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.
The Ivy League was always meant for the wealthiest people. Before the GI bill there was little to no financial aid, so people who went to the Ivy League wrote checks. There was no pretense in being for poor people. Post WW2 veterans, if they were accepted could go to the Ivy League and the government paid for it. In the 60s the government created more financial aid programs.
But unless you are a GI the government will not fully cover the cost of you going to an expensive private university. So unless you want to borrow $80k a year or so to attend an Ivy, you need to have well off parents (a few people will get grants and get to go to an Ivy for free but this is a small percentage).
If you can't understand the economic issues at play I see why you didn't get into a top university. You may have had high test scores but no critical thinking abilities.
The network at Ivy and Stanford is attractive if it is full of rich people. Not poor smart people, but rich people that one can network in. Therefore these schools will find ways of limiting the percentage of poor people that can even be in, because you want to have people from wealthy backgrounds in your elite institution to make networking overall viable.
Back to the young man I mentioned, Patel when he was rejected did not whine about discrimination against Asians. He got into UCLA, made his own company and got accepted into Yale University. He accepted what you don't want to accept, the discrimination is SOCIOECONOMIC.
He realized he needed to make himself into an EXCEPTIONAL, well ROUNDED candidate. Opening up a SAT tutor company and managing it well showed his talent.
Simply scoring high doesn't mean crap.
Money matters, but I think you're underestimating the role that race plays in college admissions. Are you really saying that there's no advantage to being an underrepresented minority, or that there's no disadvantage to being an overrepresented minority?
Then don't get into fixations with your own bias due to Asians doing well academically. I'm sure you and your husband would be pissed if they start adding new criterias in professional sports that have nothing to do with sports. I would view it as racist, but perhaps many whites won't.
???
I find myself really surprised by your reaction in the past few posts. The thread is about the lack of black and Hispanic students in specialized schools, but is full of comments about Asians in particular. Why wouldn't I comment about this? I never advocated changing standards, but I would like to see a higher representation of these racial groups in specialized high schools. Yes, I think it's important! You interpret it as a threat to Asians I think.
Why do you think that my husband and I have a stake in professional sports?
I don't think anyone except Asians think that way. After all there has to be explanations if you're non-Asian for why they do better academically than other groups. Just like how blacks excel in athletics.
And its not all Asians by the way it mainly East Asians and Indians. In 50s and 60s East Asians in Malaysia did too well in that country both in business and academically. That led to strict race quotas in all govt jobs and school to the benefit of the natives who should have had overwhelming advantage to begin with, and East Asians by law had to give away a large percentage of businesses that they own. And even that was not enough there were violent race riots against East Asians that eventually led to the Chinese being shoved into a piece of swamp land that is now known as Singapore.
If you think it's all about tiger moms then that must be it. Now if only there's a tiger mom book on how they push their kids to dominate in business. O wait they don't in this country so no one would subscribe to that stereotype. If however Asians ever get to the level of Jews in this country everyone will be saying its all because tiger moms raise their kids to dominate in business. Its all part of the subtle racism in this country. Just like how blacks are seen more as a threat by cops than whites when it all depends on the individual.
There are cultures, and then there are individuals. This doesn't confuse scientists in general, they know that a population of women are slower runners over 100 meters than the population of men - but scientists also know you can't tell beforehand whether any one individual woman is slower than the male population average, or any one male individual. Populations studies tell you about...populations. However, many non-scientists take this and run with it pretending there are no population characteristics and you can't tell anything about anything!... In truth, all it means is you can't extrapolate to an individual. Cultures, sub-cultures and other behavioral collections are essentially populations having common actions , systems and beliefs. But mainly actions. Cultures aren't genetic, so any one individual can chose to be a part of it or not. However, cultures do exist - they are collective differences in behaviors and approaches - and (despite the conceits and mental gymnastics constructed by sociologists shying away from "value judgments") they have different outcomes. Different behaviors (as a group) leads to different outcomes, as a group. Really, no surprise there.
