3 ms·

At UW they call it "race equity" [1]. Meaning that you can't have more than x% of Asian Americans in the UW if the percentage of Asian Americans in the communit

At UW they call it "race equity" [1]. Meaning that you can't have more than x% of Asian Americans in the UW if the percentage of Asian Americans in the community is x%. The Supreme Court will soon decide if this practice is legal [2], and it is going to be interesting either way! [1] https://www.washington.edu/raceequity/ https://www.washington.edu/raceequity/ [2] https://edsource.org/2022/as-supreme-court-considers-affirmative-action-case-university-of-california-offers-cautionary-tale/679692 https://edsource.org/2022/as-supreme-court-considers-affirma...

0x445442 4y ago
And yet somehow they never decry the race inequity of lucrative ventures like the NBA player pool.
- bombcar 4y ago
  Arguably there you have an exterior reliable measurement of ability (and if there was inappropriate discrimination against Asian basketball players, you should expect a team to realize it and get a winning team for cheaper).
  - thegrimmest 4y ago
    But somehow we can't have an exterior reliable measurement of intellectual ability? And have no controversy testing for it across ethnic groups? Oh wait..
  - 0x445442 4y ago
    Of course there is objective measures, that’s the point. And it’s why no sane person thinks the race inequity within the NBA player pool is a problem. The problem lies in the hypocrisy of crying about systemic racism or sexism as the reason for inequity when talking about college admissions or C level jobs but never talking about the same inequities in nursing or iron workers or NBA players.
the_third_wave 4y ago
Here's a question to those in control of these so-called "equity" rules at UW: do these also go for e.g. sex? In other words, if the percentage of women in the population is 49% there can not be more than 49% female students? If not, why not? The answer is already clear of course given the data but it would be interesting to hear their defence of their untenable position.
- ethbr0 4y ago
  I think that's why the idea of a protected class has typically been central to US legal definitions of equality: application to every individual characteristic is untenable, but blindness to all impinges on justice too. Or in essence, how to address the historical inequities of racism and sexism, without also ushering in something ridiculous like "mentalism" that attempts to help people who are "bad at tests and grades."
lotsofpulp 4y ago
If that is not racism, and illegal according to the myriad anti discrimination laws the US must have, I do not know what could be.

0x445442 4y ago

And yet somehow they never decry the race inequity of lucrative ventures like the NBA player pool.

bombcar 4y ago
Arguably there you have an exterior reliable measurement of ability (and if there was inappropriate discrimination against Asian basketball players, you should expect a team to realize it and get a winning team for cheaper).
- thegrimmest 4y ago
  But somehow we can't have an exterior reliable measurement of intellectual ability? And have no controversy testing for it across ethnic groups? Oh wait..
- 0x445442 4y ago
  Of course there is objective measures, that’s the point. And it’s why no sane person thinks the race inequity within the NBA player pool is a problem. The problem lies in the hypocrisy of crying about systemic racism or sexism as the reason for inequity when talking about college admissions or C level jobs but never talking about the same inequities in nursing or iron workers or NBA players.

the_third_wave 4y ago

Here's a question to those in control of these so-called "equity" rules at UW: do these also go for e.g. sex? In other words, if the percentage of women in the population is 49% there can not be more than 49% female students? If not, why not? The answer is already clear of course given the data but it would be interesting to hear their defence of their untenable position.

ethbr0 4y ago
I think that's why the idea of a protected class has typically been central to US legal definitions of equality: application to every individual characteristic is untenable, but blindness to all impinges on justice too. Or in essence, how to address the historical inequities of racism and sexism, without also ushering in something ridiculous like "mentalism" that attempts to help people who are "bad at tests and grades."

lotsofpulp 4y ago

If that is not racism, and illegal according to the myriad anti discrimination laws the US must have, I do not know what could be.