<p>The problem was due to Western/Japanese colonialism, warlordism, and weak/nonexistent central governments of that period, there was no one unified system of education…even elite education. It was very localized until one wanted to enter university or the military academies. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Japan has had a longstanding strong militaristic tradition dating back to the days of the samurai and shoguns(~1100 AD - 1945). One of the reasons why Japan was able to adapt to the west so quickly was precisely because they had many important similarities…such as venerating warriors known as knights in Europe and samurai in Japan. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wasn’t marketing myth considering what I heard directly from the mouths of the few corporate worker/executive parents/family members back in the 1980s in the NE and West Coast and later on, from older colleagues/supervisors at summer/first jobs during/after college. This attitude was also widespread at my STEM public magnet as there was a strong anti-hippie attitude among many classmates while I attended. </p>
<p>To be fair…the HS classmates…especially the hardcore engineering/CS techies also held similar disdain for Windows users/fans as they felt “Real Computer users” use Unix/BSD or later on…Linux.</p>
<p>One can get physical exercise without having to be involved in team sports. I love taking long walks and even with the heatwave…managed to walk 6 miles round trip in around an hour and half combined to meet some alum friends from college for dinner. I also walked around 3 miles roundtrip yesterday afternoon just to admire the blue skies and sunny weather despite the heat/humidity. </p>
<p>On the flipside, I’ve known plenty of longtime friends/folks who were active in sports during K-12 and college who are now overweight/obese…and most are around my age or younger. Only common factor among them is that they stayed in/moved to suburban areas where one drives to even visit a neighbor a few blocks away…or even across the street.</p>
<p>In short, emphasizing sports in K-12 or college is no guarantee of maintaining good health/looks in one’s life…even for those who are athletically inclined. :D</p>
<p>But it’s only an “issue” if you make it one. So in momzie’s day, a handful of rich girls at Wellesley got together and socialized together in a club called TZE. They had their own little parties or whatever. So what? If you don’t get to socialize with them, what are you missing out on? You’re missing out on the kinds of people who don’t socialize with anyone not of their socioeconomic status – so you’re missing out on nothing. I don’t understand the attitude that you’re supposed to be upset that certain people might not socialize with you. Their loss, no?</p>
<p>It is not easy to find out where the super rich are sending their kids in contemporary times. I looked at a couple of the top US billionaires who are near the age of college-parents. It looks like Larry Eillison (college drop-out), has two adult kids, only one of whom went to college for one year at USC (CA). It looks like Michael Dell’s (UT) eldest child goes to Columbia. That is as far as I was willing to look.</p>
<p><a href=“JHS”>quote</a> And no one, but no one, associated Apple Computers with hippies. Marketing myth. Apples were the not-for-work computers, except in academia, because essentially Apple didn’t market to large employers and didn’t support the products in the way large employers were used to IBM doing. I think it took Apple a long time to get networking well. Apple STILL doesn’t market to businesses much. </p>
<p>(cobrat) Wasn’t marketing myth considering what I heard directly from the mouths of the few corporate worker/executive parents/family members back in the 1980s in the NE and West Coast and later on, from older colleagues/supervisors at summer/first jobs during/after college.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That’s what we love about you, cobrat. JHS (and I daresay a bunch of us other posters who are late forties / early fifties) were actually AROUND during this time - and JHS is, as usual, spot-on in his descriptions and observations (of Apple, of veganism, and of culture in general). But you’ll still claim that the third-hand word of mouth from friends-of-friends trumps our observations. </p>
<p>Good lord, JHS could say, “When I was at Yale in 1979, blah-de-blah happened” and you would claim that it wasn’t true because the parent of an older classmate had a cousin who made it a point to talk to you about blah-de-blah at Yale and so you know it didn’t go down that way.</p>
<p>I agree (post 166), Pizzagirl. If some wealthy kids want to socialize together and exclude you, so what? Even a state school like UVa has a couple frats that you are just not going to get into if you didn’t go to prep school or are wealthy. Just socialize with other people. It doesn’t seem like that big a deal. And if the overall vibe of a school bothers a person that much, they’re not likely to want to go there in the first place.</p>
<p>If a college like Wellesley wants to make claims about being more socially inclusive and encouraging diversity through encouraging students from all SES backgrounds to mix socially, having clubs which exclude others on SES basis…especially when they use college resources like houses/dorms makes great farce of such proclamations, no?</p>
<p>This very issue was one reason why Oberlin banned fraternities/sororities or other organizations which exclude students on factors other than academic achievement*. A ban which has been in effect since the 1870s. </p>
<p>If you want to run a club/organization at Oberlin or schools like it, it must be open to all students and exclusion on factors such as SES are prohibited. </p>
<p>Moreover, socially exclusive organizations were considered so detrimental to the maintaining the campus community that if it is found an enrolled student has joined an “underground fraternity/sorority” or other socially exclusionary club, college regulations provide for the disciplining of that student up to and including expulsion. Don’t know how strongly it is enforced…but most Obies agree strongly with that rule from what I’ve observed while a student there. </p>
<p>Thanks, cobrat. I know that you and I frequently disagree on lots of issues (like politics!), but you summed up my feelings exactly – don’t tell us how egalitarian you are and then allow the existence of exclusionary societies based on SES. Such a policy shows a lack of integrity.
