SCOTUS 6-3 rules Affirmative Action over in higher education admissions

[banterfly]

On 6/29/2023 at 1:58 PM, Bloo said:

It's... startling that many seem to think this isn't going to directly result in admission discrimination. 

 

This is a beyond f***ed up decision and it needs to be fought to death. The Supreme Court also needs to be reformed massively. But I expect little to no efforts by the Democrats to challenge or combat this. They will just sigh and say "vote".

Can you explain how merit-based enrolment is discriminatory? 

[Vermillion]

 

[Tropez]

16 minutes ago, banterfly said:

How did AA help white women?

Affirmative action was created to help people’s that faced discrimination. White women are women. Women faced discrimination due to their gender. AA has allowed women to get higher employment opportunities, and attain acceptance into colleges. 

[banterfly]

50 minutes ago, Tropez said:

Affirmative action was created to help people’s that faced discrimination. White women are women. Women faced discrimination due to their gender. AA has allowed women to get higher employment opportunities, and attain acceptance into colleges. 

There are gender equality laws for this. Maybe just make sure this is enforced?

[Tropez]

24 minutes ago, banterfly said:

There are gender equality laws for this. Maybe just make sure this is enforced?

The point of AA was ensuring equal opportunity for everyone regardless of gender, race, religion, etc. I don’t see what you are arguing here. 

[banterfly]

6 minutes ago, Tropez said:

The point of AA was ensuring equal opportunity for everyone regardless of gender, race, religion, etc. I don’t see what you are arguing here. 

No, we have non-discrimination laws for that.

 

AA is positive discrimination- giving more opportunity to certain groups. It's far from ensuring "equality" because it based on demographic rather than merit.

[Communion]

52 minutes ago, banterfly said:

There are gender equality laws for this. Maybe just make sure this is enforced?

You don't seem to understand how AA worked. It was the idea that, when faced with students of equal merit, the school should pick the student from a demographic that is under-represented in their current student body.

 

It was only "discriminatory" against Asian American students in schools where Asian Americans were already overwhelmingly represented (there is a question of how class was more dominant to people's own identities than race when considering how particularly affluent Asian Americans historically showed little interest in HBCUs & MSIs that have been deemed as somehow serving a lesser-achieving rank of students than elite colleges.) 

 

White women benefited the most from this policy when their womanhood was what considered them an under-represented demographic, given the long history of academia being an institute for men and men only. 

Edited July 2, 2023 by Communion

[Chiidish]

2 hours ago, banterfly said:

Can you explain how merit-based enrolment is discriminatory? 

Who sets the “merit”? who has most access to resources that allow people to accumulate “merit”? Who gets to judge said “merit” and act out biases based on expectations about “merit”? 
 

be serious. 

Edited July 2, 2023 by Chiidish

[banterfly]

38 minutes ago, Chiidish said:

Who sets the “merit”? who has most access to resources that allow people to accumulate “merit”? Who gets to judge said “merit” and act out biases based on expectations about “merit”? 
 

be serious. 

Ok, so now you see the problem? It's access to these resources. Why not focus on access to these resources rather than making demographic quotas?

[Tropez]

1 hour ago, banterfly said:

No, we have non-discrimination laws for that.

 

AA is positive discrimination- giving more opportunity to certain groups. It's far from ensuring "equality" because it based on demographic rather than merit.

That is literally not what I am talking about. I am talking about the fact that white women benefited the most from AA. Perhaps you’re are arguing with the wrong person. 

[banterfly]

1 hour ago, Communion said:

You don't seem to understand how AA worked. It was the idea that, when faced with students of equal merit, the school should pick the student from a demographic that is under-represented in their current student body.

 

It was only "discriminatory" against Asian American students in schools where Asian Americans were already overwhelmingly represented (there is a question of how class was more dominant to people's own identities than race when considering how particularly affluent Asian Americans historically showed little interest in HBCUs & MSIs that have been deemed as somehow serving a lesser-achieving rank of students than elite colleges.) 

 

White women benefited the most from this policy when their womanhood was what considered them an under-represented demographic, given the long history of academia being an institute for men and men only. 

This is ideally what affirmative action should be, right? And yet this is not what's happening in the overwhelming majority of cases. Acceptance rates are much higher for certain POCs than the rest of the groups.

