Do You Check the Box for Ethnicity?
Primary tabs
Before I get into this, I just want to remind everyone of one thing...
Racism is not illegal.
It is deplorable, ignorant, abhorrent, and at times even unforgivable... but it is not illegal. So as I write my opinions and ask for yours regarding this, please keep this in mind; I dislike racism, I fight against it; but I also understand a person has a right to hold onto it just as they have a right to hold onto any other bad thought in their head. It doesn't become illegal until they use this thought to hurt someone else (or a group of someone elses).
So, that said... Here's today "Say What?" Moment...
Ohio State has been accused of using racial bias in their admissions process. Oh, and not just them, Miami University, too. According to this article from the Columbus Dispatch, accusations were made that claim that these institutions of higher learning actually "discriminate against white and Asian students by favoring black applicants."
My first thought was, of course, "how horrible". Followed shortly thereafter by "What the Ferbie", "I can't believe it" and even "This has to be some kind of joke".
Ah, and that's when it gets interesting. Check out the reason for these accusations...
It says black students were favored at Miami by a ratio of 10-1 over white students with similar ACT scores, and that the ratio at Ohio State was 8-to-1. When comparing students with similar SAT scores, the group found a ratio of 8-1 ratio at Miami and 3-to-1 at Ohio State... Ohio State officials said they were reviewing the study, which they saw for the first time today. But they said admission officials look at the strength of the whole student - and not just their test scores, grades and class rank... "We are also interested in such things as the strength of the applicant's high school, rigor of their curriculum, the strength of their essay and their work experience," said Dolan Evanovich, vice president for strategic enrollment planning. "And race is an optional question on the application."
Wait, What? Maybe we should read this little tidbit again...
...race is an optional question on the application.
So, I have two issues with this...
- Do you really want our colleges and universities to be so mechanical that the only standard for admitting students is test scores? Because it sounds to me like these universities really do at least try to look at more than just test scores despite our no-child-left-untested-failure-of-a-standardized-education-system agendas. and
- If the question for race is optional, then how can they claim that it's a determining factor for favoritism? How many students checked that box? Was the ethnicity ratio of students who were admitted close to the ethnicity ratio of students who applied? How many of the students who checked the box were admitted? How many of the students who did not check the box were admitted?
Very rarely is this box ever required, almost every time it is listed anywhere it's completely optional and accompanied by a disclaimer explaining that it is used for demographic purposes. Statistic tracking and the like. But for whatever reason, people still believe that it is either a ticket to get in or a hurdle to keep them out.
Which leads me to my question for you... When faced with filling out an application for anything (school, work, loan) do you check the box for ethnicity?
Comments
I don't think I should have
I don't think I should have to, but I always do. I know what the box is for. It's for affirmative action. I don't have any action that can be affirmed, and by refusing to answer, and having an employer or interviewer later notice that I'm white, makes me feel as if the person will think I was trying hide my "disadvantage."
Well, Affirmative Action is
Well, Affirmative Action is only a very small part of the statistics that they keep with demographic information, especially in universities.
Regular statistics include things like application rates, enrollment rates, targeted marketing, growth patterns.
And a lot more universities are turning away from Affirmative Action, choosing instead to implement their own admissions process and staying away from race all together.
Institutionalized Racism
I think affirmative action amounts to institutionalized racism and it totally disgusts me. It is completely wrong for the government to even keep any sort of racial or ethnic statistics. It just makes it easier for them to divide us up and control us by treating some differently than others. E pluribus unum!
I am half-Cuban but Cubans come in all colors and in my case, I pass easily as white and in fact I probably am overwhelmingly of European white descent (I'm not quite certain but that is a long story). I was raised in a small town in Wyoming where, with the exception of a few native Americans, almost everybody is white and I was raised the same as everybody else except my family was a little wealthier and better educated then most so I was probably a bit more privileged. My mother left Cuba when she was 5 so she was completely Americanized. I ate the same food, listened to the same music, spoke the same language and watched the same TV as everybody else. It never really occurred to me until I was about 16 that I might be anything but white.
