31 March, 2006

Sex, Scores, and Admissions

Posted by alex in academia, Alex Linder, education, studies at 12:02 am | Permanent Link

Jews took over the academy. They let in lots of fags and feminists, and coloreds who didn’t know which end of the pencil to pick their nose with. They made normal white men uncomfortable through their sneers and queered curriculum. Now people wonder why men aren’t interested in college.

No hint of all this in the following story. As in everything else, from comic strip to country music song to sitcom utterance the woman is always right. It was tired and wrong thirty years ago, but it will persist until the jew has wrung the last drop of advantage from it.

What does the white man get out of college? For most majors, the answer is nothing. Liberal arts is largely a waste – a bunch of professors intellectually inert as they are politically hostile. So why bother?

Increasingly the while male doesn’t. He proceeds to business or construction where at least he can still get ahead, even with its rampant anti-White discrimination.

How typical of our non-nation is the judeostructure favoring women every step of the way then asking, in all synthetic not-getting-it, how come there aren’t any males around?

Listening to a clam-jammer discuss Kate Millet is not education.

Listening to a Freakin-Nonamerican discuss the wond’rous U of Timbuktu back in the day is not education.

Education is white men reading, writing, and discussing among themselves, the rest is politics of an effective but inferior sort.

Alex,

When I first read the headline I expected to hear an explanation of why men were being discriminated against in college admissions (“their gender’s overall success”). How wrong I was!

Today, two-thirds of colleges and universities report that they get more female than male applicants, and more than 56 percent of undergraduates nationwide are women. Demographers predict that by 2009, only 42 percent of all baccalaureate degrees awarded in the United States will be given to men.

But then, women make better social planners and bureaucrats. They’re our ‘future leaders’. Men are only good at making useless stuff like cars, airplanes, light bulbs, cameras, moving pictures, televisions, computers, electrical power plants, radios, refrigerators, houses, paved roads, bicycles, motorcycles, the printing press, and lots of other useless gadgets that don’t really improve the quality of life for anybody.

Hence, the Mexican invasion…

Note the rejection of the “engineer/computer scientist” at bottom and the preference for the girl who is hopeless at math ‘but got good grades in math’.

Also not mentioned is that at the higher IQ levels there are more men (several times more at the highest levels) than women. Hence, preference should be given to basketball players. You know, the oppressed that are treated like royalty on campuses.

My staff and I carefully read these young women’s essays about their passion for poetry, their desire to discover vaccines and their conviction that they can make the world a better place.

At my own college these days, we have three applicants for every one we can admit.

Gee, that sounds discriminatory! “I like her! … He fails to excite me.” … (see below)

http://www.startribune.com/562/story/338997.html

Last update: March 29, 2006 – 7:22 PM

Jennifer Delahunty Britz: Punished for their gender’s overall success

Aiming for balance, many colleges set the bar higher for young women seeking admission than they do for young men.

Jennifer Delahunty Britz

GAMBIER, OHIO – A few days ago I watched my daughter Madalyn open a thin envelope from one of the five colleges to which she had applied. “Why?” was what she was obviously asking herself as she handed me the letter saying she was waitlisted.

Why, indeed? She had taken the toughest courses in her high school and had done well, sat through several Saturday mornings taking SATs and the like, participated in the requisite number of extracurricular activities, written a heartfelt and well-phrased essay and even taken the extra step of touring the campus.

She had not, however, been named a National Merit finalist, dug a well for a village in Africa or climbed to the top of Mount Rainier. She is a smart, well-meaning, hardworking teenage girl, but in this day and age of swollen applicant pools that are decidedly female, that wasn’t enough. The fat acceptance envelope is simply more elusive for today’s accomplished young women.

I know this well. At my own college these days, we have three applicants for every one we can admit. Just three years ago, it was two to one. Though Kenyon was a men’s college until 1969, more than 55 percent of our applicants are female, a proportion that is steadily increasing. My staff and I carefully read these young women’s essays about their passion for poetry, their desire to discover vaccines and their conviction that they can make the world a better place.

I was once one of those girls applying to college, but that was 30 years ago, when applying to college was only a tad more difficult than signing up for a membership at the Y. Today, it’s a complicated and prolonged dance that begins early, and for young women, there is little margin for error: A grade of C in Algebra II/Trig? Off to the waitlist you go.

Rest assured that admissions officers are not cavalier in making their decisions. Last week, the 10 officers at my college sat around a table, 12 hours every day, deliberating the applications of hundreds of talented young men and women. While gulping down coffee and poring over statistics, we heard about a young woman from Kentucky we were not yet ready to admit outright. She was the leader/ president/editor/captain/lead actress in every activity in her school. She had taken six advanced placement courses and had been selected for a prestigious state leadership program. In her free time, this whirlwind of achievement had accumulated more than 300 hours of community service in four different organizations.

Few of us sitting around the table were as talented and as directed at age 17 as this young woman. Unfortunately, her test scores and grade point average placed her in the middle of our pool. We had to have a debate before we decided to swallow the middling scores and write “admit” next to her name.

