<p>It is purely because of jealousy. The vast majority of Asians are smarter, harder working and more successful than most other races in America. A generalization that will offend some I’m sure, but truthful nonetheless. I personally am extremely jealous of the Asian women that never seem to age like the rest of us!</p>
<p>Here we go again</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My point isn’t even to prove that “AA” kids enroll in physics or math courses as much as everyone else. My point is that it doesn’t matter if they don’t. I know for a fact that at Yale, 55% of all majors are split between seven majors: History, English, Economics, Psychology, Biology, American Studies, and Political Science. Of all those majors, none of them require anything higher than, perhaps, multivariable calculus. Every single one is an “easy” program.</p>
<p>I’m basing my numbers on this [link[/url</a>] distributed by the Yale University.</p>
<p>So if, say, Latino students major in these seven subjects at a rate of 65% or even 75%, what does it even mean? It means that more Latino students major in those subjects and absolutely nothing more. It means that the median Latino student has the same major preferences as the median Yale student.</p>
<p>What is an ‘easy’ program anyway? Yes, some majors are more rigorous than others, and rigorous majors tend to be less popular than others. But doesn’t the very fact that the majority of Yale students, some of the best students in the world, continue do not major in rigorous majors like math and physics just prove that students chose majors according to their interest rather than their ability?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So? Non-Jewish white kids are skewed toward more easier courses than any other race. I know that at Harvard 55 is the hardest math course available. According to [url=<a href=“http://www.american.com/archive/2008/march-april-magazine-contents/why-can2019t-a-woman-be-more-like-a-man]this”>http://www.american.com/archive/2008/march-april-magazine-contents/why-can2019t-a-woman-be-more-like-a-man]this</a> article](<a href=“http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:PF_aVrWPmE0J:www.yale.edu/oir/open/pdf_public/W038_YC_Popular_Majors.pdf+most+popular+majors+at+yale&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiyZ-oXyvo4bcmdwg3kI7G2p6JoMbfptSPQ-nzheWifk0kVr8248_i8xI0adoSXvdQXgzAt27faIcvIAlnwmh-4fQaQYnhQZRkfMgy0xlqC3q0S2ZZAFLh7NFRoUDMYlE2eBiso&sig=AHIEtbTUdAxflZAZDmqueVSc-OnyK_2wig]link[/url”>http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:PF_aVrWPmE0J:www.yale.edu/oir/open/pdf_public/W038_YC_Popular_Majors.pdf+most+popular+majors+at+yale&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiyZ-oXyvo4bcmdwg3kI7G2p6JoMbfptSPQ-nzheWifk0kVr8248_i8xI0adoSXvdQXgzAt27faIcvIAlnwmh-4fQaQYnhQZRkfMgy0xlqC3q0S2ZZAFLh7NFRoUDMYlE2eBiso&sig=AHIEtbTUdAxflZAZDmqueVSc-OnyK_2wig) enrollment in Math 55 is 45 percent Jewish, 18 percent Asian and 100 percent male. Does that mean that whites, women, and to a lesser degree Asians shy away from math at Harvard? Maybe. Does that mean that Non-Jewish whites, women and to a lesser extent, Asian students are inferior students than Jews? Well, I don’t think many people would be willing to say that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why not? Maybe certain majors resonate more with certain groups. It seems like a lot of black scholars, from across departments are very interested in studying black history, blacks in society and other issues relating to blacks. They have a lot of questions about themselves and their people. A lot of black students are that way, and, in my experience gravitate toward the social sciences. </p>
<p>This year, Harvard’s Rhodes Scholar was an African-American alum that majored in sociology. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The percentage of Yale graduating last year was 97%, the number of black students graduating was 95%. </p>
<p>Statistics can give you a lot of information about a subject but motivation isn’t one of them.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think blacks at top colleges tend to be “high achieving” regardless of ethnicity. But if you must know, yes African students are more apt to major in the sciences. They’re also more likely to be pressured into the sciences by their parents, like all immigrant kids. You’ll notice the same difference with international white students and domestic white students. There’s a similar phenomenon with the Asian student body but it’s less pronounced.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Asian minorities and Hispanic and black minorities are quite different as a group. We chose to come here (blacks didn’t) and tend to come as middle-class, upper-middle class professionals (Hispanics don’t). We aren’t stigmatized by society nearly as much either. No one is ever going to question my competence, intellect, or even my ability to dance. They might think I’m shy or asexual but I’m always glad to prove them wrong on that front.</p>
<p>
Considering that Jews have the highest level of academic achievement in the world (on a per capita level). The highest rate of Nobel Prize winners. The highest rate of advanced degrees. Doesn’t that mean they are the best?</p>
<p>It means little from a deterministic individual standpoint, but in aggregate I think one can make that argument very effectively.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s laughable to so much as believe, have you ever been to Harlem? It is incredibly rough, and especially trecherous territory for whites. Do you even know what it feels like to be white in hazardous, racist areas? Believe me, there’s a verifiable reason for the “white flight” from areas such as detroit.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, it means that they’re scholarly and tend to study the fields in which Nobel Prizes are given. They’re interested in those things so they tend to be disproportionately represented. If Jews didn’t study the sciences and economics so often they wouldn’t be really that great.</p>
<p>Blacks used to be really, really well represented in baseball. Now they aren’t. Does that mean that blacks aren’t as good at baseball anymore? No, they just don’t play baseball as much for some reason.</p>
<p>
What’s considered “easy” is objective, and I’m guessing if you stuck the average American student at Harvard or Yale and made them take classes in those majors, they wouldn’t find them so easy competing against some of the top students in the country. Unless you’re implying that the only non-easy programs in the counry are ones like engineering or math at MIT. For example, I always excelled at physics and chem, but struggled with the biological sciences, so I would probably find Yale’s chemistry program to be significantly easier than biology, political science, and the rest. Here on CC, there’s a huge bias since so many students attend top schools and we lose sight of what “easy” is.
