Justice Scalia Suggests Blacks Belong at "Slower" Colleges

ldent42

jeffbr said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

is this the case where the plaintiff was too stupid to get into the school even if there was no affirmative action?

oh the irony.

She missed the mark by a couple of percentage points (finished outside the top 10%, but finished in top 12%). Did well on SATs. Had extracurricular and volunteer work. To categorize her as "too stupid" basically means that the 25% who were admitted on the basis of something other than academics are just as, or even more "stupid" (not my word), which supports Scalia's argument that they may not be ready for the rigors of an academically challenging school.

To specifically answer your question, we don't know, but based on how close she was to meeting the academic admission requirements it is likely that she would have been admitted if 25% of the slots weren't reserved for affirmative action.

The way I see it, is the University is trying to correct for the failings of the public school system by implementing that 25% rule, because otherwise there would be zero low income students admitted. Frankly, I think the idea of looking at from the perspective of this girl who is suing, is just ignorance of privilege at its fuckin' finest.

jeffbr

ldent42 said:

jeffbr said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

is this the case where the plaintiff was too stupid to get into the school even if there was no affirmative action?

oh the irony.

She missed the mark by a couple of percentage points (finished outside the top 10%, but finished in top 12%). Did well on SATs. Had extracurricular and volunteer work. To categorize her as "too stupid" basically means that the 25% who were admitted on the basis of something other than academics are just as, or even more "stupid" (not my word), which supports Scalia's argument that they may not be ready for the rigors of an academically challenging school.

To specifically answer your question, we don't know, but based on how close she was to meeting the academic admission requirements it is likely that she would have been admitted if 25% of the slots weren't reserved for affirmative action.

The way I see it, is the University is trying to correct for the failings of the public school system by implementing that 25% rule, because otherwise there would be zero low income students admitted. Frankly, I think the idea of looking at from the perspective of this girl who is suing, is just ignorance of privilege at its fuckin' finest.

Of course the university is trying to correct failings using affirmative action. It is an admirable goal to want equality/diversity at all levels, but I still think this is the wrong approach. The change needs to happen further upstream before it is time to apply for college.

You may consider it ignorant to try to view this from the white girl's POV, but I think you'd feel differently if you were discriminated against because of your skin color. And make no mistake - if they accepted any students of color with lesser admission scores than this white girl, then that's exactly what happened.

Discrimination is wrong. You don't make up for past discrimination with more discrimination. It makes more sense to focus on a remedy by providing more rigorous academics during the K-12 years. Prepare the underprivileged during their formative years. Don't suddenly throw them into a situation as young adults that may be a setup for failure.

ldent42

jeffbr said:

ldent42 said:

jeffbr said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

is this the case where the plaintiff was too stupid to get into the school even if there was no affirmative action?

oh the irony.

She missed the mark by a couple of percentage points (finished outside the top 10%, but finished in top 12%). Did well on SATs. Had extracurricular and volunteer work. To categorize her as "too stupid" basically means that the 25% who were admitted on the basis of something other than academics are just as, or even more "stupid" (not my word), which supports Scalia's argument that they may not be ready for the rigors of an academically challenging school.

To specifically answer your question, we don't know, but based on how close she was to meeting the academic admission requirements it is likely that she would have been admitted if 25% of the slots weren't reserved for affirmative action.

The way I see it, is the University is trying to correct for the failings of the public school system by implementing that 25% rule, because otherwise there would be zero low income students admitted. Frankly, I think the idea of looking at from the perspective of this girl who is suing, is just ignorance of privilege at its fuckin' finest.

Of course the university is trying to correct failings using affirmative action. It is an admirable goal to want equality/diversity at all levels, but I still think this is the wrong approach. The change needs to happen further upstream before it is time to apply for college.

You may consider it ignorant to try to view this from the white girl's POV, but I think you'd feel differently if you were discriminated against because of your skin color. And make no mistake - if they accepted any students of color with lesser admission scores than this white girl, then that's exactly what happened.

Discrimination is wrong. You don't make up for past discrimination with more discrimination. It makes more sense to focus on a remedy by providing more rigorous academics during the K-12 years. Prepare the underprivileged during their formative years. Don't suddenly throw them into a situation as young adults that may be a setup for failure.

Okay but you're misinterpreting ny words. I totally agree that the school system needs to be fixed to even the playing field. But when I say "ignorance of privilege" I don't mean that considering her point of view is ignorant. She has extracurriculars, but she didn't make it into the top 10% of her school. So we're ignoring the privilege she has to have those extracurriculars. We're assuming that if the 25% of admissions wasn't reserved for the university's discretion, she could've been accepted. It's reasonable to figure, that since she was in the top 12%, perhaps if she's graduated from a less competitive school she could've been in the top 10% and gotten accepted. So we're ignoring that privilege as well. We're also ignoring the fact that she even gets to go college at all, that privilege isn't even questioned.
I'm not saying she's wrong to be miffed about not getting into the school she wanted. That's fine. But her lawsuit carries the potential to effect thousands of underprivileged folks, and somehow that's less important? This is what I mean by ignorance of privilege.