# Affirmative Action is Just a Distraction **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 27, 2009, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454 "2009-07-27T17:58:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2009, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454/41 "2009-07-28T19:01:32Z")
> [@athelas](#): > > You draw the conclusion that group performance on these tests, which are devoid of obvious bias and predict job performance well, may not always be the same. Then you evaluate candidates as individuals. Not hard, folks. If they predict performance well, why should we ignore them? How else do we judge individuals we really don’t know? Tests may suck, but the good old boy network would be way worse. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2009, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454/42 "2009-07-28T20:51:56Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > The problem here is that affirmative action doesn’t level the playing field. It doesn’t help people do better, it says, “Even though they can’t perform at a competitive level, lets pass them up the chain anyway.” You have a very narrow understanding of affirmative action. It’s not just differing standards in educational settings, it also involves outreach, awareness campaigns, tutoring, etc. etc.. Second, you make the mistake of assuming the standards we set are effective in measuring competence, rather than just a means to justify rationing. The reality is a school like Harvard can nearly fill their incoming class with valedictorians. They can fill it with rich expats, or Asian-Americans. The reason they don’t is because a commitment to diversity has benefits in and of itself, and because there are diminished returns once an individual exceeds a minimum level of competency. In fact, I would argue that having such an unjustifiable barrier to entry does more harm than good. Third, even if a woman, or minority gets into an elite institution via affirmative action (instead of someone “more qualified”), they still have to do well once they get there. They don’t get passed up the chain if they can’t perform. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2009, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454/43 "2009-07-28T21:06:16Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > . The reason they don’t is because a commitment to diversity has benefits in and of itself, . Ahhh…the old diversity is good because everyone is different…yet wait…we arent different…what was the point again? conundrum… ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2009, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454/44 "2009-07-28T21:35:36Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > You have a very narrow understanding of affirmative action. It’s not just differing standards in educational settings, it also involves outreach, awareness campaigns, tutoring, etc. etc.. > > Second, you make the mistake of assuming the standards we set are effective in measuring competence, rather than just a means to justify rationing. The reality is a school like Harvard can nearly fill their incoming class with valedictorians. They can fill it with rich expats, or Asian-Americans. The reason they don’t is because a commitment to diversity has benefits in and of itself, and because there are diminished returns once an individual exceeds a minimum level of competency. In fact, I would argue that having such an unjustifiable barrier to entry does more harm than good. > > Third, even if a woman, or minority gets into an elite institution via affirmative action (instead of someone “more qualified”), they still have to do well once they get there. They don’t get passed up the chain if they can’t perform. Until they are quota hired by some company or government agency of course. ---
**Author:** ![athelas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5e9695/32.png) [@athelas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/athelas)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2009, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454/45 "2009-07-28T21:39:20Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > Third, even if a woman, or minority gets into an elite institution via affirmative action (instead of someone “more qualified”), they still have to do well once they get there. They don’t get passed up the chain if they can’t perform. I echo **billfish678** ’s skepticism above. Also, as a student in an “elite institution,” I can assure you that nobody fails to get passed up the chain, whatever their level of competence. They may not score As, but the minimal level of performance needed to graduate is as low as that in state schools. In addition, studies have shown that non-Asian minorities admitted under preference systems are in fact overrepresented in the bottom deciles of their class, and this appears once again in graduate and professional schools such as law schools. Clearly as a group they do _not_ perform better than their scores indicate, or at any rate not enough to justify giving them a boost of that magnitude. The only reason that such large bonuses are needed are to maintain an soft quota for each race that makes administrative officials look good and protect them against charges of racism. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2009, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454/46 "2009-07-28T22:05:25Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > Ahhh…the old diversity is good because everyone is different…yet wait…we arent different…what was the point again? conundrum… When did anyone say we were all the same? > [@mswas](#): > > Until they are quota hired by some company or government agency of course. Yes, because that happens all the time, and is the most likely outcome. :dubious: > [@athelas](#): > > I echo **billfish678** ’s skepticism above. Also, as a student in an “elite institution,” I can assure you that nobody fails to get passed up the chain, whatever their level of competence. Got any proof of that? > [@athelas](#): > > They may not score As, but the minimal level of performance needed to graduate is as low as that in state schools. In addition, studies have shown that non-Asian minorities admitted under preference systems are in fact overrepresented in the bottom deciles of their class, and this appears once again in graduate and professional schools such as law schools. Clearly as a group they do _not_ perform better than their scores indicate, or at any rate not enough to justify giving them a boost of that magnitude. The only reason that such large bonuses are needed are to maintain an soft quota for each race that makes administrative officials look good and protect them against charges of racism. Even if you are right, the real question is, are they worse practitioners once they graduate? Do you have any evidence that this is the case? Do their grades test scores mean they will be inferior doctors, lawyers, etc? ---
**Author:** ![athelas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5e9695/32.png) [@athelas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/athelas)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454/47 "2009-07-29T00:25:45Z")
We’ve had this discussion before, and it’s a pretty futile exercise when any difference in outcome is ascribed to “subtle racism that I don’t have to prove exists.” It would probably be more productive to get back to the OP. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454/48 "2009-07-29T01:14:26Z")
