<p>It has nothing to do with luck.</p>
<p>All four of them were well-qualified applicants, though I, too, have no doubt they wouldn’t ALL have been accepted if they weren’t quadruplets.</p>
<p>The fact that they were quadruplets DID play a part in their decision…</p>
<p>next topic: can asian people even give birth to quadruplets? hmmmmmmmm</p>
<p>as a deferred applicant, I have to agree that stories like these are a “slap in the face” as pig says. it almost feels like they took my spot, even though that notion is absurd. I really want april to roll around so that I can see if college admissions really are as arbitrary and unfair as I believe them to be right now :/</p>
<p>
HAHAHAHAH OMG I was just thinking this! it’s like freaking impossible. then again, very rarely do asians do in vitro fertilization or other unconventional means of birth for that matter. chinese people can’t afford to have twins (Chinese law!!) haha</p>
<p>yeppyepp deee one child law</p>
<p>SEE, that puts asians at a disadvantage! we just can’t carry that many babies =[</p>
<p>so shouldn’t the #-of-children-standard be lowered for asians? hmmmm</p>
<p>honestly, being twins (2) from China is very very very rare! your parents probably had to hide you!</p>
<p>I think we’re all looking at this the wrong way. </p>
<p>Ultimately, no private higher education institution (including Yale) is looking to create a class of the statistically most qualified people from its application pool. Schools are looking to create the student body that they believe will be most conducive to students happiness, good classroom participation, a vibrant student body, a healthy endowment, etc. It JUST SO HAPPENS that these students are often the ones who are extremely high-achieving, which is why the college admissions process has evolved the way it has with such an emphasis on grades, scores, extracurriculars, etc. It also means, however, that if a school feels that it wants to admit some seemingly “underqualified” candidate for a reason like race, then it has absolutely every right to, even if the reason is that looking in on a classroom dotted with different colored faces is easy on the eye.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is not at all out of the ordinary. A lot of schools have very specific “twin” (or more) policies. At an information session, a Harvard admissions officer explicitly stated that if a pair of twins apply to the school, then they will admit both or neither. This case is no different. I think the call that this is some kind of publicity stunt on Yale’s part is pretty silly, too. A lot of schools out there probably would have accepted the four, and it is newspapers not directly affiliated with the university or the admissions office that are giving this issue as much publicity as it is receiving.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Isn’t that sort of ridiculous?</p>
<p>^yeah seriously. I know plenty of twins where one is really smart and the other is a good athlete.</p>
<p>Ya it is pritty sad millancad.</p>
<p>Look, though, this is how I view this whole thing. Was it probably a little unfair that these kids who, as we know for a fact, had average class rank and probably imperfect test scores when there are many Vals/2400ers (most of whom are asian) that rejected/deferred? Of course it is. You can spew this “creating the class that is most conducive to learning” crap at me all day. However, in reality, it would just look very bad for schools like Yale to have a class filled with 1% of its class filled with URMs. </p>
<p>As a white male, of course this disgusts me but I sure as heck know I cant really do anything about it. So, beyond venting on this thread, what good does all this complaining and attacking get us?</p>
<p>I think the “admit one or neither” policy only extends to whether or not both applicants are qualified. If one was great and the other one not, then they’d probably fall into the “both rejected” pile. But all four of the quads clearly had something Yale was looking for, so all four were admitted.</p>
<p>You guys who were deferred, look. I’m really sorry that you were deferred. I really am. Anyone on here knows we’re a kind of club or a community of sorts here, so it’s really nice to hope that we’ll all get in. But you’re all smart enough to appreciate that it’s not that simple. You’ve known for ages that just being qualified isn’t enough, haven’t you? These quads aren’t necessarily better people than you are, this is not Yale’s way of deliberately slapping you in the face. The fact that you are deferred means Yale thinks you’re great, and you’re still in the running for RD. Sure, the chances are lower than EA, but there’s still a CHANCE.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The kid with the lowest rank was top 10%…in what world is that average? There are plenty of kids at Yale that aren’t valedictorian. In fact, the majority aren’t. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is also true of the majority of Yalies. The VAST MAJORITY OF YALIES DO NOT HAVE PERFECT SAT SCORES. Say it with me, people: THE VAST MAJORITY OF YALIES DO NOT HAVE PERFECT SAT SCORES.</p>
<p>I can’t emphasize that enough.</p>
<p>And I can’t emphasize this enough: At least 80% of Yalies could be replaced by an Asian valedictorian with perfect SAT scores who is ‘objective’ qualified. EVEN THE ASIANS AT YALE.</p>
<p>Get over your racism. You wouldn’t have gotten into HYPMS even without the existence of AA, lamer. It only affects Asians. In fact, if we got rid of AA and all this athlete, legacy-status BS, you’d have a substantially harder time getting into HYPMS because the Asian applicant pool is much better on average than the white one. Get rid of this domestic/international BS and watch HYPMS look like Berkeley.</p>
<p>And yeah, you say you want merit based admissions – but that’s only until America’s most elite universities are 50% Asian. Which they should be.</p>
<p>ASIAN POWER!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>hail to our new leader</p>
