New "Affirmative Action" nonsense

[Derec]

So, a pro "affirmative action" group called "By Any Means Necessary" is protesting a black girl with mediocre grades and ACT scores being rejected from University of Michigan.
Rejected Detroit Student Says U-M Didn’t Accept Her Because of Discrimination
The little punk is even claiming that she "has left the plantation". WTF?
Detroit student joins BAMN to lead protest against U-M admissions office

The worst thing is that such blatant playing of the race card might actually work.

U-M officials tell FOX 2 they share students' concerns about diversity on campus and that increasing the number of unrepresented minorities on campus is a major goal of the administration.
On Wednesday, officials said a series of meetings between administrators and the Black Student Union have produced several steps aiming at increasing the percentage of black students.

Just goes to show how morally bankrupt and ridiculous proponents of so-called "affirmative action" are.

But the Left is still enamored by giving preferential treatment to certain races (and women) in college admissions and are trying to bring it back in California. I hope they fail.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, in her defence, if she'd been better at math or logic she could have gotten into the university on her own merits without requiring any kind of affirmative action.

This is a clear case of discrimination on the part of the university, but it's discrimination against stupid people who'd flunk out of their school and not discrimination against her race.

 

[pegasus8]

I am On The Left Derec Yet I Do

not feel enamored about affirmative action. The girl does not have the grades and the correct ACT scores to even be considered for UM. But if Fox News Detroit needs this girl's poor choice in her reaction of being refused an example of affirmative action gone crazy then of course it would be that good ole "red meat" for the base.

What troubles me is how some need this "poorly" advised kid to go off and do something stupid like this that will affect her life for years to come as an actual example of bad advise is IMO a better interpretation then the right wing manufactured hatred of the "other."

And bro I is a white as the next cracker. Yet affirmative action does serve a purpose. And trust me dude I have experience reverse discrimination in the work place because of people of color. Yet it is still a good tool for society.

I would advise her to shut up, study more and start applying at her local JC. You know as in keeping it real!

Peace

Pegasus

 

[Nice Squirrel]

She doesn't seem to be a good poster child for discrimination. BAMN appears to be a reactionary group. Let them protest. The University can defend it's position. If there is something I am missing, feel free to correct me.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

She doesn't seem to be a good poster child for discrimination. BAMN appears to be a reactionary group. Let them protest. The University can defend it's position. If there is something I am missing, feel free to correct me.

But she does seem to be a good poster child for anti-AA propagandists. Giving them actual instances of people doing things like this allows them extra isolated examples to reference as a large scale social trend that everyone on the left side of the political spectrum actively supports due to our hatred of freedom and apple pie.

The biggest real issue here is that this woman's actions have made her essentially unemployable for the rest of her life. If I were hiring and I did a basic google search as part of a background check, as is becoming more and more common, I wouldn't let this overly litigious freak within a mile of my company and would come up with a completely unrelated reason as to why I didn't hire her. Her parents, lawyers, guidance counsellors and every other adult who knows her should have made her aware of this because their lack of proper action has fucked her.

 

[SimpleDon]

Once again, I believe that affirmative action doesn't work very well and that the main thing that it does is to provoke negative responses to it. I don't think that it would help this woman into a school that she can't handle.

And yes, Affirmative Action is legally protected racial discrimination. I am tried of the periodic threads that we get where people seemingly have just realized this. The program is designed that way.

The purpose of affirmative action is to try to make up for about 400 years of legally protected discrimination against minorities and women. Here are the choices available to opponents of AA rather than to embarrass themselves by repeatedly pointing out the blatantly obvious fact that it is racial discrimination.

You could come up with a more effective way of erasing the residual effects of 400 years of legally sanctioned racial and sexual discrimination. I for one would be all ears to hear it.

Or you could argue that this poorly conceived program has served its purpose and now minorities have are now even with whites. I think that this would be a hard case to make but you never know.

Or you could try to argue that no one who is alive today is suffering from the effects of the 400 years of legally sanctioned racial and sexual discrimination. I again feel that this would be a hard argument to make, there is a lot of data that racial minorities and women still are not on an even footing with white males.