What drives me nuts is the meme that SATs and other tests have subtle cultural and racial biases for black people born in the US. Somehow a kid born in a village in India or China, who came to the US when he was little speaking no English, and whose background is based on a completely different set of religious and philosophical thought, is not affected as much. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454/49 "2009-07-29T01:35:25Z")
> [@Honesty](#): > > Sigh. Cite? > > My hunch is that if Affirmative Action produced dropout rates of 90% in colleges and universities, there wouldn’t be an outcry. Its a problem precisely because its working as intended. I think, deep down, it enrages whites that Sally Jenkins can get into Med School with a 25 MCAT score and become a doctor. No. I don’t think it enrages them. It ineffably infuriates them. > > - Honesty 30 years ago I sat for several years on a medical school admissions committee as a faculty member. We worked very hard to admit underrepresented minorities–particularly blacks. The standards for admitting them were (and still are) hugely lower than whites and asians; this has not changed in the past 25 years, and I’ve posted those score differences elsewhere. I don’t think whites are “ineffably infuriated” about this except to the extent that the standards are so much lower for blacks–it’s not a small margin–and pretty much nothing but color is the consideration. If you are an underrepresented minority you will get in with far lower qualifications, even if you are from a wealthier background and went to a better school, giving you advantages in both areas in terms of opportunity. It is that part which grates on folks. It isn’t the idea that a truly disadvantaged individual with lower scores gets in in front of them… I nevertheless support race-based AA and quotas. I do not find it unreasonable that the concept annoys some people. ---
**Author:** ![orcenio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/orcenio/32/1036_2.png) [@orcenio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/orcenio)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454/50 "2009-07-29T01:40:09Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > The article makes several good points, but it starts off from a faulty premise. First, the primary beneficiaries of affirmative action have been women (white women specifically). I find in particularly frustrating, and enlightening when people only focus on blacks when affirmative action programs are discussed. It’s enlightening because it betrays either historical ignorance, or a bias of some kind. If you are in the position of fighting AA, then I’d say that **you need to strongly sell it as a “black thing”**. There is no question in my mind that this will only help your position. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454/51 "2009-07-29T01:40:55Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > Third, even if a woman, or minority gets into an elite institution via affirmative action (instead of someone “more qualified”), they still have to do well once they get there. They don’t get passed up the chain if they can’t perform. Well, no. If, on the basis of AA, under-represented cohorts gain acceptance to college, they continue to be eligible 4 years later for lowered standards for graduate or law or medical school. And if, 4 years later again (in the case of med school) they are looking for a residency, they will find again that the standards are lowered for them. And should they go out and compete in the market place, they will find once again that (large corporations, at least) make very specific outreach efforts which put them in front of their competitors. It’s not as if once the playing field has been leveled, the performance standards are equalized from that point on. They are not. ---
**Author:** ![orcenio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/orcenio/32/1036_2.png) [@orcenio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/orcenio)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454/52 "2009-07-29T01:47:22Z")
> [@orcenio](#): > > If you are in the position of fighting AA, then I’d say that **you need to strongly sell it as a “black thing”**. There is no question in my mind that this will only help your position. It’s gonna be a lot more difficult to accomplish, but I would recommend the fighters of “national public health care” in America to do the same. There is nothing that would help their cause more then to say that it is for “the blacks” and the poor. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454/53 "2009-07-29T01:49:13Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > But there is no such thing as \*exactly equal \*opportunity in the real world; particularly when one group is discriminated against, and expected to do less well. More importantly, your theory is simply based on faith. You have little to no credible proof of what you claim except a sense of knowing, and stupid analogies about American sports. > … Despite your claims, people of all sorts have been trying to prove black people are genetically defective for far longer than sociologists and other scientists have been trying to find other explanations. So far, the scientists have have won. > > How about instead of trying to proselytize, you actual present some evidence of your theory. My theory is that nurture and nature combine to produce outcomes, and where nurture is equivalent, nature is left as the explanation. To date, no amount of nurturing efforts have enabled black/white/asian performances to be equalized, whether the metric is sports or math. I’m not sure which scientists you are referring to when it comes to comparing large populations. Is it the case that you would posit that the Inuit, given equal nurture, would compete on par with the Kalenji in the sport of long-distance running? I want to start with a simple example such as that. If I can’t convince you of that, I don’t see much point in trying anything else. I’m basically testing to see how firm your commitment is that two human populations cannot be genetically different. I would like to stay away from rhetoric such as “defective.” Sure; if I were looking only at running, the Inuit would be “defective” but I’d rather stick with the science of it for now and leave the inflammatory remarks alone. ---
**Author:** ![athelas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5e9695/32.png) [@athelas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/athelas)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2009, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454/54 "2009-07-29T15:24:36Z")
> [@Honesty](#): > > Sigh. Cite? Hey, sorry I forgot about this request. [Here you go](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ). Always happy to fight some ignorance! > [@](#): > > Throughout the developed world, specific estimates in the academic research into the heritability of IQ have varied from relatively high, such as over 0.9 in a 1994 report, to relatively low, such as below 0.5 in a 1997 report. A 1996 statement by the American Psychological Association gave about .45 for children and about .75 during and after adolescence. A 2004 meta-analysis of reports in Current Directions in Psychological Science gave an overall estimate of around three quarters. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/affirmative-action-is-just-a-distraction/504454.md?page=2)