I ALWAYS check the Hispanic box because I think the only way to end the odious practice of affirmative action is to render it absurd with abuse. If everybody claims to be a minority it will finally stop making sense to liberals to hand out taxpayer funded goodies and privileges on such a shallow and frankly hateful basis as skin color or ethnic heritage.
Only once when I was applying to Graduate school have I have ever been challenged for looking white and checking the Hispanic checkbox and I'm pretty certain that nasty racist will NEVER do it again because by the time I was done lambasting her she was just about to cry and was fairly certain that I was going to land on her with some sort of racial grievance lawsuit. I actually produced my Mother's Cuban Birth Certificate for her review as I told her how disgusting it was for her to even be thinking about my race as she considered my qualifications for admission which I assured her had nothing to do with the color of my skin. I got admitted but went elsewhere.
Because I have a decidedly conservative political outlook, I also take some perverse pleasure in slightly skewing opinion polls in that direction which runs counter to the vast majority of Hispanics who apparently like the idea of the government confiscating wealth from people who earned it and giving it to people who did not. I'm not very impressed with the cultural values of my ethic kindred. The whole patron and peasant thing is kind of sad and I guess breeds dependency.
My niece who is only 1/4 Cuban but officially recorded as Hispanic on her birth certificate recently scored just shy of a perfect 2400 on her SATs which apparently makes her one of the top hispanic students in the country. She is being heavily recruited by colleges and my Sister recently told me that when you added up all the scholarship offers which mainly result from her ethnicity, they amounted to better then $250k. They are doing pretty well financially so she won't be accepting any of it but it is totally absurd that because a relatively wealthy Cuban family came here 70+ years ago, a descendent two generations later and with a very diluted racial mix and absolutely zero ethnic cultural heritage has access to that kind of money because based on a checkmark, they think she might have brown skin. Ironically, whatever college my niece attends, will get the benefit of some "diversity". It will have nothing to do with her ethnicity (which would be Texan) and a lot to do with the fact that her Father was Ambassador to Qatar during the Bush '43 Administration and therefore my niece has had a fairly rich life experience for a kid her age including the opportunity to travel the world, learn Arabic and meet and interact with many of the world's top leaders. That is REAL diversity and has nothing to do with the color of her skin or her grandmother's place of birth.
Hi Jack :)
Hi Jack :)
My primary problem with Affirmative Action is not the implication of creating institutionalized racism. I don't entirely agree that it does - at least not in a reversive (?) way. Don't get me wrong here, I think that Affirmative Action if in the wrong hands, just like with any other policy, can go horribly, horribly wrong and can become that which it's supposed to fight.
But my primary complaint about Affirmative Action is in the way that it has been handed out. In a lot of cases, it does not boost minorities so much as it lowers the standards to allow minorities in. This is kind of a double edged sword, because if Affirmative Action had never been implemented, then how can we be sure that we, as a society, would have matured enough in this very short amount of time to stop discriminating in work, school and government environments?
But, isn't lowering standards the same as saying "we know you couldn't do it with the standards that others meet - you can only make it if we make it easier on you" which, to me, is just as degrading.
Eh... I don't know... I think that it was such a great and much needed program once upon a time. Now it seems antiquated as if it's working against itself. Perhaps an overhaul is due?
Totally agree
But, isn't lowering standards the same as saying "we know you couldn't do it with the standards that others meet - you can only make it if we make it easier on you" which, to me, is just as degrading.
I don't see anything mutually exclusive about my comments and yours. I stand by mine and totally agree with yours. Affirmative action is a horror for those who "benefit". If I were a minority I would be a huge opponent of a policy that always through into question my abilities and achievements. I believe the guy who has spearheaded the big anti-affirmative action ballot initiatives in various states like California, Michigan and others is black.