<p>It’s true. The Asian applicant pool is easily the most competitive pool, excelling in every relevant metric. If schools admitted students purely on their academic qualifications, Asians would comprise half of HYPMS. </p>
<p>This is fact. AA separates Asians from whites, thus allowing their numbers to be unaffected. But if the two groups were put in the same pool, Asians would definitely be the majority admitted.</p>
<p>The way these threads turn out is always so predictable.</p>
<p>Why don’t y’all make your way here? <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/809185-race-college-admission-faq-discussion-6-a.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/809185-race-college-admission-faq-discussion-6-a.html</a> .</p>
<p>Being a multiple is sort of a hook in itself. If white twins apply and one is a clear admit while the other is borderline, they both get in. That’s just what happens.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>@NearL: Why should I be intimidated when you are clearly in the wrong? I happened to log off the computer in order to pursue other more pressing duties at the time. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>@NearL: You have just explicitly made a racist remark by answering yes to this question. That is, you have conceded that you do not believe in the equality of those applying for admission, which directly suggests that you are invariably hidebound in your belief racial minorities are superior to those of Asian or Caucasian descent.</p>
<p>Throughout this thread, I have been personally attacked by being called a “bigot” and have endured insinuated remarks that I am a racist when your comment above clearly suggests that it is * you * that holds these qualities. My arguments maintain that I ask for the equitable treatment of all applicants for college admissions and job opportunities. Never once can you find any evidence to the contrary, where I support the superiority of one segment of the application pool over another. Thus, I have continually had my arguments deliberately misconstrued or not comprehended at all. This is the weakest form of debate and once you caustically fill an argument with vituperative remarks, you are not engaging in a healthy form of debate.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>@southeasttitan: Yet more personal attacks. You call me ignorant because you have no moral backings or counterarguments to bolster you position. Thus you deviate from the debate through a personal attack. Let me ask you this: If you were attending your local community college this school year, would you still support the preferential treatment of certain applicants? I scarcely think you would.</p>
<p>NearL, earlier you had commented on how I am blind to my privileged nature because I happen to be of Caucasian descent. In fact, those of minority groups have the advantage in our society. They are more apt to be exonerated from guilt and obtain admittance into colleges and jobs with significantly lower qualifications despite having qualifications themselves. Why? Because any opposing act would be misapprehended as racism. Consider the proverbial act of a white police officer pulling over a black motorist. Immediately, the black misinterprets the situation as racial transgression, blind to his own driving faults. Similar to this issue, anyone who notices the blatant prejudice inherent in the privileged treatment of minorities in our society is immediately seen as a bigot, when in essence they are attempting to underscore a social blight. </p>
<p>As of current, your advantage in college admissions may be your greatest asset, but I can assure you that it will not be years from now when affirmative action is effectively derailed as it has been in the Bakke case, in which a white applicant with scores fair superior to those of minority applicants who had taken his place was reversely discriminated against. His admission decision was effectively overturned and he was admitted. Moreover, affirmative action was overturned in California’s Proposition 209, Washington State’s Initiative 200, Florida’s “One Florida” initiative, Parents v. Seattle, Meredith v. Jefferson, and Nebraska’s 2008 initiative. </p>
<p>The overturning of reverse discrimination practices will inevitably continue. In future years, minorities can proudly admit that they attended a prestigious university or hold a prominent occupation not because of the color of their skin, but because of the degree of their individual merit without fear that others will assume that he or she was admitted because of a superficial quality. I ask this question to those of you who are minorities attending exalted institutions: has it ever crossed your mind that you may not be attending your institution if it were not for the color of your skin? I can just about guarantee that your answer is yes. This is precisely the implicit danger present within such a policy. Throughout your lives, it is sad that you will have to live with the glass ceiling created because of reverse discrimination.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree. It is private universities’ supporting discriminatory practices.</p>
<p>Moreover, please heed this disturbing fact: “At the University of Michigan, according to Pepperdine University Economics Professor Stephen Yates, being black automatically counts 20 points toward admission, while a perfect SAT score earns only 12 points.” (source: [Three</a> Ethical Arguments Against Affirmative Action, Page 2 of 2 - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com](<a href=“http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/264310/three_ethical_arguments_against_affirmative_pg2.html?cat=47]Three”>http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/264310/three_ethical_arguments_against_affirmative_pg2.html?cat=47)) Which takes a greater degree of work and talent? Something attained by virtue of birth or by the work ethic and talent that are nation has cherished for centuries? How do you respond to this, NearL? Based on your previous statements, I would not be the least bit surprised if you overwhelmingly supported this.</p>
<p>Allow me to emphasize this: ** Admitting on the basis of race is Constitutionally illegal.
