what research I have done into the subject. Of course, I'm not saying it's PERFECT, but relatively speaking, better.</p>

[Drosselmeier]

<p>
[quote]
As far as Turner County goes, I asked a resident of that area, and she said that it was by choice; the students themselves traditionally decided to have separate proms. It was their choice.

[/quote]
<sigh>There is a reason for why it was their “choice”. I, for example, “choose” not to go too far beneath the Mason Dixon line, and I "choose" this for a reason. Other blacks may choose to go quite far down in that pit, but up until a few days ago they did not “choose” to go to a single school prom at a certain school. And the whites somehow just happened to make the same “choice”. There is a reason for why they just so happened to have made that one choice over and over and over again for their entire history.</sigh></p>

<p>That reason is because it has been the “choice” since slavery. The racism that supported slavery and that continued to live beyond the legal end of slavery to eventually support Jim Crow, still exists and is causing people to make racist “choices” today. The resident is simply employing a corruption of language to mask the reality black people have faced since they have been here, and that they are facing right now.</p>

<p>
[quote]

[quote]
When a black kid begins as a wee infant, he begins to breathe in this legacy.

[/quote]
No, he does not. If he breathes this legacy you speak of, it starts when people look at him as inferior, a legacy maintained by modern affirmative action.

[/quote]
C’mon guy. This thing existed long before AA. You can’t lay this on AA. AA in fact came into being in the first place because of this. Lets just go ahead and be honest here.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Race is a factor irrelevant to participation in the programs of a university. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

[/quote]
The word is not “simpler”. The word you are looking for is “simplistic”. It doesn’t get any more simplistic than that. In truth, because of the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow, whites and other groups have accumulated centuries of cultural capital that has been pointedly denied blacks by law. That fact alone means they have the natural leg up when it comes to most university programs.</p>

<p>
[quote]
But, if you'd like to make it relevant for preferential treatment, hey - I guess I'll just have to use my vote to counter yours.

[/quote]
That is not really what I am all about here, simply countering your little vote. The fact is, my vote is an expression of who I am. The mere fact I get to make this expression is ultimately all that matters to me, even if the general vote goes against me, and even if no one pays any attention to the truth as I see it. I have an obligation to the truth, and so I am fulfilling my obligation. Of course, you may vote for whatever reasons you please. But I think your voting to counter someone as insignificant as I am is pretty much a waste of life, my young friend.</p>

<p>
[quote]
It's a matter of values. I believe that Blacks deserve equal treatment, but you seem to feel that they deserve preferential treatment based on what happened centuries ago, a compensation of sorts.

[/quote]
It is not a matter of compensation. It is a matter of repair, true repair. No one can compensate for the massive centuries long, inter-generational tragedy that has taken place here against blacks in America. I know yall want to just keep overlooking the fact of it, keep dismissing it as something that is not all that big a deal. But you do not get to make that judgment for black folk, especially when you can feel your roots beneath you if you wish, and when I cannot. Blacks do deserve equal treatment. But they have always deserved this. They haven’t had it for almost the entire four hundred years they have been here. It is for that reason that our simply saying “Okay! Everything is fine now!” is just plain false. We have got to get large numbers of blacks feeling themselves to be full-fledged American natives who own the country as much as everyone else. I do not think killing AA will get us closer to that goal. AA alone will not get us there, but it seems able to help.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Drosselmeier, a repeated theme in your posts regarding affirmative action and the past is the continued negative connotations of being Black. If this is case, then why does Senator Barack Obama choose to be African-American?…

[/quote]
Because</a> he ain’ an idiot. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Obama and Blake are mixed. Both could claim to be White…

[/quote]
LOL. Roight. Race is such an obsession and a fixed convention in America that there would not be one person in the country, not even one, who would see Barack Obama and mistake him for a white man. C’mon now. We ought to just level with one another here, rather than corrupt ourselves just to try to protect some flawed idea we just happen to love.</p>

<p>
[quote]
For people who could choose otherwise, it sure doesn't seem that Black is something to be ashamed about.

[/quote]
Not a matter of shame. It is a matter of being in a societal context that is lopsided against you from birth.</p>

[k_amp_s]

<p>
[quote]
I know all about that history-- heck, I taught it last quarter. But much has changed since the turn of the 20th century. Asians are portrayed in an overwhelmingly more positive light than they were during the era of Chiang Monlin. Thank goodness!

