BREAKING: Yale university discriminated against Asian and White applicants

why are you posting a non-running topic on a running forum?

They are all equal. They don't admit dumber black kids over smarter Asian kids. You are equating income to race. My kids attend a good public school that is about 10% black. Those blacks are primarily well educated and wealthy. When Yale passes over an Asian kid with a 35 on the ACT whose parents wash dishes in favor of one of these black kids with a 31 ACT whose parents are doctors, that is immoral and illegal. Everyone should be treated as individuals instead of lumping them into groups based on similar skin color. MLK Jr. would not have been in favor.

go away run wrote:

No they did not. They used to pick the best and brightest. They now pick the best monorities over equally qualified Asians and Whites.

uuuhhhh, except this is the allegation

"and that Harvard favored Black and Hispanic applicants at the expense of Asian-Americans, who were held to a higher standard."

So if this is correct (and I don't have any info/evidence/fact at all that it is, but equally I have no info/evidence/fact at all that it isn't), then they aren't picking minorities over equally qualified Asians and Whites, they are picking them over higher qualified Asians and Whites - which is, sorry to say this, inequality towards those groups.

Capiche?

go away run wrote:

No they did not. They used to pick the best and brightest. They now pick the best monorities over equally qualified Asians and Whites.

It's funny how no one seems to care when Asians are held to a higher standard than whites.

I will agree with that.

Speak for yourself. It should be the best regardless of race. If 100% are Asian, so be it. So I care and most others who don't like racial discrimination, care.

go away run wrote:

Speak for yourself. It should be the best regardless of race. If 100% are Asian, so be it. So I care and most others who don't like racial discrimination, care.

It's sad that this even has to be said. Universities should NOT be an extension of the welfare state by giving out handouts to promote egalitarianism. They should exist to facilitate knowledge and discovery. I think we have a cynical, contorted view of what the university should be - it's not job training, and not supposed to be a means for each person to gain career status with their diploma (which paradoxically don't mean anything if everybody has one). We need a different system.

reer wrote:

dadsfadsfdasfdsafdas wrote:

your right it only takes 15s to find the classic example

Runner:Marathon

a) envoy: embassy

b) martyr : massacre

c) oarsman :regatta

d) horse: stable

This is a poor example of what you're trying to argue. I was a white, upper middle class kid, well educated, and I would have had no idea what a regatta was back in high school. Take all the white, upper middle class kids from the south and midwest (or really anywhere outside of a large coastal city), and I'm certain that they would probably fare no better on this question then a similarly wealthy/educated black student.

By the way, even though I had never heard the word "regatta" while in high school I probably would have still gotten the question correct by using process of elimination. That's just a reflection of general intelligence and being a good test taker, nothing to do with race.

No it is a great example as you are demonstrating. Why as a bright white kid didn't you know the meaning of the word? Because it wasn't part of your social circle. What you are struggling with is the idea that nobody is saying all whites will get the question right. The idea is that more whites will get it right than expected.

But lets say you get the question right. Does that mean the question doesn't have issues? Of course not. If I can solve the question in 10s because of the social capital I have and it takes you 30s, I just gained an advantage.

Think about foods. I had no clue what Okra was until college. Nobody in my section of the country ate it. Should that effect my college admission in any way? Should the fact that the person picking the questions chose okra instead of kale matter about what school a kid goes to?

go away run wrote:

They are all equal. They don't admit dumber black kids over smarter Asian kids. You are equating income to race. My kids attend a good public school that is about 10% black. Those blacks are primarily well educated and wealthy. When Yale passes over an Asian kid with a 35 on the ACT whose parents wash dishes in favor of one of these black kids with a 31 ACT whose parents are doctors, that is immoral and illegal. Everyone should be treated as individuals instead of lumping them into groups based on similar skin color. MLK Jr. would not have been in favor.

