In college admissions or jobs . . .. it’s about addressing systemic discrimination
Myra Jolivet
Here’s the definition of affirmative action: Affirmative action is defined as a set of procedures designed to; eliminate unlawful discrimination among applicants, remedy the results of such prior discrimination, and prevent such discrimination in the future. Applicants may be seeking admission to an educational program or looking for professional employment.
So logically, those against affirmative action are pro unlawful discrimination, against remedies for that discrimination, and for future discrimination.
Let’s get real, college admissions have been futz-y since the beginning of time. With all due respect to the not-for-profit organization, College Board, their list of “hard and soft” applicant factors ranging from grades to personal essays, fails to mention legacies—favoring children of alumni and donors. KCRA TV recently reported that, “a new lawsuit draws on Harvard data…records revealed that 70% of Harvard's donor-related and legacy applicants are white, and being a legacy student makes an applicant roughly six times more likely to be admitted.” Lawyers for Civil Rights, a nonprofit based in Boston, filed the suit on behalf of Black and Latino community groups in New England, alleging that Harvard's admissions system violates the Civil Rights Act. Of course, Harvard is not the only institution using legacy for admission decisions.
Affirmative action was never designed to get C and D students of color into the Ivy League. It was designed to come in between high performing students of color and discrimination, while also considering their ability to excel despite a system that is rigged against them.
I knew someone who worked in admissions at UC Berkeley in the 90s who said (at that time), an applicant’s field of study was also considered. For example, if you planned to major in political science with 20,000 others, even a high SAT score might not save you. However, if you selected a unique major such as, the mating habits of hummingbirds, your field might have available slots. True or not, this highlights the shades of gray in an imperfect system of college admissions.
The recent Supreme Court decision reveals the lengths to which bigots, racists, and truth-deniers will go in pretending that their intention is to create a more fair and perfect system. The only thing perfected in this latest decision is to maintain tools for white supremacy, white male preference, and to prop up a system of inequity, discrimination, and just plain shitty-ness.