<p>I found somebody who thinks like me! In fact, he used my links in a post on Matt's blog, and I get a mention!</p>
<p>It's good read.</p>
<p>IMHO he proves it.</p>
<p>Your hero is.... yourself?</p>
<p>Yeah, "theleet" popped in my mind when I read that feedback on both Matt's and Ben's blogs. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>meh, I wish I had wrote that.</p>
<p>We should form a coalition.</p>
<p>Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!</p>
<p>Got a link back to here! I'm going to be famous as the ORIGINAL SOURCE of information.</p>
<p>As there will undoubtedly be more traffic to this thread due to the link back, I will repost my source of inspiration. </p>
<p>REMEMBER EVERYONE DISCRIMINATION IS BAD!</p>
<p>I wish people would channel their energy into less selfish efforts. Something to benefit your community or the world, not just yourself. Although to be quite honest, obsessing about things like this really is no benefit to yourself (or anyone for that matter).</p>
<p>I don't think fighting discrimination is a selfish effort. (Civil Rights Movement was selfish?) If I have inspired somebody to make a huge writeup like that, then I doubt I am benefiting just myself. Now I know that there are others that share my opinion. The cause has been strengthened.</p>
<p>Obsession for equal rights is purely American. </p>
<p>REMEMBER EVERYONE DISCRIMINATION IS BAD!</p>
<p>Oh stop with the drama. You should learn what discrimination really is before you start campaigning against it for purely your own gain. If you were really so "unselfish" you would realize that for every "asian male" who was not accepted into his first choice "ivy league college" in favor of a hispanic female who had to fight against REAL discrimination and hardship to even have the opportunity to apply to college, there are 100 blacks being denied a promotion in favor of a white man with equal qualifications, 100 muslims losing their jobs purely because of their religion. I do work on that, do you? Do a little something about that, and then we'll talk about your little "injustice".</p>
<p>I'm a junior member :(</p>
<p>OMG! not even!! I'm a NEW member... T_T</p>
<p>i agree that the application process is unfair, but like governmental systems, perfection is unattainable. it is imperfect and it always will be (so it would be best to accept it).</p>
<p>Unconditional acceptance of anything is inherrently bad. We can't make things better if we don't try, can we?</p>
<p>What would be the ultimate goal in your opinion then, tetrahedr0n? Acceptance based solely on scores and grades? Sticking by a quota of exact percentage of students of each race, gender, geographic orgin accepted? Because that is exactly the forms of evidence raised by opponents of the system now. Look, the % of asians accepted is lower than the whites, which is in turn lower than the blacks, let's whine and complain about discrimination now. In a system in which percent-accept quotas are applied, the kid raised on a farm in the middle of montana who has has little to no opportunities will be looked at no differently than the son of weathy bankers in New York City who went to an expensive private school and hired private SAT tutors.</p>
<p>According to that quota MIT will be 50% or more Asian (estimate - someone would need to pull up the actual % of applicants who are asian for me), and 80% male. What kind of an effect woudl that have on society? That the kids with the highest numbers who happened to be from the largest group of applicants are accepted over the kids who do not have as high scores but have so much more heart? I, personally, think that the latter will leave the most lasting effect on the world with their spirit and perseverance. </p>
<p>I hope you see my point. I do not believe today's system is "unfair". It takes into account a student's potential as well as what they have already achieved, and if the students who present the best potential do not happen to be the students who have the highest test scores, then so be it. They are merely offering you the best of every world out there. We learn from each other as well as our teachers in college, and would benefit not only from psets but from the diversity of demographics, and therefore thought, in the student body as well.</p>
<p>I can see your point, pebbles. I'm not supporting theleet's position. I'm not personally sure which I support.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, I don't agree with simply accepting something one disagrees upon. Just in general. I feel that accepting something you don't believe in is a betrayal to one's morals. If theleet feels the system is unfair, let him fight it. Convince him he is wrong - sure. But don't tell him to accept a system he feels is unfair because perfection is unattainable.</p>
<p>And I absolutely agree with you on that. Complacency when it comes to worldly wrongs is, in my opinion, no better than committing those wrongs yourself.</p>
<p>"Oh stop with the drama. You should learn what discrimination really is before you start campaigning against it for purely your own gain. If you were really so "unselfish" you would realize that for every "asian male" who was not accepted into his first choice "ivy league college" in favor of a hispanic female who had to fight against REAL discrimination and hardship to even have the opportunity to apply to college, there are 100 blacks being denied a promotion in favor of a white man with equal qualifications, 100 muslims losing their jobs purely because of their religion. I do work on that, do you? Do a little something about that, and then we'll talk about your little "injustice"."</p>
<p>I admit that I am "campaigning only for my own gain." Did the Blacks "campaign for their own gain" in the Civil Rights Movement? Yes. Did females "campaign for their own gain" for Women's Rights? Yes. If you don't "campaign for your own gain" nobody else will. I don't see how you are so quick to say that Asians are not discriminated against in America. Who are you to say that it is not 100 Asians being denied promotions as well? At least when I assert something I back it with facts. Are you the judge of what is "REAL" discrimination and what is "fake" discrimination?</p>
<p>"What would be the ultimate goal in your opinion then, tetrahedr0n? Acceptance based solely on scores and grades? Sticking by a quota of exact percentage of students of each race, gender, geographic orgin accepted? Because that is exactly the forms of evidence raised by opponents of the system now. Look, the % of asians accepted is lower than the whites, which is in turn lower than the blacks, let's whine and complain about discrimination now. In a system in which percent-accept quotas are applied, the kid raised on a farm in the middle of montana who has has little to no opportunities will be looked at no differently than the son of weathy bankers in New York City who went to an expensive private school and hired private SAT tutors.</p>