How about when Yale passes over an Asian kid with a 35 on the ACT for a rich white kid with a much lower score who happens to be the son of a senator or an actor or who happens to be really good at sailing? Do you find that to be immoral? I know it's not illegal (neither is taking a dump on your neighbor's lawn, but it's generally considered a bad idea.)

Let it Rupp wrote:

I think we have a cynical, contorted view of what the university should be - it's not job training, and not supposed to be a means for each person to gain career status with their diploma (which paradoxically don't mean anything if everybody has one). We need a different system.

Yeah, we need a different system that does not put down Asian students for their lack of "social skills, broad experience and leadership quality." (Or whatever other excuse they come up with.) But we don't have that system.

You seem mentally detached from reality. If you don't know the meanings of those words on the SAT, it's because you didn't study. Vocab is literally just rote memorization, you study it with flash cards. Also, you must not have taken the SAT, or you would know that single questions don't make or break a college admissions, so your premise that colleges are denying kids because of their knowledge on boat races and vegetables is mind-numbingly dumb.

Also, I would like to point out that dadsfadsfdasfdsafdas didn't originally pick this example by themselves, apparently this is a widely known, notorious question among SAT critics and is the shining example of "bias" within the modern SAT. This one stupid question, is the best example they can come up with.

The academic success of Asians just shows the systemic racism against whites, blacks, Latinos and anyone else who likes weed and video games instead of studying.

As long as they would pass over a white kid with a 35 on the ACT for a rich Asian kid with a much lower score who happens to be the son of a senator or an actor or who happens to be really good at sailing. Exclude race from the equation. Better athlete? Sure. Son of a Senator? Sure. Better test score? Sure. Better grades? Sure.

ok, that was a shocker. wrote:

30 PERCENT of Yale is Jewish. Seems a bit much since they are only 2% of the USA population. Do they count as whites? It always seems to change with the Jews, lol

Not allowed to talk about that.

Probably it's a thought crime to be aware of it

Let it Rupp wrote:

You seem mentally detached from reality. If you don't know the meanings of those words on the SAT, it's because you didn't study. Vocab is literally just rote memorization, you study it with flash cards. Also, you must not have taken the SAT, or you would know that single questions don't make or break a college admissions, so your premise that colleges are denying kids because of their knowledge on boat races and vegetables is mind-numbingly dumb.

.

Are you dumb enough to think we are talking about one question and not the whole process about which questions are chosen to be added to the test.

And look at what we are defining "merit" as. Memorization of a bunch of words. Note the total inability that you are demonstrating at seeing an example and generalizing to a bigger problem. If you were picking out a people for college wouldn't you prefer people who can think than people who can memorize?

I guess the Ivies are really dumb then because they use test scores as the major discriminator in admissions. If you are Asian and don't rank in the upper 1% of test takers, no chance.

Ivies don't like you wrote:

This is about the legality of the actions. White males may receive legal affirmative action but they are also receiving illegal discrimination.

That is true. So you agree, Yale needs to admit way less white men! Just admit more Asians and women. Yale will be like 20% men 80% women soon. Sounds like good odds for those who can get in!

Why is nobody talking about how using race, which basically is just whatever you want it to be, for admissions is ridiculous on its face? At a DNA level, all of these "races" that people like to talk about don't even exist as a "white" person's DNA is the same as a "black" person's DNA. We all are descended from the first homo sapiens that were in Africa (and, newsflash, it wasn't that long ago). Knowing that race is just made up, you get people really making it up like Elizabeth Warren or the nutjob who was white but who was the head of the NAACP after fooling people into thinking she was "black."

The ridiculousness was most event when Obama won the election and he now universally is hailed as the "first African American (or black) POTUS" when his mother was 100% "white"! Even Kamala Harris is 1/2 Indian. Why is nobody talking about her as being the first Indian VP candidate ever? Because the whole idea of "race" is a joke and simply whatever you want it to be. It's about time schools stop using this fake category as a major factor for admissions (particularly when a "black" candidate whose parents are wealthy and who has poor scores will get much better treatment than a "white" candidate with superior scores whose parents are poor).