** The Equal Protection Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment prevents it. Although nearly 145 years ago it was designed exclusively for African Americans, it now pertains to Caucasians more than it ever has in our history. I must reiterate that our nation has continually thrived off liberal policy, but discriminatory practices are far overliberalized, and overliberalization is just as baneful as the lack of any liberalization at all.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am absolutely appalled that you support punishing today’s non-minority generation for sins committed in previous generations for which none of us holds any responsibility. Why must we reaffirm the continued existence of systematic discrimination present within our nation?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In what way? My family makes $40,000 per year yet I do not check a box on the application to support this. </p>
<p>Further, I am alarmed at the degree to which people believe that skin color is absolutely requisite to unique intellectual insights and differing perspectives. Although skin color may to some degree be correlated with such, correlation does not prove causation. If there is any degree of correspondence, it sure as hell is not derived from checking a box. </p>
<p>In addition, the fact that many posters on this thread are blind to their own beliefs supporting a discriminatory practice only serves to emphasize the sinister effects of affirmative action. It creates a stupefaction in which we are blind to our own moral and ethical faults.</p>
<p>I firmly stand by my position on grounds that all individuals must be treated on equal bases. I adamantly refuse to support any policy that create numerical racial quotas, creates preferences for individuals that are not as qualified as others, imposes prejudice and punishment on the majority group which had no accountability in forming previous social injustices, and perpetuates inequality by creating racial disparity to begin with.</p>
<p>If you wish to continue this, I will be back tomorrow. My argument in favor of equal representation is too justly upright to succumb to the foundations of biased guidelines.</p>
<p>whether or not you agree with mifune, you MUST admit he is an excellent debater. He is eloquent, he is logical, he debates the ISSUES presented and does not resort to personal attacks or straw man arguments. if you can rebut his arguments in the same logical way, by all means go ahead. if not, I suggest you stop because he’s won.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Based on the above statement, I supposed asserting that socioeconomic status should be considered in admission, is conceding to the fact that the poor are superior, as well. It only follows that special consideration equals superiority!</p>
<p>Do you see just how flawed your reasoning is? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What equitable treatment? Most college admissions is open and thus perfectly ‘equitable’. Most jobs go to people that know someone that can affect hiring decisions in some manner. In most of these instances in particular, whites are the ones that benefit the most. </p>
<p>And that’s why AA exists.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’ve destroyed any legitimacy you may have had with this statement.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Minorities are more apt to be exonerated from guilt? Can you please cite anything that supports this claim? This is patently false. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, you’re completely wrong but I’m not about to teach you Con Law, right now.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Punish? Giving preference to minorities, while still admitting a huge majority of white students is punishing whites? The only people being punished are Asians, who would overwhelm America’s elite universities if they were put in the same pool as whites. </p>
<p>You may not hold any responsibility for “the sins of previous generations”, but many minorities bear the costs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s called FAFSA.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Good luck talking about being a latino in America! Or even a white guy from largely black neighborhood and school. The idea isn’t that color in and of itself gives way to unique insights. The point is that race affects the kind of social experiences people have which allows them to have unique insights.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Cool. I want you to treat me like a literal brother. I expect something for Christmas.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You fail for several reasons:</p>
<ol>
<li>AA doesn’t have any ‘numerical quotas’</li>
<li>Employers and adcoms have preferences have nothing to do with 'qualifications. Oftentimes, employment is just a matter of who you know and who you’re associated with. In these instances, whites benefit the most. In the case of admissions, plenty of schools emphasize regional and socioeconomic diversity, neither of which have anything to do with qualifications. But most importantly, ‘qualified’ is not something that’s relative. You are either qualified or you aren’t. There’s no such thing as ‘more qualified’ in admissions.</li>
<li>Considering race is not the equivalent of a No Coloureds sign. One is clearly racist. The other is essentially benign in the aggregate.</li>
<li>If Latinos are 15% of the population, but 2% of Yale’s student population, admitting more Latinos is not creating a racial disparity. It’s minimizing one.</li>
</ol>
<p>
</p>
<p>Many of his arguments thus far have been straw man arguments.</p>
<p>Consider this exchange:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>He’s arguing something about ‘superiority’ when my statement is firmly grounded in the idea that the past continues to affect the present. He misinterprets my argument and precedes to refute it with a moral-rational retort. This is the definition of a straw-man argument.</p>
<p>Straight from wikipedia.org:A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position.[1] To “attack a straw man” is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the “straw man”), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.</p>
<p>He never actually replied to my original statement, regarding the legacy of American genocide and subsequent preferences for Native Americans. He just argues that I’ve somehow admitted that minorities are superior and refutes his newly made strawman.</p>
<p>I won’t harp on his eloquence. I think his prose is dense with long words that no one actually uses. If I didn’t know any better, I’d suspect that he was trying to confuse me into submissions.</p>