Maybe I'm Missing Something: Who is affirmitive action supposed to help?

[chequita guevara]

Anyone here work in a university admissions department? Bunnrgrrl's aunt worked in one. Poor whites do get consideration for their economic circumstances. Which is why I was able to get into DePaul University. My grades certainly didn't get me there (but my test scores helped). Such admissions programs do take into account many factors, and not merely grades and test scores. But many factors are not simply quantifiable, which allows racists to claim that "less qualified" people are being passed over more qualified whites, even when it isn't the case. Should I be passed ahead of someone because I can answer more questions on a test about being a good fireman than someone who isn't 260 lbs and asthamatic? On the numbers alone, yes.

What anti-AA fanatics are keen to forget is that racism and sexism are alive and well and take a psychological toll. It has been proven that being a part of an oppressed group increases likelyhood of self-doubt while being in the power group increases self-confidence, both of which have an impact on test scores. In the real world, however, they don't have as much of an effect.

[Shi Huangdi]

"Poor whites do get consideration for their economic circumstances. Which is why I was able to get into DePaul University."

DePaul's a Vincentian university however which has a specific mission to educate the poor, so that's not a good example .

"Bunnrgrrl's aunt worked in one. Poor whites do get consideration for their economic circumstances."

Show me a source showing that socioeconomics are used naiton-wide as a criteria, and how much of a weight is is compared to affirmative action.

"Such admissions programs do take into account many factors, and not merely grades and test scores. But many factors are not simply quantifiable, which allows racists to claim that "less qualified" people are being passed over more qualified whites, even when it isn't the case"

You should have seen the 60 minutes program on AA. Looking at a certain grade/test score combination for applicants at a certain level they found that about 85% of a sample of minorites and about 10% of whites were accepted(Don't remember exact numbers). When awarding points at U of Michigan, being a minorities was 20 points- 1/4 the total of points for a perfect GPA, and if I remember right, more total points then for a perfect SAT. With minorities being given such a large boost for the color of their skin, it's only natural they'd get accepted in place of whites who had achieved more.

"Such admissions programs do take into account many factors, and not merely grades and test scores."

Grades and test scores, are, however, along with class rank and the rigour of the student's schedule, the best indications we have of how good a student is and how prepared the student is for college. Do they tell the whole picture? No, but they are the best indicators they have. (And Yes, I think it is also stupid how much weight they put to non-academic ECs and essays).

"What anti-AA fanatics are keen to forget is that racism and sexism are alive and well and take a psychological toll. It has been proven that being a part of an oppressed group increases likelyhood of self-doubt while being in the power group increases self-confidence, both of which have an impact on test scores. In the real world, however, they don't have as much of an effect."

Oh, come on.

Psychological toll for being part of an opressed group? Overcoming whatever mental conditions you have is something that many have to deal with. Asians must face racism, and Jews must face anti-semitism, but neither of those groups are given AA. Someone could be in a poor psychological state because they were in a fight with a parent or a girlfriend, but they don't get AA! Or what about the people in highschool who are bullied/beaten up consistently? If anyone is being opressed, they are, but they don't get any AA.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Monk
As for you, DinoDoc, your suggestion "He considers them to be lesser races and not worth consideration", even if it's meant as a joke, says a lot more about you than anybody else around.

You know, I had decided to let this nausea inducing trollish comment go with my earlier comment until I thought about it a little me. Hueji and his whole offensive spiel about how Soviet tanks never rolled down his streets being the reason he was never mad about the name Djugashvili got under my skin and you'll have to forgive me if I decided to reply in kind.

[Hueij]

Hueji and his whole offensive spiel about how Soviet tanks never rolled down his streets being the reason he was never mad about the name Djugashvili...

Well, I just tried to explain why Communism does not give the same knee jerk reaction over here as it does over at your side... If you consider that offensive, I guess that's your problem, not mine...