I’m a white female student living in Morningside Heights, the low income neighborhood next to Harlem proper where Columbia is. Some people consider the heights as part of Harlem too. It’s not as rough as people stereotype it to be. I’m just curious, do you live in NY?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Unless you grew up in Harlem, there’s a good chance that I probably know Harlem a lot better than you do. Black victims and black victimizers alike realize that a crime on a white person will be met with far quicker police response. As a result, criminals tend to leave whites alone unless the potential pay off of robbing a white outweighs the very real chance of getting caught.</p>
<p>It sounds like you were frightened to be in a black area with a rough area and that you don’t spend any substantial time in Harlem. You might just be uncomfortable or afraid of black people in large numbers. That’s one of the motivations for white flight by the way. The other is lowered property value and the possibility of rowdy neighbors. </p>
<p>Blacks don’t really victimize whites that often at all. That’s a myth based on a fear of retribution. I think a lot of whites fear that blacks have reason to be ****ed and thus harm whites. I don’t know why they think that way. Most of my friends are African-American and often they’re pretty frank when they talk around me - or more frank than when they’re just around campus. They don’t talk about whites at all. They tend to talk about race really rarely. Race is something they tend to discuss when they have a plausible reason for doing so.</p>
<p>NearL, if you don’t mind, I would love to know how you reconcile your “not acknowledging that racial classification is a big factor in admissions” with your “Such a system [ie. same as what we have today minus racial and gender preferences]…would be a whole lot less colorful” comment.</p>
<p>And, I would also like to know why you said I shouldn’t be prepared to make the argument that affirmative action for Chinese and Japanese is as justified as it is for Hispanics…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You mean the same kind of nonsense that you spewed earlier with your “90% Asian, oh noes!” remark?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Quote where he said that. I’m interested as an Asian.</p>
<p>Post 28 on [this</a> similar thread](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/790609-do-elite-colleges-discriminate-against-asian-students-2.html]this”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-admissions/790609-do-elite-colleges-discriminate-against-asian-students-2.html).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Edit</p>
<p>Also, are you going to answer my questions, especially the one I’ve been asking for three times already?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What is especially funny is this is what the President of Harvard said when he justified Jewish quotas back in the early 1900s. He said without quotas, Jewish numbers would skyrocket, whites would stop wanting to come, and then Jews wouldn’t want to go either.</p>
<p>Wow, that is basically what Lowell said way back when!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[url=<a href=“Getting In | The New Yorker”>Getting In | The New Yorker]Source[/url</a>]</p>
<p>
And all this time I thought being scholarly meant you were a good student. Good thing you are here to tell me different.</p>
<p>
Umm, yeah, that’s exactly what it means. It means they aren’t as good at baseball anymore. Wow.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What separates an admitted student and a rejected student at a school like Yale is extremely small. A small boost can the tipping factor when it comes to Ivy League admissions. It’s as simple as that. A small institutional boost would probably have a big affect on the demographic of the student body. I’d argue that if legacy status weren’t considered, legacies would be affected hugely despite the fact that legacy students aren’t that much different from average applicants.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Are Chinese and Japanese currently subject to the same stereotypes and stigma that Hispanics are? Are they underrepresented in elite universities?</p>
<p>
Wait…do you think stereotypes have meaning?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Scholarly was a bad word. How about academically-inclined? Jews are far more inclined to work in academia and study the fields for which there exists a Nobel Prizes. Feel free to extrapolate if you wish.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wait…are you setting up strawman? At no point did I ever imply that stereotypes had meaning. </p>
<p>Stereotypes can have adverse effects on the stereotyped. Care to debate this point?</p>