But you can't argue that the program is racial discrimination and that it should be stopped for that reason. Of course it is racial discrimination. It has to be. It is a "duh!" moment.

 

[fromderinside]

This story says three things to me.

First, there is another reason to discriminate against those you don't want, like blacks etc., for a single act forever.

Way to go haters.

I'd need to see other things about her accomplishments and potential to reject the criteria the U used to reject her. But, to claim either she is now unemployable or that AA is just a rabid apologist dog is throwing out a lot of babies.

Seems to me the one who chose this 'example' forgets those on his side are the Christy white ones who spout stuff like blacks are stupid, killers, inferior, etc even before some of those so denigrated commit foo paws like smoking crack or complaining things aren't fair.

Take the lesson. There are those on the outside who want to get in. Rather than finding ways to reinforce your prejudices how about finding ways to let them in.

OK.

Sermon over.

 

[Metaphor]

Once again, I believe that affirmative action doesn't work very well and that the main thing that it does is to provoke negative responses to it. I don't think that it would help this woman into a school that she can't handle.

And yes, Affirmative Action is legally protected racial discrimination. I am tried of the periodic threads that we get where people seemingly have just realized this. The program is designed that way.

The purpose of affirmative action is to try to make up for about 400 years of legally protected discrimination against minorities and women. Here are the choices available to opponents of AA rather than to embarrass themselves by repeatedly pointing out the blatantly obvious fact that it is racial discrimination.

You could come up with a more effective way of erasing the residual effects of 400 years of legally sanctioned racial and sexual discrimination. I for one would be all ears to hear it.

Or you could argue that this poorly conceived program has served its purpose and now minorities have are now even with whites. I think that this would be a hard case to make but you never know.

Or you could try to argue that no one who is alive today is suffering from the effects of the 400 years of legally sanctioned racial and sexual discrimination. I again feel that this would be a hard argument to make, there is a lot of data that racial minorities and women still are not on an even footing with white males.

But you can't argue that the program is racial discrimination and that it should be stopped for that reason. Of course it is racial discrimination. It has to be. It is a "duh!" moment.

SimpleDon, you're giving too much credit to supporters of AA. The threads don't get anywhere useful because supporters won't even get out of the starting gate and admit AA is discrimination.

 

[Metaphor]

This story says three things to me.

First, there is another reason to discriminate against those you don't want, like blacks etc., for a single act forever.

Way to go haters.

I'd need to see other things about her accomplishments and potential to reject the criteria the U used to reject her. But, to claim either she is now unemployable or that AA is just a rabid apologist dog is throwing out a lot of babies.

Seems to me the one who chose this 'example' forgets those on his side are the Christy white ones who spout stuff like blacks are stupid, killers, inferior, etc even before some of those so denigrated commit foo paws like smoking crack or complaining things aren't fair.

Take the lesson. There are those on the outside who want to get in. Rather than finding ways to reinforce your prejudices how about finding ways to let them in.

OK.

Sermon over.

Huh?

Getting rejected for a particular University and never being 100% sure why is what you get with the American system, because the American system is plagued with opaque, 'holistic', and ultimately subjective, decision makers.

I'm not sure who 'those on the outside' are. Do you mean those who don't have the grades and aptitude scores to get in? Why should any University 'find ways' to let them in?
Universities build up their brands by being selective (if they're elite). How many undergraduates with an ACT score of 23 do you think MIT let in last year? (Answer: zero).

 

[Underseer]

Ah, this tired old routine, eh?

As the saying goes, "the plural of anecdote is not data."

Despite all these anecdotal stories, when we use actual scientific methodology to examine these issues, we find that overall, blacks need to be more qualified than their white counterparts to get the same jobs and promotions.

Example: http://www.chicagobooth.edu/capideas/spring03/racialbias.html

If the facts really were in their favor, then rightists would use statistics-based studies to prove their case. Instead, they only use anecdotes to "prove" their claim that whites have to be more qualified than blacks to get the same jobs and promotions.

