<p>Actually I don’t have anything better to do… Any suggestions?</p>
<p>If you get into a top university because of AA, then you can be just as good as any student at that university. </p>
<p>If studies show that the achievement gap narrows as blacks go through college and practically becomes minuscule once they graduate, then the effects of AA are truly mind blowing.</p>
<p>If someone says, you got in because you are black, tell them that regardless of what they say, you are going to succeed.</p>
<p>I got into Michigan because of my race [my opinion], meaning that I was given extra consideration because I was black. Albeit I did some great things in high school, but I’m succeeding far more than I ever would have expected. Thank God!</p>
<p>Anyone can succeed in college. Self motivation, good study habits, friends and family is what you will need to get through!</p>
<p>Well said, ksarmand. And I would also have to agree with her in that African Americans are already thought of as less than in this nation without regards to AA; thus, tough skin is formed heading into elite colleges. I could’ve honestly cared less about the reactions I received upon the wake of my acceptances from my peers and teachers. The fact of the matter is, I now have the opportunity to share an equal playing field for the first time in my life in college. I did not have that opportunity throughout grade school, considering the general scope of my school district inhabited by the poor/ working class. To eliminate AA without first ensuring that there is actual equality within our k-12 school systems across America (which is astoundingly by far not the reality) will render consequences that may very well destroy the fabric of minority-mobility in this country, which then causes other detriments affecting society at large. Let’s guarantee that all students are given the same opportunities to excel; then we can talk about expelling AA policies.</p>
<p>America is not a meritocracy and it never has been. It would be nice, perhaps, to see such a thing. However, until every student in this nation is given an identical education with identical opportunities to excel, AA will continue and minorities will thrive via opportunity while managing to persevere through the same old criticism that was endowed to them upon birth.*</p>
<p>AA isn’t pretty and I oppose many of the elements of the policy, as some are inefficient in resolving race-related issues. However, its benefits outweigh its detriments. Until something that is more equitable is proposed and put into law before legislation, AA is here to stay.</p>
<p>I go to a school that has a 2% black population. I haven’t had a single black student in any of my classes for the past 3 years except for PE- and I am constantly ridiculed by BLACK people who think I’m a “nerd” because I take hard classes and do academic activities versus playing football. It’s become so hard that I don’t have any black friends and I feel disconnected from them entirely. They also ridicule me because I don’t speak like them or walk like them. They say I’m too “white”. At the same time, white students at my school say very offensive things and often put me in the spotlight when topics based on African-Americans come up. It’s very hard to survive in this environment - but I do and so do many others.</p>
<p>I’m very sure that most of us have faced adversities. The only thing to do is pick yourself up and keep trudging along. Those who say that you have been accepted because of AA and those who ridicule you because of your hair and color are only jealous of your accomplishments. They’re jealous because they’re not used to seeing a person of color above them - let alone do something extraordinary. These adversities will continue in the professional world, I’m sure.</p>
<p>Just based on previous AA discussions and Chances threads, I think CC has instilled some sort of feeling that Asians and Whites heavily resent us African-Americans because we are “underrepresented”. Then again, before I came here, I had no clue what “URM” or “ORM” was - and I surely wasn’t under the impression that the bar was set so high for Asian-Americans.</p>
<p>There are MANY people who will probably resent your accomplishments and your successes simply based on jealousy and envy. There are also MANY people who will respect you for who you are and look beyond color and see you instead. </p>
<p>If AA is the reason you got into a college over another person, then so be it. We can’t want AA to work in our favor and then deny that it played a role in admission. Of course, people will exaggerate its effect and base your success solely on it. But don’t let it get to you. You still got in. Successful people - black or white - always have some degree of “haters”. The best way to get them off your back is to ignore them and move on with your life.</p>
<p>But I feel as though CC instills some type of “paranoia” in us that all of our friends and college roommates will belligerently attack us because AA played some trivial role in admission. Not always. I think there are many people at the collegiate level who will respect you for who you are, not what color your skin is. And I think that people will be open-minded and accept you for who you are. </p>
<p>And for the others who attack you constantly and ridicule you, let them talk. </p>
<p>Success speaks volumes - you can let that do the talking for you.</p>
<p>Going back to this statement:</p>
<p>
[quote=ksarmand]
However, to think that removing a certain policy will change the calcified mindset of many is na</p>
<p>I disagree in that I think there is a potential for this. I am more optimistic than you in this respect. So I stand by the intention of my original statement that you deemed “crap.”</p>
<p>Silverturtle, this has nothing to do with ‘optimism.’ History stands to prove you wrong - as it has already been stated, people have been using different explanations to deem African American students as inferior to white students for centuries, even long before affirmative action existed. Even if the system of affirmative action were abolished, bigoted people would still find a way to deem African American students as less accomplished or deserving than their white counterparts. Actual fairness in admissions is a lot more important than the perception of fairness.</p>
<p>In addition, I’ve seen the same tired stereotypes about African American students being anti-intellectual, not caring about their classes, because our “culture” prevents us from achieving. A lot of times, it’s white students whose only exposure to our “culture” is seeing the average black student pass by in the hallway. Quit it. You don’t know what you’re talking about and you’re exposing your stupidity. In fact, it’s part of African American culture to fight, rise above and achieve - one of the reasons that “We Shall Overcome” was a battle cry during the Civil Rights Movement.</p>
