Pure Racism by Harvard
#1
 x 0 x 0
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/07/09/harvard-yale-defy-trump-guidelines-continue-to-use-race-in-admissions.html



According to the lawsuit against Harvard, Asian-Americans consistently rated lower on subjective categories such as “courage” as well as “lacking in personality” which decreased their chances of being accepted. But the school said its “comprehensive” analysis showed no discrimination.


This is pure discrimination and the fact that they defy the law is most disconcerting.  Let me be more to the point, more fucking assholes
"Do not correct a fool, or he will hate you; correct a wise man and he will appreciate you." ~PROVERBS 9:8



#2
 x 0 x 0
(07-09-2018, 03:16 PM)Dr_Pitbull Wrote:  http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/07/09/harvard-yale-defy-trump-guidelines-continue-to-use-race-in-admissions.html



According to the lawsuit against Harvard, Asian-Americans consistently rated lower on subjective categories such as “courage” as well as “lacking in personality” which decreased their chances of being accepted. But the school said its “comprehensive” analysis showed no discrimination.


This is pure discrimination and the fact that they defy the law is most disconcerting.  Let me be more to the point, more fucking assholes

i wont call it "racism" .. but definitely something shady.  It is well known they have different grading for certain races ... meaning certain minority groups say would qualify if you have say 1,300 SAT, but for Asian it would be 1,400 (just making up a number).     But to knock a group down based on vague attribute like "courage" is total bs - how on earth do they even measure it ... like asian gets 5/10 for courage, and everyone else gets 10/10?  
#3
 x 0 x 0
(07-09-2018, 03:25 PM)apollo04 Wrote:  
(07-09-2018, 03:16 PM)Dr_Pitbull Wrote:  http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/07/09/harvard-yale-defy-trump-guidelines-continue-to-use-race-in-admissions.html



According to the lawsuit against Harvard, Asian-Americans consistently rated lower on subjective categories such as “courage” as well as “lacking in personality” which decreased their chances of being accepted. But the school said its “comprehensive” analysis showed no discrimination.


This is pure discrimination and the fact that they defy the law is most disconcerting.  Let me be more to the point, more fucking assholes

i wont call it "racism" .. but definitely something shady.  It is well known they have different grading for certain races ... meaning certain minority groups say would qualify if you have say 1,300 SAT, but for Asian it would be 1,400 (just making up a number).     But to knock a group down based on vague attribute like "courage" is total bs - how on earth do they even measure it ... like asian gets 5/10 for courage, and everyone else gets 10/10?  

Totally disagree, take out Asian and replace it with Mexican, Muslim or Jew and they would shut them down.
"Do not correct a fool, or he will hate you; correct a wise man and he will appreciate you." ~PROVERBS 9:8



#4
 x 0 x 0
(07-09-2018, 03:26 PM)Dr_Pitbull Wrote:  
(07-09-2018, 03:25 PM)apollo04 Wrote:  i wont call it "racism" .. but definitely something shady.  It is well known they have different grading for certain races ... meaning certain minority groups say would qualify if you have say 1,300 SAT, but for Asian it would be 1,400 (just making up a number).     But to knock a group down based on vague attribute like "courage" is total bs - how on earth do they even measure it ... like asian gets 5/10 for courage, and everyone else gets 10/10?  

Totally disagree, take out Asian and replace it with Mexican, Muslim or Jew and they would shut them down.

yes i get that ... i see racism as intending to harm a group & having a hate factor. In this case, I don't think they had a "hate" factor .. just trying to be overly PC .. and got themselves into this situation.  What I think they tried to do - they want to get some minority in by lowering the standard for them.. and next thing that happened, those minority told them,  what you think we are stupid & we need you to lower your standard?  So to be be politically correct - they created other criteria to accomplish same thing.  
#5
 x 0 x 0
It’s not exactly racism. It’s racial discrimination. They’re allegedly discriminating against Asian applicants in order to reach their goal of diversity, not out of some belief of Asian inferiority. Either way it’s disgusting if true. The school should be ashamed and held accountable.
Bilal Powell superfan
#6
 x 0 x 0
Ivy League schools have never used a linear judgement system such as SAT scores or GPA with a cutoff below which or above which "everyone" would be rejected/accepted. It's always been that there is no set list of traits, scores, or achievements that would guarantee admission. Rather, an objective look at an individual's qualifications for acceptance, including leadership potential, character assessments, assertiveness, curiosity, civic and social involvement, as well as academic and test performance would be taken and a complete picture of an applicant as an individual would decide things.