Worst of all, they put all of these anecdotes under the banner of "affirmative action" despite the fact that the term refers to a fairly specific thing: if you can prove that you were discriminated against on the job and can prove it in a court of law, you can sue. That's it. It does not apply to things like university admissions.

They deliberately conflate other things with affirmative action because affirmative action is the real target. They want to make it impossible for people to sue even if they can prove in a court of law that they have been discriminated against, thus preserving white privilege.

After all, rightists are exactly the kind of people who know they can't get ahead if they have to compete on a level playing field, so they need the extra boost that legalized discrimination provides them.

 

[Metaphor]

Worst of all, they put all of these anecdotes under the banner of "affirmative action" despite the fact that the term refers to a fairly specific thing: if you can prove that you were discriminated against on the job and can prove it in a court of law, you can sue. That's it. It does not apply to things like university admissions.

Anti-discrimination and affirmative action are not the same thing. In fact, they are the exact opposite. Anti-discrimination laws aim to prevent discrimination based on race. Affirmative action laws encourage it.

Of course affirmative action is present at Universities. How on earth could you think it was not?

They deliberately conflate other things with affirmative action because affirmative action is the real target. They want to make it impossible for people to sue even if they can prove in a court of law that they have been discriminated against, thus preserving white privilege.

If you have been discriminated against because of your race, you can seek redress with anti-discrimination laws.

After all, rightists are exactly the kind of people who know they can't get ahead if they have to compete on a level playing field, so they need the extra boost that legalized discrimination provides them.

Affirmative action is legalised discrimination. Some graduate schools (law and medicine) typically provide the most egregious examples of this. Statistics show rampant discrimination against Asians, and to a lesser extent against Whites, to favour Blacks and Latinos.

 

[laughing dog]

According to the Detroit News

Kimbrough is a senior at University Prep Academy High School, one of Detroit’s top charter schools. She scored 23 on the ACT — a college readiness test with a possible high score of 36. Last year, she was executive director of her school’s National Honor Society; this year, she is president.

Outside academics, Kimbrough is a member of a youth leadership program at Alternatives for Girls, a local nonprofit serving homeless and at-risk girls. She is a member of her school’s championship debate team; last weekend, she and a classmate won the Urban Debate National Championship Tournament in Washington.

(source: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140415/SCHOOLS/304150030). That appears inconsistent with the OP characterization of her as a "punk".

While I don't know about the U. of Mi. entrance standards (and I expect neither does the OP), Ms. Kimbrough does not appear to me to automatically disqualify her based on the totality of the available record.

 

[fromderinside]

Hell, we don't want to legislate why a 34 ACT might not be a good indicator of the abilities and capabilities of a ghetto raised child do we.

Reed, one of the best evidence based (second highest percentage of doctoral students) productive schools over the past five years, doesn't participate in the newsWeek popularity contest based on traditional standards. So one shouldn't go to Reed because it isn't among the top fifty on any of those ratings, right?

The same applies to any student who ranks in the top five or ten percent of her class will likely succeed wherever they go to school. But, if the goal is to capture the highest ranked families through student selection the ACT is a very fine "like successful people already there" indicator.

I think we want the best and brightest regardless of their heritage so shouldn't we get rid of heritage related markers. I'd be much more satisfied with good grades from many teachers, great recommendations from local folk, and demonstration of strong determination to succeed indices like elections, athletics, music, academic competition, etc.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Affirmative action is legalised discrimination. Some graduate schools (law and medicine) typically provide the most egregious examples of this. Statistics show rampant discrimination against Asians, and to a lesser extent against Whites, to favour Blacks and Latinos.

There seems to be a drive to equal the numbers, rather than address barriers or look to individual circumstances or intellect or skill. If an identified group (race and gender mostly) is under represented in a program, or doing worse on average than others on test scores, that itself proves discrimination against the group. Discrimination against the group means discrimination against all who can identify with the group, even the privileged, and so we discriminate for anybody who has the right skin colour or genetalia. To do otherwise would be racist / sexist.

