This is an outrage. Why aren’t Asians suing over this great injustice ?
Oh that’s right, Asians aren’t whiny, entitled ethno-narcissicsts
This is an outrage. Why aren’t Asians suing over this great injustice ?
Oh that’s right, Asians aren’t whiny, entitled ethno-narcissicsts
This post was removed.
This post was removed.
This post was removed.
bothered wrote:
This is an outrage. Why aren’t Asians suing over this great injustice ?
Because they have you to whine for them.
This post was removed.
This post was removed.
This post was removed.
This post was removed.
This post was removed.
Yes they are. Actually many think they are superior to others, it's just they keep it to themselves.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CZgW9TjA11l/?utm_medium=copy_link
They should sue. They have sued and been denied by court after court, which basically just reinforces the fact that "diversity" and affirmative action measures are legally supported structural racism against asians and whites that have been upheld by the courts.
https://www.ceousa.org/2018/05/22/too-many-asian-americans/
As far as the NFL is concerned, Kim Il Zong setback prospects for Asians in the league for generations:
Ivy's are about 22% Asian. NFL is about 57% black. Not a very good comparator.
And for what it is worth, Ivy presidencies, boards and upper level administrators are very white and male dominated. The ivies are still largely institutions dedicated to preserving the privileges of the wealthy, with legacy admissions pushing 30% at some Ivies and graduates of elite private prep schools and children of big donors eating up lots of spots.
bothered wrote:
This is an outrage. Why aren’t Asians suing over this great injustice ?
Oh that’s right, Asians aren’t whiny, entitled ethno-narcissicsts
You should have left it at your first line. The thread was good.
But then you ruined it with your last statement. It expressed a hostile agenda.
I will ignore your last statement and ask if Asians are excluded due to systemic racism.
Precious Roy wrote:
Ivy's are about 22% Asian. NFL is about 57% black. Not a very good comparator. And for what it is worth, Ivy presidencies, boards and upper level administrators are very white and male dominated. The ivies are still largely institutions dedicated to preserving the privileges of the wealthy, with legacy admissions pushing 30% at some Ivies and graduates of elite private prep schools and children of big donors eating up lots of spots.
At what percent would race baiting become acceptable to you - 40%? just trying to calibrate your framework.
Cal Tech is 45% Asian (plus 8% international, a number of whom are likely Asian as well), 27% White, 12% Hispanic and 2% Black because they have color blind admissions. I have no problem with this as all individuals earned their way in there. We shouldn't penalize people for being smart (as is the case with affirmative action). In a similar light, I have no issues with 70% of NFL players being black. Why do we look at academic ability differently than we look at athletic ability? 85% of lawyers are white. 81%% of the NBA is black. 65% of doctors are white (almost 20% are Asian). 70% of NFL players are black.
All of the ivy league presidents are effete, pencil-neck pu$ies.
All of the ivy league students are effete, pencil-neck pu$$ies.
Perfect representation and alignment.
I am strongly in favor of 60% of NFL owners being black. 70% of NBA owners too. Let's do this. Who disagrees and why?? (hint: not the people you think)
simple. asians are great because they are actually great. other groups are below average and lazy and are using racist discrimination to get more places.
I would be ok with this, with the exception of the NBA, make it 99%. Just dictate it. Done.