HW Question for Tues, 5/10

[Jay Levine]

Hello,

My questions for tonight's reading (pp. 166-174) are as follows:
Do you think that Cheryl Hopwood was correct in asserting that she was
a victim of discrimination? Why or why not?
Do you think that it's OK to discriminate based on certain
characteristics in the spirit of achieving equality, or are all forms
of discrimination wrong, in all cases? Are there times when society
discriminates based on natural characteristics and it makes sense to
do so? Explain.

[Rhianna Waterman]

In the reading it says "The use of racial preferences will not bring about a more pluralistic society or reduce prejudice and inequalities, but will damage the self-esteem of niority students, increase racial consciousness on all sides.... " etc. I agree with this quotation completely. I believe that Cheryl Hopwood should have been accepted because she did have better grades. The person of ethnic diversity had lower grades, and may not  accomplish as much as Cheryl could. (if she had been accepted.) If you put yourself in her situation, I bet that you would feel  discriminated if you had better grades than someone, and YOU were the one to be REJECTED.  I believe that to a certain degree it is okay to discriminate based on certain natural characteristics. If you are choosing between a student who is polite and gets good grades and a student who recieves the same grades, but has a horrible attitude, then the student who is polite should be accepted. On the other hand, when it comes to achieving equality, I don't believe that a student who recieves better grades than someone of ethnic diversity, who recieves lower grades, should be rejected; it just seems unfair.

[Jaclyn Solimine]

I do believe that Cheryl Hopwood was a victim of discrimination. It seems clear to me that she wasn't exactly a privileged person, but a dedicated student who worked hard to get where she is. If her grades were better than those of a minority student, she should've been accepted instead. It's only fair. However, I don't believe all forms of discrimination are wrong. For instance, if two students were to have the exact same grades or qualifications but one was black and the other white, I don't see anything wrong with choosing the black student over the white one in order to increase ethnic diversity. They both equally deserve to be accepted intelligence-wise, but accepting the minority student would be more beneficial.I do believe there are times when society discriminates based on natural characterisics. For example, when casting a play, some people may not get the part because of their appearence, regardless of their skills or ability.  

[Misa Tran]

I did not believe that Cheryl Hopwood was a victim of discrimination.
Though universities should not judge on applicants' skin color or
ethnicity since the only thing that counts are the students academics
and merit. I know that many universities are trying to create a more
"diverse" schooling but I don't find discriminating students is right.
As Harvard had said, "If scholarly excellence were the sole or even
predominant criterion, Harvard College would lose a great deal of its
vitality and intellectual excellence..."

[Misa Tran]

I did believe that Cheryl Hopwood was a victim of discrimination.

Though universities should not judge on applicants' skin color or
ethnicity since the only thing that counts are the students academics
and merit. I know that many universities are trying to create a more
"diverse" schooling but I don't find discriminating students is right.
As Harvard had said, "If scholarly excellence were the sole or even
predominant criterion, Harvard College would lose a great deal of its
vitality and intellectual excellence..."

[Shain Roche]

I think good old Cheryl has a legitamate point. It might not have been
discrimination, but the fact that schools are supposed to favor
minorities over whites could have affected her rejection. Personally,
I would say she is a victim of unfair and unjust laws and/or
regulations because if there were no regulations she wold've had a
higher chance of getting into law school. I'm a proponent of
the abolishment of discrimination in all of its forms.


Peace, love.

[Egan Davis]

Yes, I do think that she was a victim of discrimination because this college was basically deciding who got in based on skin color instead of the persons grades or how hard the person worked. I think that in some ways it can be considered okay to discriminate based on characteristics for example a job interview. Would you rather have some lazy slob who barely does any work, or a very neat and organized person who can get their job done and do it well. So, this would be an example of people discriminating on characteristics and it makes sense to do this in a business place because you don't want lazy workers, and choosing the hard workers will make that certain business just a little bit better. On the other hand, that lazy slob may have just given a bad first impression and actually turns out to be a very good worker. So it could go either way.

[Michaela Pierro]

I think Cheryl Hopwood was a victim of discrimination because those who were accepted were minorities and had lower grades than Cheryl. She deserved to be accepted because she did have better grades. I don't think discriminating to achieve equality is okay because it's unfair. For example, if a university decides to only accept white students to achieve "equality", it would be unfair to minorities who may have better chances of successful at that university because of ability or grades.

[Zachary Brown]

I believe Cheryl was a victim of racial discrimination. It is not fair to judge people on their skin color. I believe it does not matter the skin color of the students a college has. What should matter is that it has  smarter and overall more qualified students attending it. To me, it looks better to have more students graduatiing and getting good jobs right out of college, or having students with better test averages than to have a diverse amount of racial ethnicities at a given school.   

[whitney milewski]

I definitely think that Cherly was a victim of discrimination. The school was deciding who would be enrolled based on skin color, not by grades, effort, work ethic etc. I personally agree with Shain. All forms of discrimination should be eradicated. I'm a strong believer in equal opportunity. It causes problems in all systems.

On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Egan Davis <egan....@gmail.com> wrote:

[Stephanie Pelletier]

I do believe that Cheryl Hopwood was a victim of discrimination in the admissions process of the Texas university because she may have been more qualified for the position, but she was not given the opportunity and was overlooked by the admissions board mainly due to the fact that she was just another white American. The minority students got a better advantage, even though she might have deserved it more (taking into consideration her class and economic background compared to a so-called minority as an example mentioned in the book. They were favored while they could have had less of a disadvantage than she had.) I feel like every person should have an equal chance, even if it is simply to be recognized equally.Society discriminates in a variety of ways which is unfair to the people being negatively affected, but no one who is positively gaining for such advantages is going to say anything about the others in the poorer circumstances. I dont think it makes sense in any case to be unfair to people, but it's just what happens.