<p>SOME black students are lazy and unmotivated - just like some white students are. The difference is, when people see a lazy and unmotivated white student, they just attribute it to that student being lazy. When they see a lazy and unmotivated black student, however, they attribute it to our whole race. I went to a 98% black public Magnet school, and everyone I went to high school with worked their butts off for four years to go to top colleges. I didn’t know very many who took fewer than two AP classes a year.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I fully understand, and have explicitly stated, that the prejudices that Affirmative Action can serve as justification for are nothing new. But as the reality can no longer be as easily explained away, fewer people will attempt to do so; accordingly, the mentalities of some will change. Or so I optimistically believe.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Quit what? Expressing my opinion? If readers want to dismiss my thoughts because of a lack of perspective, that’s fine; but please don’t drop personal insults.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I did not find it inappropriate; perhaps I was not entirely clear in my disapproval of that phrase. Individuals are not thought to be “unqualified,” to use a rough term, because of affirmative action; such ideas persist in spite of the policy. When you said “presumed unworthy,” your statement indicated that disapprobation and disbelief on the part of many came about as a result of that policy. That is not true; you have further qualified your statement, but the idea that the removal of that policy will do much to correct certain attitudes is, as I have previously stated, na</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, some of the thoughts of URMs’ being unqualified do stem from Affirmative Action. Again, I did not suggest that AA was the only cause. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, it is accurate; there are definitely people who presume all URM acceptees to be unworthy of acceptance. I have seen it hundreds of times on CC and elsewhere, as have you I’m sure. Stating this is not a generalization.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Good sir, that is not what I am disputing.</p>
<p>You are suggesting removal of a proximate, not ultimate, cause, along with the removal of a secondary, not primary (and hence more necessary), source of aid for some. That is the bone of my contention, that’s all.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you’re not disputing my original statement, why did you label it “crap” and later “misinformed”? If you agree that “there are definitely people who presume all URM acceptees to be unworthy of acceptance” and that AA is the reason for some of those presumptions, then you agree with my original statement because they are semantically equivalent.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I understand your point, and I agree that it would not solve the problem.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>…</p>
<p>Let’s backtrack a moment here, because my intentions seem to have been lost in the thickets of verbiage we are both guilty of.</p>
<p>Here is your statement:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You claimed that the practice of affirmative action led to URM acceptees being presumed unworthy, later elaborating upon your point by explaining that it was being used as a justification. You then proceeded to claim that removing the practice would have saliently beneficial effects by changing the mindsets of those who felt the need to downgrade students who would have been beneficiaries of AA during the admissions process attending topflight institutions.</p>
<p>This is false; affirmative action is only the most current justification for a historical trend of denigrating African Americans’ achievements. The mindset will still exist, and another justification will be found to suit that prejudicial argument.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, they are not, and I do not agree with your original statement. That has not changed, and no rhetorical sleight of hand will alter the fact that they are quite different.</p>
<p>You did not say “there are definitely people,” first of all. If you had, then I would not have objected as strenuously as I did.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, I did and stand by it, as I’m sure you do.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, in many cases it is not the cause but merely a vehicle for rationalization.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, I think that it would change the mindsets of some.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I edited my post right after you must have read it to</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They do mean the same thing. So if you agree with the two objects of the adverbial clause there, you agree with my original statement.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A specific belief, which in this case is the inferiority of certain applicants, is not to be conflated with a justification of such.</p>
<p>The inferiority of certain applicants is not even a question for some; affirmative action is conveniently there to “prove” their belief. What I’m saying is this: the existence of affirmative action is irrelevant to the foundation of that belief.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree, as I have indicated repeatedly.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For many, yes. But I’m still not clear on your position on this:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The quote above this one in your post is my position.</p>
<p>I don’t believe that AA is the reason.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You don’t think that a single person presumes URM’s be unworthy of their acceptances to top schools because of Affirmative Action? You think that there are more fundamental reasons in every single case? If so, I firmly disagree. </p>
<p>I’m still not seeing how the statement, even if it is false (which I do not believe it is), is in any way a generalization.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>From whence are you drawing such statements? Did I ever state that this was the case? Affirmative action, as I have said, is not the reason URM acceptees are automatically thought “unworthy.”</p>
<p>Yes, there are usually, but not always, more fundamental reasons. Given that I did not elaborate on my statement much, I suppose that you did have to extrapolate a bit, but generally speaking, there is already a system of perception in place that is enhanced but not generated by affirmative action. I have seen more examples of this than I care to count; in this case, personal perception is (unfortunately) all we have to go on, and I doubt that either of us can successfully prove that the other is wrong with regard to such perceptions, given that we lack the proper quantitative sources and that we have had, no doubt, different experiences. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is a generalization because you indicated that there is a direct causation factor involved. There is not. Affirmative action, in most cases, does not automatically cause people to assume that the applicant was unqualified; many of them would have drawn such a conclusion without the existence of that policy - again, the achievements of many are denigrated even where affirmative action does not apply. There are far more factors at play, and the removal of that policy will not cause the various perceptions associated with certain types of applicants to change, no matter how optimistic one may be.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, in post #56.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I cannot reconcile these statements. The first one supports your disagreement with my statement, but the second one is consistent with my statement.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m still not seeing a generalization there, or, for that matter, anything that is inconsistent with what I have argued at any point.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have qualified that statement.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The second is not consistent with your statement, silverturtle. You cited AA as the reason applicants were automatically - and universally - presumed unworthy. My second statement allows for other possibilities, but that is all; I do not see how both are identical.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This was not your argument.</p>