There is a reason why some are calling President Obama the "Afirmative Action President". It is a terrible insult!
No matter how much any particular minority person had earned and deserved a particular admission to a school or a particular job on the basis of merit, people will ALWAYS suspect and suggest that the person was handed the position because of their skin color or ethnicity. It is a badge of degradation that is almost impossible to live down. If you are a minority, whatever you achieve, people will question whether it was the result of your race or your ability.
Which leads us back to my point. Affirmative Action is institutionalized racism. If we want to end racism (which is a great goal but which I doubt is possible), a good place to start would be for the government to stop being racist.
You mention reform. I think a great place to start would be to stop worrying about race and ethnicity and start focusing on economic need. There are quite a few white families that are poor and have yet to see their first family member attend college. Why are they any less deserving of government or educational institution help then a similarly economically situated black family? Yet, because there is a lot of correlation between poverty and minority status, such a color-blind policy of focusing on economic need would overwhelmingly benefit minorities without the overt government sponsored racism.
Totally disagree
"If I were a minority I would be a huge opponent of a policy that always through into question my abilities and achievements."
I would suggest that you see these programs as questioning your personal abilities and achievements because you are used to be afforded the privilege of being treated that way. However, these programs exist because of the evidence which suggest that in their absence, minority candidates are NOT treated equally. That evidence shows that even when all relevant qualifications are equal, there is a significant disparate tendency for favoritism towards the majority candidates.
Now, that being said, I am open to the possibility that the current programs we have might not be the BEST way to address these disparities, but I do not think that one can rationally suggest that these disparities exist, or that they do not need to be addressed if we are going to call ourselves a free and equal society.
"It is better to be hated for what you are than to be loved for something you are not." ~ Andre Gide
Oops...and edit...
I said, "I do not think that one can rationally suggest that these disparities exist, or that they do not need to be addressed if we are going to call ourselves a free and equal society."
But my intended statement should have read, "I do not think that one can rationally suggest that these disparities DO NOT exist, or that they do not need to be addressed if we are going to call ourselves a free and equal society."
"It is better to be hated for what you are than to be loved for something you are not." ~ Andre Gide
Are you sure?
However, these programs exist because of the evidence which suggest that in their absence, minority candidates are NOT treated equally. That evidence shows that even when all relevant qualifications are equal, there is a significant disparate tendency for favoritism towards the majority candidates. I find it interesting that you chose the present tense for this assertion. There is no doubt that minorities were historically discriminated against. Contrary to your assertion, I don't think there is a lot of evidence that situation still persists or has persisted for a couple of decades and I think there is quite a bit of evidence that less qualified minorities are displacing more qualified whites. If there is any minority group that has a real grievance against the current system it is probably Asians. They are getting shafted. Now, I would probably agree that the evidence would suggest that if candidates were evaluated strictly on their merits without any knowledge of their race, ethnicity or creed that some minorities would probably find themselves under-represented on top campuses and that Asians would probably find themselves way over-represented as a percentage of the population. I'm not sure what exactly accounts for this outcome. I tend to believe it is a combination of both genetics and environment. Whatever the cause might be, it is wrong for the government or government funded institutions like many schools to systematically discriminate against one group for the benefit of another.
Yeah, I'm sure...
The current data shows that even through the education gap between black and white citizens has been steadily decreasing since the 1960's, college admissions and employment gaps remain stubbornly disparate. Even greater disparities are evident in our national prison population, with our own Congress recently concluding a study that found a significant and growing disparity in sentence lengths for black as opposed to white inmates, that began immediately following the Supreme Court's loosing of federal sentencing guidelines in 2005. A good gauge of the prevalence of stereotypes in our society can be found by analyzing media content, and this measure also continues to support the notion that racism (and racial discrimination) is alive and well in the United States today.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30437468/ns/business-careers/t/racial-dispar...
http://www.shsu.edu/~tcq001/paper_files/wp11-01_paper.pdf
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/03/12/90316/racial-disparities-in-senten...