[Guynemer]

Shi, you've either forgotten certain things from that report, or the report neglected to mention them:

Yes, you get 20 points for being a minority. You can also get 20 points for being poor.

But you CAN'T GET BOTH.

A poor white would get the exact same 20 points that a poor black would get.

You can get that 20 points from being an underrepresented minority, for being poor, for being an athlete, for being from an underrepresented geographical location, or at the "provost's discretion".

If you're a First Nations kid from the middle of nowhere in the UP who's lived in a log cabin his whole life, but plays a mean point guard, and you happened to save the provost's kid's life a few years ago, you don't get 100 points. You get 20.

And the poor white kid from a trailer park (or what-have-you) will also get 20.

I forget exactly how many points you get for being a "legacy", meaning your parents went to UM. It was either 5 or 10 points. You know, it's funny, I don't hear anti-affirmative action folks railing against that.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Hueij
Well, I just tried to explain why Communism does not give the same knee jerk reaction over here as it does over at your side...

Only Eastern Europeans had to deal with the Soviets, so I guess it doesn't matter.

If you consider that offensive, I guess that's your problem

I only have a problem with the feigned aura of moral superiority with which the demands that AS change his nick. You happened to present yourself as a convenient target.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

"Feigned aura of moral superiority" my arse, DinoDoc. What kind of mewling ****wit names himself after a prominent nazi and slaver, then starts doling out threads on how eugenics to wipe out "idiots" is worthwhile, and how bullying people is a really good idea?

I'll tell you what kind of ****wit for nothing, DinoDoc. A deeply stupid and crass little boy. Now take your "feigned aura of moral superiority" and shove it right up your smug and self-satisfied arse until it splits open like an over-ripe plum. Once you start speaking out in defence of unapologetic nazis then you're just another cancer on the face of society.

Go on. Let's see some whining claptrap about failure to condem Stalinists. I could do with a really good laugh at your expense before I start my condemnation of them too.

[Stefu]

Were you as pissed over Djugashvilli?

And from that on, goodish part of Imran's and DinoDoc's postation can be summarized as:

HYPOCRITE! HYPOCRITE! You complained about Albert Speer's nick but not about Djugashvili's nick, so I'm going to dwell on this point instead of facing the music on Albert Speer's nick actually being offensive. You're a hypocrite, and that's what important here!

Hypocrisy argument rides strong!

Maybe Djugashvili's nick is offensive. Hell, it is offensive. Djug chose to name himself after a brutal, bloody-handed tyrant. However, this does nothing to absolve Albert Speer. I mean, what, is there some kind of a balance requirement in Apolyton posts now? "If you complain about something, make sure you complain about something from the other side as well, or you're a HYPOCRITE?"

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ron Jeremy
What kind of mewling ****wit names himself after a prominent nazi and slaver, ...

Now this is what I don't understand about the desire to have AS change his name, why wouldn't you want such idiots to label themselves as such? Why would you want them to blend in with the rest of society, Mr. Gimp?

Once you start speaking out in defence of unapologetic nazis then you're just another cancer on the face of society.

Until you can show me where the nick breaks the forum rules, you can shove your opinions of me where the sun doesn't shine.

I could do with a really good laugh at your expense

I hope I provide you with a little amusement.

[DinoDoc]

God, I am so bored.

Stefu: The fact that AS's nick is offensive doesn't detract from the fact that demanding it be changed is quite frankly stupid.

[Stefu]

How come? If it's offensive people can demand it to be changed. If it doesn't break forum rules then he can't be banned for it - but that doesn't mean people can't complain.

Thanks to (frankly idiotic) American lack of rules concerning child-naming, there are children named "Vagina". That's legal, but that most certainly shouldn't stop people from thinking - and saying - that that's a damn stupid name.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Stefu
How come?

What does it actually accomplish other than making you look like an arse?

[Stefu]

If it can't achieve anything, then why do you care?

[BeBMan]

What should be AS´s new user name?

[Stefu]

"The Fascist Formerly Known As Albert Speer"?