The problem with speaking out and calling out stereotyping for what it is that you get the above 5 responses, which are not much more accurate than the screed of an article we’ve been treated to. Here are 6 more “types” of people found on this thread and in real life:
6. People who are able to recognize hyperbole bordering on libel.
7. People who see in someone's writing a lack of critical thinking skills and/or an emotional state which severely misrepresents the proportion of mixed-up students we're supposed to trust by his (or anyone's) anecdotes do exist there.
8. People who know their law: The problems are not "the school's." The school possesses no liability for what the author of the article b** encountered. "The school" (Columbia) did not create the products who matriculated to Columbia, nor is Columbia or any other Ivy engaged in psychiatry as an element of admissions.
9. People who feel lots of sympathy and even empathy for students who are seriously depressed, apparently not treated, apparently not willing to take responsibility for the effect of that depression on their perceptions about their environments, which by definition for a depressed person are **negative, and often extremely so.**
10. People who can relate to the reality that there is at least a small core group at every Elite institution who are not pleasant company for a variety of reasons, attitudinal and otherwise, but who do not respect the mischaracterizing of an entire institution by such unpleasantness.
11. People who recognize depression for its clinical manifestations and aren't confused about whether that's the depressed person's issue or "the school's" issue.