[Emily Lawler]

The article quotes “The question for courts is whether affirmative action hiring and admissions policies violate the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection of the laws.” Pg. 168 I completely agree with Hopwood saying that she deserved to go to that school instead of someone who did worse on the test and had worse grades. The government thinks that this is a way to reverse racism and give equal opportunities, but they don’t realize that they are denying the opportunities of someone who deserves them. I think that mostly all forms of discrimination are wrong. I mean if you discriminate against a boy because he can’t room with girls on a class trip, than that is not an issue and that is a basic principle. But affirmative action just to follow a law that is technically contradicting another law is wrong.

On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 9:14 PM, Michaela Pierro <michae...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Maia Johnson]

I agree with Whitney and Dog. Cheryl was a victim of discrimination. Who gets accepted and enrolled in a college should never be based on skin color, but rather education, effort, and work ethic like Whitney said. I'd also like to point out that I agree with Shain as well. Discrimination isn't necessary and shouldn't be involved in any situation whatsoever. Affirmative Action just seems like a program that's trying to prevent racism, sexism, etc, but it's infact making it worse.

[Calé Frost]

I think in this situation, she was discriminated against. I mean, it's a college, shouldn't you be accepted based on your academic ability, not any other factor? Some groups/organizations/etc. need to be ethnically (insert other ways to categorize people here) diverse so that it's not elitist/biased/whatever. For example, juries, I think. Don't they try to select a certain number of men and women, people with certain IQ levels, ethnic minorities, etc. Maybe that's not juries, but that's the crux of it. Colleges shouldn't accept students based on diversity. Students should be accepted based on academic prowess. Not like we have this problem with public high schools, what with HHS being the misfit school that'll take anyone. :P

[George Bonner]

Cheryl was a victim of discrimination. colleges should accept students
based on merit or athletics. I agree with do6 in the sense that it
would probably look better to have successful graduates rather than
simply racially diverse graduates. i feel bad for Cheryl because from
her story, it sounded as though she deserved to get into the UTexas
Law School. I think that college affirmative action policies are
unneccesary. theres no pancake mix in there.

[Nick Roy]

I do think she was a victim because of the fact that she wasnt accepted based on skin color because colleges are trying to become more ethnically diverse. Also, equality through segregation seems contradictory. I think there are some cases where a degree of segregation to be okay because there are some jobs that are hazardous to people with disabilities or physical impairments.

[bridget stemmler]

Yes, i do believe that Cheryl Hopwood was correct in fighting the discrimination she was faced with. Discrimination is discrimination regardless of which group is being targeted. That is, in matters of race. Race simply should not matter in the slightest. Racial quotas make very little sense to me, i just don't understand why it is such an issue. people should be admitted to a school based on their grades and other classic criteria, not the amount of money they make and certainly not the color of their skin. however, i do think that in some elements discrimination is necessary. for example inequality in intellectual merit is far more important and justifiable. i don't think cheryl would have a case if her scores were say far worse that those accepted over her. 

On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Jay Levine <jaymle...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Jen Shaw]

agreeing with others, i do think that cheryl was a victim of
discrimination. she should be accepted into a college (along with
anyone else) no because of race or skin color, but because of grades
and how well off you are for that school. i do not think its okay to
discriminate anyone in any way. if two people both had the same grades
but there was only one spot open in the college and one was black and
the other was white, it should be a lottery drawing or something. both
students should have equal chance to getting into the college they
wish.

[Phil]

I agree with shain. Cheryl should have gotten accepted into the school because she had higher grades. Race doesn't matter. I'm not against schools trying to be ethnically diverse but they shouldn't choose someone with lower grades over someone who has higher ones that just doesn't make sense to me. If they had the same grade then its up to them it doesn't matter but I feel as though the school should have chosen Cheryl because her grades were higher. Choose the better student not a different race.

[Emily DelDotto]

I do think Cheryl was a victim of discrimination. She should have been accepted into college because of her grades, not because of her race. I don't believe it's okay to discriminate in any way. The color of someone's skin should not determine whether or not someone gets into a certain college.

[Austin Ratkevicius]

I do feel that Cheryl Hopwood was a victim of discrimination due to
the fact that the idea of "race" was brought into the decision of
whether or not she would be accepted into UT Law. I feel that
discrimination on principles such as effort, intelect, et cetera are
perfectly okay, but ones such as "race" and gender are completely
arbitrary and should not be even raised in decisions like college
acceptance. Society is meant to discriminate on those principles, but
ones such as "race" and gender are completely without proof and are
terribly backwards.

On May 9, 9:56 am, Jay Levine <jaymlevin...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Lucille Sirois]

I do think that Cheryl Hopwood was discriminated against. Factors determining whether someone should be accepted to school should be the person's performance such as grades, extra-cirriculars, admissions essay, volunteer work, etc. I understand that many colleges admit ethnic minorities to promote diversity amongst their students, but I do not think this was the right action for this case. If someone else had performed at a higher level, then they should be admitted before Ms. Hopwood.

[Adelise Roberts]

I do think that Cheryl Hopwood was discriminated against because the factors were out of her control.  I do not think that it is okay to choose certain factors over others because then the people who really worked hard aren't getting the oppurtunity to try.