<p>According to that quota MIT will be 50% or more Asian (estimate - someone would need to pull up the actual % of applicants who are asian for me), and 80% male. What kind of an effect woudl that have on society? That the kids with the highest numbers who happened to be from the largest group of applicants are accepted over the kids who do not have as high scores but have so much more heart? I, personally, think that the latter will leave the most lasting effect on the world with their spirit and perseverance.</p>
<p>I hope you see my point. I do not believe today's system is "unfair". It takes into account a student's potential as well as what they have already achieved, and if the students who present the best potential do not happen to be the students who have the highest test scores, then so be it. They are merely offering you the best of every world out there. We learn from each other as well as our teachers in college, and would benefit not only from psets but from the diversity of demographics, and therefore thought, in the student body as well."</p>
<p>I don't see why you keep associating a non-AA system with only scores. Gender and race blind admission can still gauge ECs as well. And then you always blame the anti-AA person for being "obsessed with scores." I think the obsession with scores is in you, for you are the one that always brings them up. Neither tetrahedr0n nor I brought up scores in our posts, yet you always seem to work them in.</p>
<p>Finally, nice job in the "I do work on that, do you?" Yet another clever way to tell everyone how good you are. What I do is my own business thank you.</p>
<p>EDIT: Almost forgot, REMEMBER EVERYONE, DISCRIMINATION IS BAD!</p>
<p>The college admission process is really a judging process. And whenever you consider race or gender while judging someone, that is discrimination. There is no such thing as "real" or "fake" or "good" or "bad" discrimination. It's all wrong and it's all degrading. </p>
<p>"In a system in which percent-accept quotas are applied, the kid raised on a farm in the middle of montana who has has little to no opportunities will be looked at no differently than the son of weathy bankers in New York City who went to an expensive private school and hired private SAT tutors."</p>
<p>I don't see how the two thoughts are related. Why can't we just eliminate consideration of race/gender altogether? Lots of schools try pretty hard to get a feel for how much "heart" the student has, and I think MIT does a pretty good job of it. Moreso than the other colleges to which I've applied. They take into consideration how hard you've tried and what you've done with the opportunities you had. So why not keep that part of the system the way it is, and then just forget about everything else altogether?</p>
<p>"According to that quota MIT will be 50% or more Asian (estimate - someone would need to pull up the actual % of applicants who are asian for me), and 80% male. What kind of an effect woudl that have on society?"</p>
<p>A very relevant one. Whether anyone wants to admit it or not, more men than women WANT to be engineers. A lot of women want to raise a family and shy away from more competitive careers that require a big time committment, etc. And there's nothing wrong with that. The bottom line is that if more men want to be engineers, let them. If more women want to be housewives, let them. That's not a stereotype, or discrimination, or opression. That's true freedom.</p>
<p>-Laura</p>
<p>just a thought:</p>
<p>sure, the rich banker's kid straight from prep school has an advantage over the poor farm boy from montana. but what if the banker's child is black, and the farmer's child is white?</p>
<p>to me, racial affirmative action has never made much sense, because it automatically assumes that all non-asian minorities are at an obvious disadvantage and all whites/asians have a clear edge. and while this may be the general trend, some of the most disadvantaged people in america are the poor, rural whites in west virginia and other appalachian regions; while their numbers are not as great as whites, there are also plenty of black men (vernon jordan? colin powell?) who could easily afford to send their children to prep school and SAT classes. the child of two chinese engineers with a home in the suburbs and not a single non-academic care in the world is very different from a refugee of southeast-asian warfare whose farmer parents escaped their homeland as illiterate boat people. looking at these examples, it really seems like economics--not race--factors a lot more into determining a child's "advantages." </p>
<p>personally, i don't support racial affirmative action one bit. but if the system were overhauled and designed to "level the playing field" for economically disadvantaged students instead, i wouldn't complain at all--even if i would never qualify for aid under such a program. </p>
<p>...wow, that was longer than i meant to write. anyone else agree/disagree? i'm curious...</p>
<p>Doublespresso, I completely agree. Those are pretty much my opinions exactly.</p>
<p>It always seemed ironic to me that affirmative action, which was created with the intent of helping out those who have faced discrimination, relies so heavily on stereotypes! The whole thing makes no sense to me.</p>
<p>-Laura</p>
<p>I agree with you guys (doublespresso and LauraN)</p>
<p>AA and admitting students JUST based on race is a bit stereotypical. There are many Asians who are at disadvantage and minorities who have many opportunities. </p>
<p>I am Asian but before coming to US, I grew up with my extended family and grandparents who never finished middle school and where no one valued or even cared about education. There were no books or educational resources like libraries. Even after I came to US and education was free, I didn't have any money to do any ECs like playing an instrument etc. In fact, we never owned a TV or computer until I was in middle school. Not to mention that most students in my school were behind in education compared to the rest of the nation.</p>
<p>A few months ago, I remember talking about AA in class and to back up my arguments, one person automatically assumed that I came from a very advantaged background with many more opportunites than minorities just b/c I'm Asian and my parents are educated. And now because I live in a pretty privileged area, many people who don't know me well just assume that my background is like any other asian. I had to catch up on academics and ECs when I moved here but people would just think: you're asian, that's possbile. (Assuming that it wouldn't be possible for minorities) I did well but I'm sure most minorities could if they tried. I'm not first generation to go to college but my parents rarely helped with me any schoolwork since they were too busy with work. Most people probably wont think that since Asian parents nag their kids about perfection in school but they don't realize that not all are like that. </p>
<p>Wow that was really long. I'm just trying to say that AA is not a good idea because it only considers race, not much about a person's background or economic status. And this doesn't only apply to me of course. I know many poor Asian immigrants who had many disadvantages as well. But whether colleges consider them for Asians, that's another question.</p>