Common mistake here. “Because she didn’t speak about other factors, and only filed suit about AA, we can conclude that she’s _only_ miffed about the AA angle.” Logically unsound. One of many possibilities is there simply was no legal grounding for which to sue on strict meritocracy grounds.

The root reason that people disagree over this is that there is a conflict between whether a school should admit based on objective qualifications (test scores) or some combination of objective and subjective (are you a minority? are you a legacy?) criteria. Obviously you fall into the latter camp, so it’s dissonance…

This is bizarre. You do realize that there are people who got in, of all races, with lower scores, correct? So why should she receive a message of “you did not earn it”. Because there is a POINT process that takes into account a host of other qualifications of which race is one. By your own logic her parents could…

There is this meme that she only cared about race in her lawsuit and so she thinks that everybody else with lower grades who got in is “fine”.

Well, the victim is not around to appreciate the long sentence, so why actually doesn’t the perpetrator “deserve leeway”? Are they likely to reoffend? What interest is served?

This is _always_ true, never moreso than with tabloids.

I suppose this means you believe the justice system is primarily for revenge.

Maybe for you, but not for me.

Now you are begging the question.

Well coming full circle, I am not claiming she is exceptional. By things we can actually _measure_ she is not mediocre in context, because by those measurements there are other students at the university who did worse. I think we can agree it is ridiculous to say she’s mediocre because she’s white or came from the…

You can think that of course, but you haven’t shown any evidence to support it, just a lot of guesswork based off some people you know and projecting.

I was trying to keep the convo restricted to why we should believe she’s a racist. No offense but your anecdotal life experience has nothing at all to do with it. I don’t know that we know enough to judge her as oblivious, though. We simply don’t know. It’s just spun by media, for clicks, to paint her as some entitled…

I get that she didn’t contest the validity of the other criteria. Now please connect that to proof that she is a racist. Please back up that this _must_ mean she considers those other criteria to be fine. She might hate them all for all we know.

No, I mean it very literally. You didn’t read what I wrote. Because you spent your whole post arguing against me when I was primarily agreeing with you.

You clearly didn’t read what I just wrote.

Affirmative action _did_ disadvantage her, which is _objectively_ true- You get points for being of minority status. Nobody is disputing this part.

Where are you getting that she doesn’t “care” about the “shitload” of white people who also had lower grades? Is there any evidence for this?

On what do you base this judgment of her that she is a racist? Do we know how she views the white students who also had lower scores?

You are conflating qualitative and quantitative attributes. When dealing with the former, it is a little silly to apply labels like ‘mediocre’ because by definition we are dealing with opinions and subjective criteria, not hard facts.

Where are we getting ‘mediocrity’ from here? What does one do to earn their racial points? How is one mediocre from growing up in a town too large or too small?