Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wow I touched a nerve. As a woman, you were underrepresented in your field of study and universities may take that into account in an effort to increase diversity. Your gender may have given you an unfair advantage over a male FOREIGNER. There's really no way for you to know for sure.
Was your field of study primarily white or were you a minority in terms of race too?
There is a way to know for sure: there was no person, male or female, black or white, applying to the PhD program with the thesis advisor that I chose. That scientist had no grad student to work in the lab. That scientist would have taken anybody, literally anybody who wanted to work in the lab in my capacity. I was a newly graduated physician in my home country already, and going for that PhD in the US, doing research in a lab of an anonymous young scientist who struggled for a tenure at a state univetsity, was a step down for me in terms of qualifications, step waaay down. It saved that scientist's career, and my life - so it worked out okay, via DEMAND & SUPPLY, not via being female or anuthing else. Trust me, there were no efforts to increase diversity, only to save that lab :-).
You also are arguing two opposite things: if I had been given something as a woman "in an effort to increase diversity", how did I then also benefit from the "effort to increase diversity" by being white? (my field, as most traditional fields, is both predominantly male and white)
Your arguments exemplify the way of thinking of people who have not really been in the trenches of serious work, and therefore think that all achievement is the matter of what you are "given", and what you are demographically..... where in reality 99% of achievement, at least in the US, is the matter of how much effort you expend, and how you ride the market laws of demand and supply.
Yawn, I mentioned my family background in another thread but I guess you forgot. It's funny that you of all people are now complaining of prejudice.
You should learn to take personal responsibility for your own words.
I don't read all the threads on this forum, and don't know your family background. What do you mean about personal responsibility? Of course I take responsibility for my words, who else would take it? Which exact words do you mean?
I don't read all the threads on this forum, and don't know your family background. What do you mean about personal responsibility? Of course I take responsibility for my words, who else would take it? Which exact words do you mean?
You are assuming that the way that I'm interpreting what you say is based on prejudice against you, rather than the things you write themselves.
There is a way to know for sure: there was no person, male or female, black or white, applying to the PhD program with the thesis advisor that I chose. That scientist had no grad student to work in the lab. That scientist would have taken anybody, literally anybody who wanted to work in the lab in my capacity. I was a newly graduated physician in my home country already, and going for that PhD in the US, doing research in a lab of an anonymous young scientist who struggled for a tenure at a state univetsity, was a step down for me in terms of qualifications, step waaay down. It saved that scientist's career, and my life - so it worked out okay, via DEMAND & SUPPLY, not via being female or anuthing else. Trust me, there were no efforts to increase diversity, only to save that lab :-).
You also are arguing two opposite things: if I had been given something as a woman "in an effort to increase diversity", how did I then also benefit from the "effort to increase diversity" by being white? (my field, as most traditional fields, is both predominantly male and white)
Your arguments exemplify the way of thinking of people who have not really been in the trenches of serious work, and therefore think that all achievement is the matter of what you are "given", and what you are demographically..... where in reality 99% of achievement, at least in the US, is the matter of how much effort you expend, and how you ride the market laws of demand and supply.
So the students in your university program were primarily white male? You also said the program was primarily immigrants (primarily white male immigrants?).
Because I don't agree with you, you're making false assumptions about me? Yawn again.
You are assuming that the way that I'm interpreting what you say is based on prejudice against you, rather than the things you write themselves.
Well, I am not a supremacist, racial or otherwise (if anything, I am constantly mentioning that I come from a major disadvantage, but if I could get myself out of it just by working like a mule, and not asking for much, then ANYBODY can do the same ) - but, you have this idea that I am a racist because I apparently write in some kind of "tenor" that you associate with racism. Judging about somebody based on her "tenor" is a definition of prejudice.