This is by design but also in theory, resistant to biases such as cultural/racial limitations and the like. It has led to a wide variety of people being able to enter those schools.

The same thing is done at military academies. They don't want mere bookworms. There was a time where the Coast Guard Academy was the toughest military university of the bunch to get into and the reason why was because non-athletic people had practically zero change to get in. Didn't mean you had to play a particular sport, but you had to have academics and books smarts balanced by good physical condition and displayed success with teamwork and team goals.

Personally I think it's a better system. But then I've always been against grading on curves rather than assessing individual accomplishment and judging accordingly as well.
When you wish upon a star you're actually a few million years late. That star is dead. Just like your dreams.
#7
 x 0 x 0
(07-09-2018, 11:38 PM)HerrinSchadenfreude Wrote:  Ivy League schools have never used a linear judgement system such as SAT scores or GPA with a cutoff below which or above which "everyone" would be rejected/accepted. It's always been that there is no set list of traits, scores, or achievements that would guarantee admission. Rather, an objective look at an individual's qualifications for acceptance, including leadership potential, character assessments, assertiveness, curiosity, civic and social involvement, as well as academic and test performance would be taken and a complete picture of an applicant as an individual would decide things.

This is by design but also in theory, resistant to biases such as cultural/racial limitations and the like. It has led to a wide variety of people being able to enter those schools.

The same thing is done at military academies. They don't want mere bookworms. There was a time where the Coast Guard Academy was the toughest military university of the bunch to get into and the reason why was because non-athletic people had practically zero change to get in. Didn't mean you had to play a particular sport, but you had to have academics and books smarts balanced by good physical condition and displayed success with teamwork and team goals.

Personally I think it's a better system. But then I've always been against grading on curves rather than assessing individual accomplishment and judging accordingly as well.

of course they have .. are you kidding me?   Yes they have exceptions, but you're not going to get into Ivy with 1100 out of 1600 score in SAT.  And I'm fairly certain they've target SAT scores that differ by ethnicity.   Obviously they wont tell you that outright.
#8
 x 0 x 0
(07-10-2018, 08:57 AM)apollo04 Wrote:  
(07-09-2018, 11:38 PM)HerrinSchadenfreude Wrote:  Ivy League schools have never used a linear judgement system such as SAT scores or GPA with a cutoff below which or above which "everyone" would be rejected/accepted. It's always been that there is no set list of traits, scores, or achievements that would guarantee admission. Rather, an objective look at an individual's qualifications for acceptance, including leadership potential, character assessments, assertiveness, curiosity, civic and social involvement, as well as academic and test performance would be taken and a complete picture of an applicant as an individual would decide things.

This is by design but also in theory, resistant to biases such as cultural/racial limitations and the like. It has led to a wide variety of people being able to enter those schools.

The same thing is done at military academies. They don't want mere bookworms. There was a time where the Coast Guard Academy was the toughest military university of the bunch to get into and the reason why was because non-athletic people had practically zero change to get in. Didn't mean you had to play a particular sport, but you had to have academics and books smarts balanced by good physical condition and displayed success with teamwork and team goals.

Personally I think it's a better system. But then I've always been against grading on curves rather than assessing individual accomplishment and judging accordingly as well.

of course they have .. are you kidding me?   Yes they have exceptions, but you're not going to get into Ivy with 1100 out of 1600 score in SAT.  And I'm fairly certain they've target SAT scores that differ by ethnicity.   Obviously they wont tell you that outright.