So, yes, people who are asian get discriminated against, because there are already so many other asian people who made it. Sorry kid, you're parents are from Japan and you look just like them. You made the mistake of being born asian. That used to mean we discriminated against you, took your stuff, worked you to death to build our railroads, charged you extra taxes, and one time rounded you up in conentration camps. We did that because you were seen as bad. But now, we see you as too good, so we need to treat you unfairly in this special new way. We are giving the spot you clearly earned with your superior test results to that one balck kid who applied, and scored sort of ok. We do this to show everybody how not racist we are.

 

[Derec]

Despite all these anecdotal stories, when we use actual scientific methodology to examine these issues, we find that overall, blacks need to be more qualified than their white counterparts to get the same jobs and promotions.

Example: http://www.chicagobooth.edu/capideas/spring03/racialbias.html

Physician heal thyself when talking about "scientific methodology" because this isn't it. For one, they used "ghetto" names and made them a proxy for black race vs. mainstream names for whites. Why not use redneck names to compare them to ghetto names? Besides, even if what you are saying were true it still does not justify overt, codified racial discrimination that "affirmative action" presents.

And I am not talking anecdote either - the very concept of "affirmative action" policies groups like BAMN demand is to admit less qualified applicants of certain racial (blacks, hispanics) groups or women over better qualified applicants who aren't.

If the facts really were in their favor, then rightists would use statistics-based studies to prove their case. Instead, they only use anecdotes to "prove" their claim that whites have to be more qualified than blacks to get the same jobs and promotions.

You are shifting the goalposts - we are talking specifically about college admissions in this thread and policy that result in racial discrimination. The issue of "affirmative action" in the workplace is a different issue and relevant with employers that have racial preferences in hiring. For example the New Haven Fire Department that threw out results of a promotion test simply because not enough "minorities" passed. That is a blatant case of racial discrimination.

Worst of all, they put all of these anecdotes under the banner of "affirmative action" despite the fact that the term refers to a fairly specific thing: if you can prove that you were discriminated against on the job and can prove it in a court of law, you can sue. That's it. It does not apply to things like university admissions.

Please, now you are just playing semantics. That may be how the program was envisioned initially but long since "affirmative action" has changed its meaning to "racial/gender preferences" in contemporary parlance. Words change their meaning - see for example how the Founders used "democracy" vs. our contemporary usage.

They deliberately conflate other things with affirmative action because affirmative action is the real target. They want to make it impossible for people to sue even if they can prove in a court of law that they have been discriminated against, thus preserving white privilege.

Nonsense! The aim is the system of racial preferences, commonly known as "affirmative action". For example, Proposition 209 prohibits "state government institutions from considering race, sex, or ethnicity, specifically in the areas of public employment, public contracting or public education." It does nothing to prohibit being able to sue for actual discrimination. In fact, it may open the door to discrimination lawsuits if government officials want to use racial preferences illegally.

After all, rightists are exactly the kind of people who know they can't get ahead if they have to compete on a level playing field, so they need the extra boost that legalized discrimination provides them.

And Leftists are exactly the kind of people that attack people personally when they run out of arguments ...
Besides, the girl in the OP does not strike me as a right winger exactly ...

 

[Derec]

Hell, we don't want to legislate why a 34 ACT might not be a good indicator of the abilities and capabilities of a ghetto raised child do we.

She was denied admission because of her grades and ACT scores compared to other applicants (UM is more selective; she should have applied to schools better suited to her academic achievement.) Why should she be held to a lower standard just because of the color of her skin?

I think we want the best and brightest regardless of their heritage so shouldn't we get rid of heritage related markers.

You mean like color of one's skin or concavity of their genitals?

I'd be much more satisfied with good grades from many teachers, great recommendations from local folk, and demonstration of strong determination to succeed indices like elections, athletics, music, academic competition, etc.

Grades are one factor (where she was below average for UM applicants as well) but grades suffer from school based differences and, in recent years, grade inflation.

 

[Derec]

According to the Detroit News
(source: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140415/SCHOOLS/304150030). That appears inconsistent with the OP characterization of her as a "punk".