[/quote]
</p>

<p>LOL!! </p>

<p>
[quote]
But today, it's hard to argue that Latinos are treated better than Asians by the media and society in general. This is, of course, just my opinion based on observation and what research I have done into the subject. Of course, I'm not saying it's PERFECT, but relatively speaking, better.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hispanics (well, white Hispanics) have made quite an inroads in film/television.
Many of TV shows -such as CSI Miami, Without a Trace, Law&Order, Cold Case, Heroes, ER, 6 Degrees, Desperate Housewives, etc. have regular Hispanic cast members in non-stereotypical roles.</p>

<p>Asians, and in particular, Asian-American males, haven't fared nearly as well yet on the tube.</p>

[UCLAri]

<p>k&s,</p>

<p>Was the LOL in regard to my Chiang comment a good or bad lawl? :confused:</p>

<p>Latinos have made inroads, but they are also a larger portion of the American population. The fact remains, however, that while they are on TV, they are still often portrayed like blacks: criminal and deviant. Asians very rarely get portrayed as criminals.</p>

<p>I know it's not a popular opinion in the US, but I do believe that Latinos SHOULD be portrayed more often than Asians. The market's larger, and they are more common. I don't believe in diversity in TV just for the sake of diversity. There shouldn't be 1 white, 1 black, 1 Asian, 1 Latino, 1 mixed... It should, in theory, be based on something more representative of demographics.</p>

[k_amp_s]

<p>
[quote]
Was the LOL in regard to my Chiang comment a good or bad lawl?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>UCLAri - that LOL was b/c I should have known that you had some background in history based on your previous posts.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Latinos have made inroads, but they are also a larger portion of the American population. The fact remains, however, that while they are on TV, they are still often portrayed like blacks: criminal and deviant.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>One has to make the distinction btwn "white" and mestizo/indigenous Hispanics and btwn regular cast members and guest roles (on crime shows which tend to be of the criminal element).</p>

<p>On the shows I listed (and a good no. more) - all the Hispanic regular cast members depict Hispanic characters as educated professionals - CSI investigators, assistant DA, physician, FBI agent, police detective, attorney, etc.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Asians very rarely get portrayed as criminals.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I would have to disagree w/ you here.</p>

<p>Asian males are predominantly depicted as (1) asexual dorks, (2) martial artists (3) cold and abusive towards Asian women and (4) gangsters.</p>

<p>All the crime dramas have had espisodes with Asian gangsters and/or espisodes where the controlling Asian family/male ends up killing an AF.</p>

<p>Hollywood is a male dominated medium -there are more regular male white, black and Hispanic cast members than that for their female counterparts - the one exception to this is for Asians - where AFs outnumber AMs.</p>

<p>Plus, neither black nor Hispanic (or Jewish or gay ) males have been totally emasculated by Hollywood as have AMs.</p>

<p>Pretty much every single AF actress who has achieved some level of success has repeatedly been paired with non-AM actors (it took Daniel Kim 14 yrs. in the industry before he even got an onscreen kiss on "Lost" and he had to play a foreigner at that).</p>

<p>Same with Madison Avenue - AFs are predominantly paired with WMs in advertising and the same goes for the anchor chair (many AFs - usually paired w/ a WM co-anchor, hardly any AMs - but a good no. of BMs and HMs in the anchor chair).</p>

<p>
[quote]
I know it's not a popular opinion in the US, but I do believe that Latinos SHOULD be portrayed more often than Asians. The market's larger, and they are more common. I don't believe in diversity in TV just for the sake of diversity. There shouldn't be 1 white, 1 black, 1 Asian, 1 Latino, 1 mixed... It should, in theory, be based on something more representative of demographics.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don't have a problem w/ that at all - but why are there significantly more AFs than AMs and esp. significantly more AFs in advertising and the anchor chair?</p>

<p>In addition - advertising geared towards women (clothing, shampoo, cosmetics, feminine hygien products) usually includes women from all backgrounds. In contrast, advertising for men is usually limited to WMs and the token BM.</p>

[UCLAri]