The tendency towards "woe is me, historically, and therefore everybody should give me everything for free" is annoying to me in every social group - and it is particularly annoying in my own group, ie, in women. There is nothing more absurd to me than a Women's Studies graduate spending all her time blasting microscopically insignificant forms of perceived inequality with men, instead of shutting up and doing the formerly exclusively male hard work. Does that make me an anti-myself sexist too?
So the students in your university program were primarily white male? You also said the program was primarily immigrants (primarily white male immigrants?).
Because I don't agree with you, you're making false assumptions about me? Yawn again.
No, you asked whether my field of study was predominantly white and male overall - yes, the FIELD was. The grad students in my particular program were mostly foreign (not immigrants at that point, but on a student visa - we did not know if we'd be able to definitely immigrate). The program was small, we are talking about dozen grad students. The majority of them were from Asia, both genders.
Over 50% of STEM PhDs are foreigners. In order for the USA to compete economically we need foreign PhD students who can research AI, technology, healthcare, etc
Fact: American children are too dumb. Not ALL American children, of course.
It's a problem of lowering standards for feel-good politics and catering to the lowest common denominator. DeBlasio and the fat racist chancellor Carranza is only propagating this.
It's also a problem of tax structure, where you have middle-class people holding off on children or only having one child because childcare is so expensive. Meanwhile they are taxed out the butt to support welfare single mothers who pop out 5-6 kids, many who also use up a disproportionate amount of resources in SNAP, special education services, CPS, welfare. The kids didn't ask for this so I support welfare directly to the child but it's often abused by the mothers for their own use.
If we continue to slash the middle class and their education at the expense of the welfare class, we are going to look like a third world country with a huge disparity between the rich and poor, and no one in the middle.
Over 50% of STEM PhDs are foreigners. In order for the USA to compete economically we need foreign PhD students who can research AI, technology, healthcare, etc
Fact: American children are too dumb. Not ALL American children, of course.
It's a problem of lowering standards for feel-good politics and catering to the lowest common denominator. DeBlasio and the fat racist chancellor Carranza is only propagating this.
It's also a problem of tax structure, where you have middle-class people holding off on children or only having one child because childcare is so expensive. Meanwhile they are taxed out the butt to support welfare single mothers who pop out 5-6 kids, many who also use up a disproportionate amount of resources in SNAP, special education services, CPS, welfare. The kids didn't ask for this so I support welfare directly to the child but it's often abused by the mothers for their own use.
If we continue to slash the middle class and their education at the expense of the welfare class, we are going to look like a third world country with a huge disparity between the rich and poor, and no one in the middle.
Yes. Except I don't think American children are too dumb, there is just the tendency of not wanting to put in the required effort.
1. Those who work hard and succeed due to work.
2. Those who don't work hard, but want the same financial and other material results of hard work by voting for politicians who will take stuff from group 1 and give it to group 2. Those politicians think that all people are helpless, hopeless and incompetent, but their views are based only on their interactions with their own supporters in group 2.
I find her posts full of assumptions and negative stereotypes.
I wonder if you'd have the same reaction if she was repeatedly writing something similar about Jews:
"I am not bashing Jews, I am just bashing the expectation that things should be handed to a certain group of people just because they were historically disadvantaged - when they are no more disadvantaged NOW than most other groups of people. Yes, the holocaust was very ugly, but most of the history was very ugly to many groups of people. You actually need only one generation to go from nothing to solid self sufficiency - and I would add, you can do it much more effectively if you rely on yourself rather than on handouts (I am speaking from some degree of experience :-).."
If that were true I would 100% agree with that statement. But it's rather the opposite. Jews who arrived in the USA as refugees after the holocaust (essentially) took less than a generation to succeed to the top and now well, we all know how successful they are as a group.
Back then, Jewish students were outperforming WASP white kids so elite schools used to have policies to limit the amount of Jewish students admitted to their schools. Today we are doing the same thing to Asian students. Eventually we decided that such policies were antisemitic and discriminatory. Hopefully we choose the same for our Asian students.
When we push down smart kids, ultimately it is society that takes the fall for it
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