Her behavior at that pro-racial discrimination rally does. Did you watch the video at the My Fox Detroit link?

While I don't know about the U. of Mi. entrance standards (and I expect neither does the OP), Ms. Kimbrough does not appear to me to automatically disqualify her based on the totality of the available record.

According to the first link I posted, she has 3.5 GPA where 3.82 is the average GPA for UM freshmen. She also scored quit subpar on her ACTs. UM is a very selective school and only admits 37% of their applicants. Kimbaugh should have applied to a less selective school - Spartans maybe?

 

[Derec]

First, there is another reason to discriminate against those you don't want, like blacks etc., for a single act forever.

She is not being denied admission because she was black but because her academic performance was subpar compared to those UM admitted. She wants to be admitted because she is black to "increase diversity".

Way to go haters.

In fact her rant showed a lot of hatred.

I'd need to see other things about her accomplishments and potential to reject the criteria the U used to reject her. But, to claim either she is now unemployable or that AA is just a rabid apologist dog is throwing out a lot of babies.

No babies in the bilge water that is AA. The claim she is now unemployable stems from the fact that her name, easily googlable, is now indelibly linked to her little rant - caught on video. Ultimately I disagree that she is unemployable - I am sure she will be found on staff of some racial pressure group or other before long.

Seems to me the one who chose this 'example' forgets those on his side are the Christy white ones who spout stuff like blacks are stupid, killers, inferior, etc even before some of those so denigrated commit foo paws like smoking crack or complaining things aren't fair.

First of all, nobody "chose" that example. She placed herself in limelight voluntarily. Second, there are plenty of blacks that qualify for schools like UM (she is not one of them!) and plenty of whites who don't. It should not be about race. Thirdly, nice going implying people that don't agree with you about AA are racists.

Take the lesson. There are those on the outside who want to get in. Rather than finding ways to reinforce your prejudices how about finding ways to let them in.

Most people do not belong in elite universities. Yelling how it is "discrimination" to let her in just because she is black does not make her more worthy either.

 

[laughing dog]

Her behavior at that pro-racial discrimination rally does. Did you watch the video at the My Fox Detroit link?

I saw an upset young black woman who was not inciting violence nor acting inappropriately. Was her gender or race that makes you think she is a "punk"?

According to the first link I posted, she has 3.5 GPA where 3.82 is the average GPA for UM freshmen. She also scored quit subpar on her ACTs.

Your response indicates a lack of knowledge about statistics. Averages without standard deviations are relatively pointless. Without more information about the school's entrance standards, etc...., her overall record does not appear automatically inadequate as your OP implied.

UM is a very selective school and only admits 37% of their applicants. Kimbaugh should have applied to a less selective school - Spartans maybe?

Or perhaps your alma mater.

 

[Derec]

not feel enamored about affirmative action.

Yet you defend it below?

But if Fox News Detroit needs this girl's poor choice in her reaction of being refused an example of affirmative action gone crazy then of course it would be that good ole "red meat" for the base.

It's not like Fox sought her out. She protested, quite loudly. And she is an example of feelings of entitlement AA culture brings.

What troubles me is how some need this "poorly" advised kid to go off and do something stupid like this that will affect her life for years to come as an actual example of bad advise is IMO a better interpretation then the right wing manufactured hatred of the "other."

Not sure what you mean here? Where is the "hatred of the other"? I, and many others, think college admissions should be based one one's individual merits and not on things like race and gender. That is not hateful. That is not even "right wing". It is in fact "liberal" and "progressive" in the true sense of these words.

And bro I is a white as the next cracker. Yet affirmative action does serve a purpose.

Like what? Rather than allowing people into highly selective schools when their academics do not warrant that more effort must be placed in removing systemic inequalities of access to education from an early age, as much as possible (given how important parents are especially at very early ages it can not be achieved completely by such programs though).

And trust me dude I have experience reverse discrimination in the work place because of people of color. Yet it is still a good tool for society.

“A liberal is a man too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel. ”
― Robert Frost
Very true, at least for the "modern" American kind of liberal.