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/03/12/90316/racial-disparities-in-senten...
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/210758.html
http://www.jbhe.com/features/49_college_admissions-test.html
"It is better to be hated for what you are than to be loved for something you are not." ~ Andre Gide
Not supported
The current data shows that even through the education gap between black and white citizens has been steadily decreasing since the 1960's, college admissions and employment gaps remain stubbornly disparate.
It is interesting that in a blog about race and education, you posted a whole series of links and not a single one of them is on the topic of the blog or supports your questionable point that college admission gaps remain stubbornly persistent as you assert above. One article was one about hiring and firing gaps. I suspect that an amoral profit focused businesses do their best to hire and retain the best employees and I think there is probably a close relationship between minority poor performance in the jobs market and their poor performance in the education market. A degree awarded due to affirmative action does not mean the same as a degree honestly earned and employers are not stupid. And I'm not sure what the point is about the incarceration statistics. Are we supposed to now have reverse affirmative action for whites in admittance to prison? What these statistics don't capture is the data like prior offenses that prosecutors and judges consider during the sentencing phase of our justice system. Perhaps somebody with a yard long rap sheet gets treated rougher than a first offender. That data is not in the statistics so I just don't know.
The closest you got to a link that was on topic showed that blacks as a group were lagging on their SAT scores which is a point I already made.
As I stated previously, I am not sure why blacks who are applying to college are not stacking up well against the competition. I suspect it is both genetic and environmental. To the extent that it is environmental, it could either be a failure the public institutions who are charged with preparing them or it could be a failure of their parents and/or their self-destructive sub-culture in which case I think they are hosed. If it is just poor schools then perhaps it can be fixed (take it up with the Democrats and the teachers unions who control the inner city schools).
Regardless of the cause of the problem, it is wrong for the government to systematically racially discriminate against one group for the benefit of another. That's just wrong and it is the exact opposite and a total perversion of the meaning of the 14'th Amendment which is about the only part of the Constitution that most liberals care about.
An arbitrary rejection of the evidence...
I'm sorry, but I think your rejection of the evidence seems rather...arbitrary. The sources I provided to you paint a plain picture of on-going racism throughout our society. And, despite your denial, there are multiple references in these sources to the specific issues of inequity in college admissions. But if you want more data, I'll be your huckleberry.
"In 1998, California's ban on affirmative action went into effect in undergraduate admissions, and the effect at Berkeley was considerable. In its first year without race-based preferences, the school accepted its least diverse freshman class in 17 years, admitting 56 percent fewer blacks and 49 percent fewer Latinos than in 1997. Six months later, in February,"
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/sats/race/summary.html
"[A]ffirmative action bans decrease underreprese minority enrollment at selective colleges. For example, the results suggest that banning affirmative action at a public university in the top 50 of the U.S. News rankings is associated with a decrease in black enrollment of roughly 1.74 percentage points, a decrease in Hispanic enrollment of roughly 2.03 percentage points, and a decrease in Native American enrollment of roughly .47 percentage points. Since the bases are already small, these effects are very large in relative terms."
http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/plh24/hinrichs_aff_action.pdf
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0281.pdf
http://www.princeton.edu/ceps/workingpapers/108krueger.pdf
http://149.68.16.192/media/3/b5b80d60fe07462f9a0483d1e8e6df31.pdf
http://www.salon.com/2011/08/26/americans_denying_racism/
"It is better to be hated for what you are than to be loved for something you are not." ~ Andre Gide
"The sources I provided to
"The sources I provided to you paint a plain picture of on-going racism throughout our society."
"In 1998, California's ban on affirmative action went into effect in undergraduate admissions, and the effect at Berkeley was considerable. In its first year without race-based preferences, the school accepted its least diverse freshman class in 17 years, admitting 56 percent fewer blacks and 49 percent fewer Latinos than in 1997."