When you attribute behavior to race, it is discriminatory.  Even if it is spot on.
"Do not correct a fool, or he will hate you; correct a wise man and he will appreciate you." ~PROVERBS 9:8



#9
 x 0 x 0
(07-10-2018, 08:57 AM)apollo04 Wrote:  
(07-09-2018, 11:38 PM)HerrinSchadenfreude Wrote:  Ivy League schools have never used a linear judgement system such as SAT scores or GPA with a cutoff below which or above which "everyone" would be rejected/accepted. It's always been that there is no set list of traits, scores, or achievements that would guarantee admission. Rather, an objective look at an individual's qualifications for acceptance, including leadership potential, character assessments, assertiveness, curiosity, civic and social involvement, as well as academic and test performance would be taken and a complete picture of an applicant as an individual would decide things.

This is by design but also in theory, resistant to biases such as cultural/racial limitations and the like. It has led to a wide variety of people being able to enter those schools.

The same thing is done at military academies. They don't want mere bookworms. There was a time where the Coast Guard Academy was the toughest military university of the bunch to get into and the reason why was because non-athletic people had practically zero change to get in. Didn't mean you had to play a particular sport, but you had to have academics and books smarts balanced by good physical condition and displayed success with teamwork and team goals.

Personally I think it's a better system. But then I've always been against grading on curves rather than assessing individual accomplishment and judging accordingly as well.

of course they have .. are you kidding me?   Yes they have exceptions, but you're not going to get into Ivy with 1100 out of 1600 score in SAT.  And I'm fairly certain they've target SAT scores that differ by ethnicity.   Obviously they wont tell you that outright.

No I'm sorry they have not, and it's been in their literature for decades that they have not. It is not "exception" based. There was never any minimum SAT cutoff score above which you were going to get in. There was never a guaranteed SAT/GPA combination that was going to get you in. Their evaluations were nothing like UC schools or other state run schools that abide by that sort of thing and would get them subjected to questions of bias based on tests that favor certain cultural backgrounds over others.

That most people who enter those schools are rocking SAT scores in the 1300's and above does not indicate that they had to in order to get in. Correlation is not causation. Those people were being groomed to get into schools of that caliber and their parents had a very firm grasp on what sort of civic, scholastic, and character based backgrounds their kids had to show in order to have the best chance. Most kids that don't have it in the rest of those areas don't usually come popping out of the test facilities with 1500's on their tests either, and that's either pure aptitude issues or it's failure to take things seriously or it's lack of preparation and work ethic. All things that mark an applicant with a high chance for success.

Again. Happens in tandem, but not necessarily causative.
When you wish upon a star you're actually a few million years late. That star is dead. Just like your dreams.
#10
 x 0 x 0
(07-10-2018, 05:01 PM)HerrinSchadenfreude Wrote:  
(07-10-2018, 08:57 AM)apollo04 Wrote:  of course they have .. are you kidding me?   Yes they have exceptions, but you're not going to get into Ivy with 1100 out of 1600 score in SAT.  And I'm fairly certain they've target SAT scores that differ by ethnicity.   Obviously they wont tell you that outright.

No I'm sorry they have not, and it's been in their literature for decades that they have not. It is not "exception" based. There was never any minimum SAT cutoff score above which you were going to get in. There was never a guaranteed SAT/GPA combination that was going to get you in. Their evaluations were nothing like UC schools or other state run schools that abide by that sort of thing and would get them subjected to questions of bias based on tests that favor certain cultural backgrounds over others.

That most people who enter those schools are rocking SAT scores in the 1300's and above does not indicate that they had to in order to get in. Correlation is not causation. Those people were being groomed to get into schools of that caliber and their parents had a very firm grasp on what sort of civic, scholastic, and character based backgrounds their kids had to show in order to have the best chance. Most kids that don't have it in the rest of those areas don't usually come popping out of the test facilities with 1500's on their tests either, and that's either pure aptitude issues or it's failure to take things seriously or it's lack of preparation and work ethic. All things that mark an applicant with a high chance for success.

Again. Happens in tandem, but not necessarily causative.