Had she been a male applicant, there would have been little, if any, hesitation to admit. The reality is that because young men are rarer, they’re more valued applicants. Today, two-thirds of colleges and universities report that they get more female than male applicants, and more than 56 percent of undergraduates nationwide are women. Demographers predict that by 2009, only 42 percent of all baccalaureate degrees awarded in the United States will be given to men.

We have told today’s young women that the world is their oyster; the problem is, so many of them believed us that the standards for admission to today’s most selective colleges are stiffer for women than men. How’s that for an unintended consequence of the women’s liberation movement?

The elephant that looms large in the middle of the room is the importance of gender balance. Should it trump the qualifications of talented young female applicants? At those colleges that have reached what the experts call a “tipping point,” where 60 percent or more of their enrolled students are female, you’ll hear a hint of desperation in the voices of admissions officers.

Beyond the availability of dance partners for the winter formal, gender balance matters in ways both large and small on a residential college campus. Once you become decidedly female in enrollment, fewer males and, as it turns out, fewer females find your campus attractive.

What are the consequences of young men discovering that even if they do less, they have more options? And what messages are we sending young women that they must, nearly 25 years after the defeat of the Equal Rights Amendment, be even more accomplished than men to gain admission to the nation’s top colleges? These are questions that admissions officers like me grapple with.

In the meantime, I’m sending out waitlist and rejection letters for nearly 3,000 students. Unfortunately, a majority of them will be female, young women much like my daughter. I will linger over letters, remembering individual students I’ve met, essays I loved, accomplishments I’ve admired. I know all too well that parents will ache when their talented daughters read the letters and will feel a bolt of anger at the college admissions officers who didn’t recognize how special their daughters are.

Yes, of course, these talented young women will all find fine places to attend college — Maddie has four acceptance letters in hand — but it doesn’t dilute the disappointment they will feel when they receive a rejection or waitlist offer.

I admire the brilliant successes of our daughters. To parents and the students getting thin envelopes, I apologize for the demographic realities.

Jennifer Delahunty Britz is the dean of admissions and financial aid at Kenyon College. She wrote this for the New York Times.

©2006 Star Tribune. All rights reserved.

_______________________

Here are examples of the more stringent requirements for women (the aforementioned “hint of desperation in the voices of admissions officers”):

Verbal 510
Math 410
Combined 920

Impressive grades but low test score. Active in high school government and in music. Her essay screams ear: she’s got a good one for languages, music and the written word. Her interest in Religious Studies and high scores in math classes tells me that she’s fairly well-rounded. I like her and would admit.

… “high scores in math classes” … with a 410 SAT!???

_________________

Verbal 560
Math 680
Combined 1240

Scores are high; lots of AP classes, but an essay about his driver’s license that fails to excite me. He sounds like he’ll work in engineering or computer science some day, but I wouldn’t count on him to become one of California’s leaders. I’d say no.


  1. Similar posts:

  2. 03/14/19 The College Admissions Scandal: Merely Gaming the Game 54% similar
  3. 09/13/06 Idiocracy in Action: The Shrinking SAT 40% similar
  4. 03/26/06 How Competent Whites Get Screwed at Berkeley 27% similar
  5. 09/16/16 How to Bypass the Expensive, Marxist Colleges and Universities 27% similar
  6. 08/05/15 Prestigious University Drops Standard Test for Admissions 26% similar
  7. 11 Responses to “Sex, Scores, and Admissions”

    1. alex Says:

      I don’t think I’ve ever seen an article about race in admissions titled “Whites: Punished for Their Race’s Success.”

      What a joke has our country become.

      Things obvious can’t be said.

      Things said are usually lies.

      Almost everybody in trembling fear he’ll be caught saying what he thinks, or make a slip at inopportune moment, a la Lenihan.

      When women get ahead, it’s by their own efforts – just like jews. When white men get ahead, it’s due to the old boy network – discrimination. The Supreme Court signs off on this Big Lie.

    2. Agis Says:

      Women are 99.9% useless in academia. The only ‘spot’ I could possibly see them filling is as ‘school teachers’ from nursery school to third grade. Anything above the third grade level should be taught by men.

      Women should be schooled separately with a primary focus on ‘family economics’.

      Putting women in positions they don’t belong is about the same as putting monkeys in manpants.

    3. A. Says:

      Enrolement should be merit based but education also should focus on subjects not only of especial interest to men but also women. Who are you to say what they have to offer is unimportant? Is it any more unimportant than Latin, or Greek was? In the old days, middle or higher class ladies went to finishing schools and were trained in things like music and art etc. WTF is wrong with that?

      We might all be living in mud-huts if it wasn’t for the inventions of man as some here claim on VNN, but without the prompting of our women folk for something higher we would still be living in caves hitting things with a big stick.

      Our much vaunted western culture owes more to our women folk and their own spiritual longing than most imagine. It is not an either/or as the monothesic semitic religions would impart as a social lesson, it is two halves coming together to make a whole. Here it is jumping from one phoney semitic idea to another (in this case forced “equality”) that is causing all the problems. You can’t go back, only forward.