<p>k&s,</p>

<p>Good points. I'll get back to you later, however. Right now, I have to do some bond valuation exercises.</p>

[k_amp_s]

<p>Have fun w/ that.</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>Drosselmeier,</p>

<p>There is indeed a reason for why it was their choice, no quotation marks needed. The prom is run entirely by the students. It is only appropriate for them to make their own decision. I live pretty far below the Mason Dixon line, and it is anything but a pit. Given that some Black Yale students have reported cold treatment from their classmates in the laundry areas of their dorms, the "pit" I live in is a lot more appreciative of "diversity" than New England. (I placed quotation marks around diversity because my usage in this context is closer to how you define it.)</p>

<p>
[quote]

C’mon guy. This thing existed long before AA. You can’t lay this on AA. AA in fact came into being in the first place because of this. Lets just go ahead and be honest here.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Of course it existed before affirmative action. Hence, my use of the words "legacy" and "maintain." I agree with you that affirmative action in its current form was a result of whites wanting to prove that they weren't racists.</p>

<p>No, I think simpler makes more sense than simplistic. It's a fundamental concept to me, albeit novel for others. Race just doesn't matter when it comes to participating in university life, plain and simple.</p>

<p>Other groups have not had centuries of cultural capital in the United States. The current student body at U.C. Berkeley belies your "natural leg up" argument.</p>

<p>I absolutely agree with you that voting simply to counter you is petty and pointless. Rather, my vote would be a contribution to furthering an ideal our nation was founded upon - equal treatment for all. It would also be a rejection of the reactionary preferential treatment system you staunchly defend.</p>

<p>Compensation. Repair. No matter what word you use, the system you support amounts to nothing more than "getting even." I do not overlook the fact that Blacks were enslaved for centuries and treated very poorly for another century. I do not dismiss its significance. I do, however, believe that these events should not be used to justify preferential treatment now. Few people say that 'everything is fine now.' I certainly don't. There are problems in our education system. Not all students are getting an equal chance. Therefore, we should try to make sure they do have equal chances starting from youth and continuing to young adulthood. This is a true solution, not a fake one that does absolutely nothing to benefit Blacks. Research by Dr. Richard Sander shows that dropping modern affirmative action increases the number of Black lawyers. I don't know about you, but I think more talented Black lawyers can increase the numbers of Blacks "feeling themselves to be full-fledged American natives who own the country as much as everyone else."</p>

<p>None of my Black friends exhibits the kind of dissociation from the American identity that you seem to have. They are all proud to be Americans, and from talking, joking, and working with them, they all feel they own the country as much as everyone else. Maybe you should visit us in our "pit" sometime. You may be enlightened as to how "diverse" it is.</p>

<p>So Senator Obama looks more Black than White. What about Mr. Blake and Mr. Williams?</p>

[Tyler09]

<p>maybe those senators choose to identify as black because it's an important part of their identity. </p>

<p>AA doesn't do nothing to help black people, obviously, because it allows qualified black students to get the best college opportunities in order to further nurture their skills and encourage a better life. This is especially important when there are more black men in prison then in college. </p>

<p>And there is no way that dropping affirmative action increases the number of black lawyers/students or w/e, that contradicts itself and would mean that you would have no reason to be upset.</p>

<p>I really don't think you DO understand the detrimental impact of slavery, discrimination, and prejudice on african americans in America. Because if you did you would realize that it's not something that you can just go "hey...uh, we're sorry. You're free now so.....good luck!". You can't just ignore the fact that the incredible wrongs of the past have left a tremendous scar on african americans and it's something that NEEDS to be repaired if they are going to truly have equal opportunities. I do agree that it should start sooner in the educational system, that's a long term effort that should be initiated as soon as possible. But AA is a decent temporary solution and it does produce positive effects. To call it "getting even" is pure ignorance. Nobody wants to "get even" with anybody, it's about an entire race of people acquiring what they need to succeed as well as any other group in todays competitive society after they began at a tremendous disadvantage.</p>

<p>The idea that AA promotes racism amongst other groups may or may not be true. But that's up to you as and individual and how you choose to view the situation. If you choose to use AA to justify racism or derogatory comments against blacks then you were probably already racist to begin with (not directed at you, but at anyone in general).</p>