If they said the same thing about Muslims they would be shut down, lets cut the bullshit.
"Do not correct a fool, or he will hate you; correct a wise man and he will appreciate you." ~PROVERBS 9:8



#11
 x 0 x 0
https://harvardlawreview.org/2017/12/the-harvard-plan-that-failed-asian-americans/
Bilal Powell superfan
#12
 x 1 x 0
(07-10-2018, 05:12 PM)Dr_Pitbull Wrote:  
(07-10-2018, 05:01 PM)HerrinSchadenfreude Wrote:  No I'm sorry they have not, and it's been in their literature for decades that they have not. It is not "exception" based. There was never any minimum SAT cutoff score above which you were going to get in. There was never a guaranteed SAT/GPA combination that was going to get you in. Their evaluations were nothing like UC schools or other state run schools that abide by that sort of thing and would get them subjected to questions of bias based on tests that favor certain cultural backgrounds over others.

That most people who enter those schools are rocking SAT scores in the 1300's and above does not indicate that they had to in order to get in. Correlation is not causation. Those people were being groomed to get into schools of that caliber and their parents had a very firm grasp on what sort of civic, scholastic, and character based backgrounds their kids had to show in order to have the best chance. Most kids that don't have it in the rest of those areas don't usually come popping out of the test facilities with 1500's on their tests either, and that's either pure aptitude issues or it's failure to take things seriously or it's lack of preparation and work ethic. All things that mark an applicant with a high chance for success.

Again. Happens in tandem, but not necessarily causative.

If they said the same thing about Muslims they would be shut down, lets cut the bullshit.

If they said the same thing about Christians and I said the same thing in response, your head would pop off. If the people being discriminated against supposedly were Black, you'd be making MY argument, and almost everyone whose weighed in so far would be fist pumping your every word.

The bullshit is cut!
When you wish upon a star you're actually a few million years late. That star is dead. Just like your dreams.
#13
 x 0 x 0
(07-10-2018, 07:16 PM)HerrinSchadenfreude Wrote:  
(07-10-2018, 05:12 PM)Dr_Pitbull Wrote:  If they said the same thing about Muslims they would be shut down, lets cut the bullshit.

If they said the same thing about Christians and I said the same thing in response, your head would pop off. If the people being discriminated against supposedly were Black, you'd be making MY argument, and almost everyone whose weighed in so far would be fist pumping your every word.

The bullshit is cut!

I probably would not pump my fist because Christians are attacked on a daily basis and no one really fucking cares.  The left loves Muslims though, and it's funny to anyone who understands the game.  Purely moronic!
"Do not correct a fool, or he will hate you; correct a wise man and he will appreciate you." ~PROVERBS 9:8



#14
 x 1 x 0
Read the study results in that article. If that has held up over this long a period of time, then at Harvard, which those figures seem to target in particular, I'd have to say that in practice, they might definitely have some questions to answer. I didn't apply to Harvard. I applied to Yale, NYU, Princeton, and a few others, and then ultimately chose to go to Pepperdine. I do remember that at the Ivy League schools I applied to, much was mentioned about overall qualities and what organizations and social/civics activities I had undertaken throughout my schooling, including any outside activities. While these weren't rated "above" scholastic achievement, it was very well understood that a well rounded candidate would trump a bookworm who had nothing else to speak for him/herself. And it was described that way by counselors and admissions documents.

I still have to wonder who'd be telling me to cut the bullshit if this had been anyone other than an Asian or White person making these claims against Harvard. Because such claims have been made at many school systems before, and it was always chalked up to the plaintiffs wanting "free stuff", "breaks", or throwing "race cards" to cover laziness and lack of commitment.
When you wish upon a star you're actually a few million years late. That star is dead. Just like your dreams.
#15
 x 0 x 0
Harvard just released a statement that says they believe the cowardly lion in the Wizard of Oz was Asian.
Etrius on Kavanaugh 9/19/18:  "Now he is saying he was there... Something happened and it was just rough sexual horse play."
#16
 x 0 x 0
Schools have said worse about Whites, who cares, Harvard is full of fags, fuck them
I contain unprepared crude & raw humor
#17
 x 0 x 0
Malcolm Gladwell has interesting insight on the topic of affirmative action in his book, David and Goliath. I highly recommend.
Bilal Powell superfan
#18
 x 0 x 0
Malcolm Gladwell has interesting insight on the topic of affirmative action in his book David and Goliath. I highly recommend.
Bilal Powell superfan


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)