    4. Carl Loerbs Says:

      So a gal with a combined SAT of 920 gets the nod over a guy with a combined SAT of 1240 because “her essay screams ‘ear'” and his essay “doesn’t excite” the admissions officer. This is a textbook example of how feminization trumps competency and has contributed to our nation’s declining performance in and dominance of the hard sciences.

      The Golden Gate Bridge and the Empire State Building weren’t conceived and designed by people whose essays “screamed ear”.

    5. Alan Amalek Says:

      I would bet that the real race of the gal with the 920 SAT is ‘hispanic’ or whatever. The ‘essays’ are bunk. An essay was added to the SAT in order to further boost non whites – believe me, the people grading the tests know exactly ‘what’ each person is, and the essay is graded subjectively, meaning if you are non White (or of course a Jew) you will no doubt be given bonus points. Even silly leftist teachers in CA were stunned when the essay portion of the test was introduced, and kids who were not very facile with the language were getting high to perfect scores – these kids were non Whites. This of course led to charges of racism, blah blah. Whites need to realize that war is being waged. Worse is better. When the jewsmedia can’t even cover up the fact that jews and Asians are admitted to Yale and Harvard at triple the rate they would be if grades and test scores were the only criteria, what other proof do you need? Whites make up 15% of the Harvard student body for example (if you separate them from the jews the media will claim to be white). This happened by merit?

    6. Brink Says:

      “When the jewsmedia can’t even cover up the fact that jews and Asians are admitted to Yale and Harvard at triple the rate they would be if grades and test scores were the only criteria, what other proof do you need?”

      http://brookings.nap.edu/books/0815746091/html/434.html

      In general, Asian students at elite universities have slightly higher SAT scores than Whites.

      And Whites are more like 30-35% of the student body at Harvard (for undergrad, anyway).

    7. Harry Tuttle Says:

      “Essays” on the SAT!! Whatta larf!!! Objective testing is outside the range of comprehension of people with an average IQ of 84.

      “Essays” are ideological affirmative action for niggers.

    8. van helsing Says:

      Define Asians. Eastern orientals are interested in hard sciences. The ones that arent staying here (and maybe some that are…) are gearing up for a war.

      The “Western” Asians are a mixed lot. Non-jews probly just want to make money, some are interested in fighting us in the current war.

      The jews are all over the arts and social sciences etc, denuding them of value.

      They are all out for the white chicks.

    9. Hans Brinker Says:

      Brink – Asians have a very high percentage of people who study (average E. Asian student in the US studies more per day than the average than the average White studies per week. That said, in raw numbers there are 10 times more whites that score over 700 on the math portion of the SAT than Asians – similar numbers for jews as Asians I should add. Yet, in raw ‘admittance’ numbers, Whites are 15% of the Yale and Harvard student bodies – if you don’t count the jews the schools count as White to make it look as if there are more whites. Definite discrimination against Whites, especially White males, in favor of drone like, unimaginative Asians with computational talent and little else, and jews who are intelligent, but not creative when it comes to new ideas or inventions, more apt to appropriate the work of others, or synthesize the work of others. Both groups are well aware of their shortcomings, as you should be.

    10. Arthur Says:

      Americans finally realize the try-before-you-buy works just as well with sex as it does with commodities. Rather than marrying and then shacking up with hot sex coming after the nuptuals, Americans are increasingly putting out before putting on the wedding rings.Women are just as likely as men to get it on before matrimony.
      I think this is just the sign of the times. I mean, we like to test things, try them out, before making a purchase. Why should sex and marriage be any different? The stigma associated with pre-marital sex is dead. Long live free love!

    11. Anonymous Says:

      I have a comment to make regarding sex, race, scores and admission. Today in one of my classes I received a 0 for an exceptionally great assignment, the only reason being.. my professor didn’t believe the work was done by me. It was far too professional, (as it is my job to make presentations). She called me up to her podium and told me I was a plagiarist in front of the class. I was so surprised and extremely heated I walked out quickly, before I let my anger control me, otherwise it would have turned out bad for both of us. Now, a background on my teacher, she is a black power feminist who gives a rant about feminism and black oppression basically every other class. Our extra credit assignments in a TECHNOLOGY course are to go volunteer at conventions aimed at womens rights and black rights in the workplace. Excuse me, but didn’t they already get affirmative action? I am failing a technology course, and I work as an IT while I’m at college.. because I’m a white male with a shaved head, and I don’t buy into her bullshit. Now I’ve got to go to the dean to get a fair grade on this assignment, because the rest of the class (mostly black) failed to meet up to my standards, and I am accused of plagiarism.
      College is liberalized up the ass today, and half of the garbage I hear in these courses makes me want to vomit. Blacks, feminists, gays, muds, everyone is glorified, and they try to drill white shame into our heads. My english professor had a “talk” with me after I refused to listen to a speech about Malcom X. What is happening to our colleges today? Why are they so gayed up with minority-biased propaganda? Why are kids silent about this? Should college professors be allowed to drill their own political and personal agendas into the minds of their students without consequence?