[Communion]

11 minutes ago, banterfly said:

 Acceptance rates are much higher for certain POCs than the rest of the groups.

Asian Americans have the highest college acceptance rates, in part due to years of benefitting from AA at its start?

[Bloo]

3 hours ago, banterfly said:

And yet AA, being race-based, isn't racist?

Just say you don’t know what you’re talking about a move along. AA was put in place to combat subconscious biases that confirm people generally admit and hire people that remind them of themselves. When higher education and other economic opportunities are dominated by White men, it becomes blaringly obvious that there needs to be some system to artificially nudge candidates from marginalized communities if they are equally as qualified.

[Bloo]

1 hour ago, banterfly said:

AA is positive discrimination- giving more opportunity to certain groups. It's far from ensuring "equality" because it based on demographic rather than merit.

You have one hell of an argument to make (so I hope you have data) to convince anyone that AA results in admittance of students from marginalized communities solely based on demographics.

[banterfly]

22 minutes ago, Communion said:

Asian Americans have the highest college acceptance rates, in part due to years of benefitting from AA at its start?

This is absolutely false. The acceptance rates for White and Asians dropped significantly after AA. 

 

https://archive.ph/20140927012454/https://www.aamc.org/data/facts/applicantmatriculant/157998/mcat-gpa-grid-by-selected-race-ethnicity.html

[banterfly]

24 minutes ago, Communion said:

Asian Americans have the highest college acceptance rates, in part due to years of benefitting from AA at its start?

Why dyo think Asian Americans started this lawsuit?

 

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2015/5/16/complaint-federal-harvard-admissions/

 

[banterfly]

22 minutes ago, Bloo said:

Just say you don’t know what you’re talking about a move along. AA was put in place to combat subconscious biases that confirm people generally admit and hire people that remind them of themselves. When higher education and other economic opportunities are dominated by White men, it becomes blaringly obvious that there needs to be some system to artificially nudge candidates from marginalized communities if they are equally as qualified.

Not true at all, if you have groups with the same scores, you will find that acceptance rates differ a lot. And the difference is influenced by race-based decisions for purposes of diversity.

[banterfly]

22 minutes ago, Bloo said:

You have one hell of an argument to make (so I hope you have data) to convince anyone that AA results in admittance of students from marginalized communities solely based on demographics.

That is the crux of the criticisms against AA. I'm just echoing this criticism and why, for some reasons, it may benefit all of us to eliminate bias. We can't combat prejudice with more prejudice.

 

[Bloo]

1 minute ago, banterfly said:

Not true at all, if you have groups with the same scores, you will find that acceptance rates differ a lot. And the difference is influenced by race-based decisions for purposes of diversity.

1. Provide references.
2. Making decisions to improve diversity of a student body is not a bad decision. Your argument however is that the decision is solely based on race, meaning that the admitted students didn’t have the grades to deserve it. Again, provide data.
3. It is literally a good thing for a student body to be diverse in a college setting as research has shown diverse collegiate experiences has several benefits to all students [x].

[Bloo]

2 minutes ago, banterfly said:

That is the crux of the criticisms against AA. I'm just echoing this criticism and why, for some reasons, it may benefit all of us to eliminate bias. We can't combat prejudice with more prejudice.

This is honestly one of the most anti-historical things imaginable.

 

AA was put in place because marginalized people weren’t being admitted even when they were wholly deserving of it. That’s the entire point. You cannot combat racism passively. Racism has to be actively combated. 

[Horizon Flame]

Affirmative Action was intended to be temporary. That’s how it was able to get through in the first place. It was never constitutional. However, over time, it was deemed third rail politics and no one wanted to take it on.
 

 

[Communion]

37 minutes ago, banterfly said:

This is absolutely false. The acceptance rates for White and Asians dropped significantly after AA. 

 

https://archive.ph/20140927012454/https://www.aamc.org/data/facts/applicantmatriculant/157998/mcat-gpa-grid-by-selected-race-ethnicity.html

You've provided a dead link and one that proposes data for medical schools only. 

[banterfly]

Those saying AA is not about race have absolutely no idea what they're talking about. 

[Horizon Flame]

 

[banterfly]

5 hours ago, Horizon Flame said:

 

People like her are one of the reasons why the majority of the US are against AA.