"Asian-American" pro-educational culture leads to a pro-educational outcome. Its not genetic. Its cultural. Any one Asian kid, or family, may subscribe to that culture or may not (again, you can't extrapolate the population characteristics to any one individual), but pretending cultural differences don't exist and don't result in different outcomes is silly.
I haven't any time for those on here pretending racial background has no impact on entry into an Ivy (especially over-represented minorities - i.e. "Asians" in their many ethnic and national backgrounds). Until/unless the Supreme court strikes it down, and they haven't actually done so as of March, 2016, race is still being considered as "a factor" by Ivys. Very few schools consider socioeconomic background in the same way race is still considered.
The final factor - how much control does your cultural group have over its own situation - there's what you can as a group do, and there's what you as a group can't control. Clearly that's different for different groups in view of racism - or more precisely in view of the racism of the dominant power holders (because lets stop the pretense racism doesn't exist widely among all groups - its the power of the racists that is deciding). Racism from the disempowered and disenfranchised is either ignored or excused.
I find myself really surprised by your reaction in the past few posts. The thread is about the lack of black and Hispanic students in specialized schools, but is full of comments about Asians in particular. Why wouldn't I comment about this? I never advocated changing standards, but I would like to see a higher representation of these racial groups in specialized high schools. Yes, I think it's important! You interpret it as a threat to Asians I think.
Why do you think that my husband and I have a stake in professional sports?
The lack of black and Hispanic students has always lead to discussions about implementing other criterias for admissions. And once those alternative options are discussed it leads people to think about why are Asians doing so well, and every non-Asian says that its because of tiger parenting, memorization, tutoring centers etc...That explanation alone is enough to discredit them from any sort of innate talent that they may or may not have. So now that we've established that they have no talent its okay to minimize their achievement and if we implement new criterias that have nothing to do with academics that come at the detriment to Asian achievement then so what because all they do is memorize which I know is what lots of people think is the case.
Your husband is black, and blacks dominate some sports hence I thought you would be able to relate if a similar circumstance occurs. One can agrue that it would be to the benefit of society that professional sports should be made more inclusive. Which i agree with too. And frankly the only way to do that would be to add new requirements that have nothing to do with sports which would be race driven. But for someone to get others to agree they would need to discredit them from any sort of innate talent. So you don't think black people or people who actually see whats going on would get pissed?
Last edited by bumblebyz; 03-10-2016 at 08:30 AM..
There are cultures, and then there are individuals. This doesn't confuse scientists in general, they know that a population of women are slower runners over 100 meters than the population of men - but scientists also know you can't tell beforehand whether any one individual woman is slower than the male population average, or any one male individual. Populations studies tell you about...populations. However, many non-scientists take this and run with it pretending there are no population characteristics and you can't tell anything about anything!... In truth, all it means is you can't extrapolate to an individual. Cultures, sub-cultures and other behavioral collections are essentially populations having common actions , systems and beliefs. But mainly actions. Cultures aren't genetic, so any one individual can chose to be a part of it or not. However, cultures do exist - they are collective differences in behaviors and approaches - and (despite the conceits and mental gymnastics constructed by sociologists shying away from "value judgments") they have different outcomes. Different behaviors (as a group) leads to different outcomes, as a group. Really, no surprise there.
"Asian-American" pro-educational culture leads to a pro-educational outcome. Its not genetic. Its cultural. Any one Asian kid, or family, may subscribe to that culture or may not (again, you can't extrapolate the population characteristics to any one individual), but pretending cultural differences don't exist and don't result in different outcomes is silly.
I haven't any time for those on here pretending racial background has no impact on entry into an Ivy (especially over-represented minorities - i.e. "Asians" in their many ethnic and national backgrounds). Until/unless the Supreme court strikes it down, and they haven't actually done so as of March, 2016, race is still being considered as "a factor" by Ivys. Very few schools consider socioeconomic background in the same way race is still considered.
