Quote:
Originally Posted by miami_fan
I know I give you a lot of shit but you have to admit that choosing a clear cut winner based on race in this case is problematic, no? I don't know if you are right or wrong. Just commenting on the wording given the context of the case and well if there is a winner in terms of race, then there must be a loser in terms of race.
|
The clear cut winner comment was based on below. The presumption of the lawsuit is that Asian kids were being discriminated against.
Quote:
|
In the Harvard case, the organization claimed the school's race-conscious admissions policies violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits racial discrimination in any program or activity that receives federal funds, by discriminating against Asian-American applicants. Students for Fair Admissions accused Harvard of assigning Asian-American students lower ratings on personality traits than other races and limiting the number of Asian-American applicants it admits.
|
If winner-loser is defined as # of kids/race enrolled, you are right there are losers also. Although not a pure zero sum game, the "pie" is fixed (or won't/can't scale as much as demand). So more for one "race" (winner) means less for other "races" (losers).