Actually, the only source you posted which was on point (education and affirmative action) showed that black kids applying to schools were on average less qualified then other applicants.
The fact that minority enrollment fell at Berkley fell when the government was forced by the people to discontinue its racist policies which discriminated against kids of one race for the benefit of another is evidence of LESS racism in our society. The lower admissions reflect the average lower qualifications. Kids were admitted to college on the basis of their actual qualifications rather than the amount of pigment in their skin. When the government desists from racist policies we get less racism.
You are trying to equate the fact that some minorities who apply to college are for some reason unable to compete with whites and other minorities (Asians) with racism when in fact they have the same opportunity to apply and be admitted on their merits as everybody else. The Constitution guarantees equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.
Your evaluation of the evidence...
Your evaluation of the evidence is really rather remarkable, but not really surprising. The data clearly shows that in the absence of these policies, the same disparities that existed prior to these policies reemerge. You can try to spin the data however you wish, but the bottom line is that when you take these policies away, the rates of minority admissions fall in ratio to the size of minority populations, and the rates of majority (white and male) admissions rise.
These statistics can only lead to two possible conclusions:
1) Minority candidates are inherently inferior...
...or...
2) There is some non-inherent limitation which disadvantages these candidates.
If you think the disparity is due to option #2, then there needs to be some means made available to address the disparity by leveling the playing field so that all candidates are treated fairly. If however you think that the reason is due to #1, well, we have a word for that...racism.
"It is better to be hated for what you are than to be loved for something you are not." ~ Andre Gide
Wrong and wrong
I agree that the statistics can only lead to two possible conclusions and have stated more or less the same thing in two previous posts.
You are the one using the word inferior. My choice of words would be "different". Most people don't find it racist to observe that there are inherent differences between races that make some, on average, better at basketball (which means that others are inferior at basketball) and others vulnerable to certain diseases and others seem to excel at math. We ARE different and I reject the notion that it is racist to say what might well be the truth. That is just a tactic to silence debate. The truth may be uncomfortable but that is no reason to put it off limits. There have been some very interesting IQ studies which suggest that inherent differences are a factor.
But I am not certain it is the truth or at least not the whole truth. It could be some "non-inherent limitation(s)". Perhaps it is bad schools. They certainly are bad and places like Washington DC seem to prove that it is not just for lack of money. I wonder why the Democrats who have controlled the worst of the inner city schools for decades have not fixed them? If bad primary schools are the problem that is the obvious place to fix the problem rather than generation after generation of affirmative action. But perhaps it is some other cause like their self-destructive culture that celebrates the gangsta lifestyle, pigeon English and ignorance. Should white kids and Asians be punished in the college admission process because black culture does not have its act together? I think the cultural aspect goes a long ways towards explaining black under-performance and also Asian over-performance. Maybe it is because the welfare culture has created perverse incentives that have destroyed the black family. Regardless of race, kids from broken homes on average don't do as well. But there are a lot higher percentage of black kids from single family homes. Is that a reason to punish white and Asian kids? I don't think so.
I don't think it is the government's job to be dividing us up into groups and then punishing one group that out-performs other groups for the pupose of achieving equal outcomes. I don't even think the government should be tracking these types of statistics let alone trying to social engineer equal outcomes.
Thank you for demonstrating the bias of white privilege...
"Most people don't find it racist to observe that there are inherent differences between races that make some, on average, better at basketball (which means that others are inferior at basketball) and others vulnerable to certain diseases and others seem to excel at math."
I think that this statement tells us all that we need to know about your opinion, Jack.
"It is better to be hated for what you are than to be loved for something you are not." ~ Andre Gide
Only when its in my favor
I tend to do it only when it is going to be in my favor. I know that might sound odd, but knowing what i know and how a lot of agencies are I only do it when i know it is going to work out in my best interest.