Of course you can't extrapolate, there are lots of dumb Asians, lots. But somehow there are enough smart ones that subscribe to doing well in school such that they are overrepresented compared to other groups. And why should those or anyone within that group get penalized for it? And why do they have to put up with others' stereotypes used to discredit their achievement? Should they just accept that others think that they're robots? I certainly won't and no one can convince me otherwise.
Of course you can't extrapolate, there are lots of dumb Asians, lots. But somehow there are enough smart ones that subscribe to doing well in school such that they are overrepresented compared to other groups. And why should those or anyone within that group get penalized for it? And why do they have to put up with other's stereotypes used to discredit their achievement? Should they just accept that others think that they're robots?
I quite agree - there is no way they should be penalized - and they are despite deniers here.
I quite agree - there is no way they should be penalized - and they are despite deniers here.
Asians makes up a large percentage of the world's population. Not sure how thrilled I would be with Asians succeeding at colonizing the world. Humans are tribal people.
The lack of black and Hispanic students has always lead to discussions about implementing other criterias for admissions. And once those alternative options are discussed it leads people to think about why are Asians doing so well, and every non-Asian says that its because of tiger parenting, memorization, tutoring centers etc...That explanation alone is enough to discredit them from any sort of innate talent that they may or may not have. So now that we've established that they have no talent its okay to minimize their achievement and if we implement new criterias that have nothing to do with academics that come at the detriment to Asian achievement then so what because all they do is memorize which I know is what lots of people think is the case.
Your husband is black, and blacks dominate some sports. One can agrue that it would be to the benefit of society that professional sports should be made more inclusive. Which i agree with too. And frankly the only way to do that would be to add new requirements that have nothing to do with sports which would be race driven. But for someone to get others to agree they would need to discredit them from any sort of innate talent. So you don't think black people or people who actually see whats going on would get pissed?
Regarding your first paragraph - I never said any such thing. I never advocated changing standards in the thread or said that Asians lack innate talent. But when the input of many posters boils down to a recommendation for blacks and Hispanics to simply be and act more like Asians, I'll comment on it. And the underrepresentation of blacks and Hispanics in specialized schools doesn't mean that these groups lack innate intellectual talent either (it is sometimes the unsaid implication unfortunately).
FYI - no one is my husband's family is involved in professional sports. Not cousins, second cousins...Overwhelmingly, his members are professionals--most are college graduates, and some have attended specialized schools here. Much more intellectual talent than sports talent in his family (despite being black)! It's not an unusual thing...
Regarding your first paragraph - I never said any such thing. I never advocated changing standards in the thread or said that Asians lack innate talent. But when the input of many posters boils down to a recommendation for blacks and Hispanics to simply be and act more like Asians, I'll comment on it. And the underrepresentation of blacks and Hispanics in specialized schools doesn't mean that these groups lack innate intellectual talent either (it is often the unsaid implication unfortunately).
FYI - no one is my husband's family is involved in professional sports. Not cousins, second cousins...Overwhelmingly, his members are professions, most are college graduates, and some have attended specialized schools here. Much more intellectual talent than sports talent in his family (despite being black)! It's not an unusual thing...
You never said such a thing, but you would largely agree with the reasons that they do well without questioning individual circumstances. Hence making you a silent supporter. And everyone has their own biases, and you need to notice how you only think Asian H1Bs work hard 6 days a week. The lower pay thing might have been one of the main reasons thay they were hired to begin with so no surprises there. Lots of whites work hard to achieve successful careers. I've seen white woman go home sick and are back home dialing into calls and telling people what to do 15mins later. So much for stereotypes about woman. If anything working hard is a characteristic of all self made successful people.
Regarding your husband good for him and his family. Hope they can advance the breakdown of stereotypes against blacks.
I quite agree - there is no way they should be penalized - and they are despite deniers here.
Thank you, the only way to fix this is more natural integration to the point that no one looks at anyone else differently. But it's hard when you look different.
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.