Interesting to hear that Oberlin feels so strongly about this. Oberlin is high on my son’s radar at the moment – one point in its favor!</p>
<p>I know these are private colleges and they can make whatever rules they want which is fine, but I never understood why it is okay for colleges to ban social clubs out of fear of “SES exclusivity” yet support campus clubs that are defined by race or religion (Oberlin has plenty of these). Sure, <em>everyone</em> is welcome to join them, but come on, what a farce. If the idea is to ban organizations that go against the grain of an “inclusive community,” then race and religion-based clubs ought to be banned as well.</p>
<p>But you just made up out of whole cloth that these clubs (or other clubs, fraternities, etc.) “exclude based on SES” because it suits your world-view. Do you have some proof that they require the parents’ tax forms and that everyone below a certain income is automatically rejected?</p>
<p>And anyway, what the heck difference does it make if Rich Girl Nancy meets / befriends Rich Girl Suzie and Rich Girl Mary and they all hang out together in the cafeteria and the dorm, versus if Rich Girl Nancy, Rich Girl Suzie and Rich Girl Mary all join a society and hang out together? Do you think you should be able to force Rich Girl Nancy to hang out with you? Maybe she just doesn’t like you. It’s possible, you know. I didn’t like everybody in college and I didn’t want to socialize with just anybody.</p>
<p>The key distinction is EVERYONE IS WELCOME TO JOIN THEM. A couple of the Obie alums I had dinner with this past friday lived in Afrikan Heritage House while they were students and had no issues even though they were White. </p>
<p>I had no problems hanging out with friends who lived in the houses or participated in race/religious groups at their meetings/gatherings. In fact, I was always welcome.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The main point is that colleges which promote themselves as trying to promote a more egalitarian inclusive environment and then allow their resources to be used by student groups which are exclusive on factors such as SES are showing themselves up to be nothing more than a bunch of hypocrites guilty of false advertising. </p>
<p>One aspect of creating an egalitarian campus social environment is at the very least…not allowing college resources to be used by student groups which do exclude on basis of SES or “because I don’t like you”. </p>
<p>And no, no student has the right to ask the college to effectively serve as his/her abettor in social exclusionism by being allowed to use college resources like dorms/houses for their activities. </p>
<p>You want to use college resources for club activities/social events…they must be open to all college students who are interested in coming. </p>
<p>If colleges like Wellesley don’t want to bother or even want such socially exclusionary clubs to continue operating with college resources, they need to stop with the pretense of “promoting egalitarianism”. To do otherwise is to lower themselves to the same…or IMO, lower levels than the sleaziest used car salespersons or telemarketer peddling some fraudulent BS.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Personally, I’m not the type of person inclined to “sucking up”. Instead, I’d rather organize a raiding party a la Vikings, Pirates, Goths, Huns, Vandals, Xiong-Nu, etc and raiding the exclusive parties/clubs for all the culinary delights they have on hand. </p>
<p>In the case of that club at W, however, most of my fellow compatriots are going to decline on the fears they may end up starving to death on the meager rations of tea, fancy biscuits, and if they’re really trying to ape old British aristocracy…cucumber sandwiches. </p>
<p>Goody goody gumdrops for Obies. Here’s a concept – those people who object to fraternities, sororities, eating clubs, finals clubs, societies, etc. should go to colleges that don’t offer them, and those people who don’t mind or welcome them should go to colleges that offer them. Why do you want everyone’s experience to be the same? There are how many thousands of colleges that all offer different types of experiences, whether it’s presence of sports, Greek life, conservative / liberal spectrum, whatever. Why not let the free market decide?</p>
<p>Yes, heaven forbid we respect people’s space to hang with other people with whom they have something in common. You don’t realize how rude that … oh never mind.</p>
:D</p>
:D</p>