# Baizuo **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 5, 2019, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749 "2019-09-05T18:13:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/121 "2019-09-08T02:28:44Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …I’m a woke SJW. I haven’t told any asians they are racist for opposing anti-asian discrimination. Not every woke SJW is a baizuo. Perhaps you’re not woke enough. Just like not every Trump voter is a racist. > [@](#): > > This has nothing to do with my question. **I answered your question.** I did answer your question. You asked “what lawsuit”. I don’t know how to answer it any more clearly than that. What question did you answer? > [@](#): > > I’m not confused at all. > > You haven’t come fucking close to explaining how woke SJW’s fit into this narrative you’ve created. You are adding 1 + 1 and coming up with 3. Nothing you say makes any sense. Wait. So you are saying that you don’t think that woke SJWs are supporting Harvard’s side in this lawsuit? Pfft. Once again I would say, look at that long list of amicus briefs written by SJWs. Look at the parade of articles written by SJWs. You don’t see any woke SJWs there? > [@](#): > > Cite? Watch the first episode of Hasan Minhaj series. “Do YOU believe that harvard is or may be discriminating against asians in the admissions process?” > [@](#): > > To be honest I don’t really give a fuck. Yes, that is becoming quite clear. > [@](#): > > I don’t live in America. I can only imagine Harvard in the most abstract of ways. Then how the fuck is it relevant that you haven’t formed a baizuo-like opinion on the harvard lawsuit? It’s like saying “racists in the 1960s used to lynch black people in the south” and you saying “I was a racist in the 1960s and I’ve never lynched anyone” Oh, BTW I’ve never been to the south. > [@](#): > > I’m not going to read the legal documents you cited because reading legal document hurts my brain. And with all due respect I don’t trust your interpretation of what those documents say and what they mean. Yes of course, you don’t want to read the evidence, and you won’t take my word for what it says but think I’m making it all up. It’s like I’m arguing with a global warming denier. > [@](#): > > I’m here because you’ve made specific claims about woke SJW’s. And as a member of the woke SJW community I’m here to correct your misconceptions of what it means to be a woke SJW. Woke SJW’s do not “immediately dismiss the concerns of anti-asian discrimination.” That isn’t what we do. Its in our charter. So whatever it is you are ranting about in this thread: it doesn’t have anything at all to do with anything that a woke SJW actually said. So I say some woke SJWs do X and the only people doing X seems to be woke SJWs. And your response is I am a woke SJW and I don’t do X so that proves you’re wrong and therefore no woke SJWs do X. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/122 "2019-09-08T02:39:15Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > It’s not “woke SJWs” who are defending Harvard’s admission policies – it’s rich white parents. Maybe some of them are liberal, but they’re not defending Harvard because they’re liberal… they’re defending Harvard because they want to justify/rationalize special benefits for their kids. So Janelle Wong, Julie Park, are white? I am not sure where the narrative of the lawsuit being against AA started but the woke SJW crowd picked it up and ran with it. Unless you think discrimination against asians is a necessary element of AA, why would anyone reach this conclusion? I am not sure where the condescending skepticism towards asian concerns came from but the woke SJW crowd picked it up and ran with it. If these allegation were made by any other minority and they had HALF the evidence that exists in this case, liberals would generally jerk their knee in support of the party alleging the discrimination. but not so with asians. I am not sure where the notion that asians were naive pawns being manipulated by the white supremacists came from but the woke SJW crowd picked it up and ran with it. Why do white woke SJWs think that they need to come along and do our thinking for us? Why do they feel the need to whitesplain how we are being duped? These woke SJWs were told the lawsuit was a direct attack on AA and they rallied to its defense and they entirely dismissed asian concerns because AA was being threatened. This is why it feels like asians are a juunior partner, why asians feel like there is a racial pecking order and we’re fairly low down that pecking order. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/123 "2019-09-08T02:43:04Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > Serious question–did they weigh feeder schools and relative wealth (not just current income, but “development potential” level wealth? Espenshade did the study and it was based mostly on stuff available to admissions offices i believe. I don’t know if they had the information to correct for wealth but they did correct for legacy, extracurriculars and sports. I figure legacy might be a proxy for wealth. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/124 "2019-09-08T02:50:12Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Not every woke SJW is a baizuo. Perhaps you’re not woke enough. …I’m as woke as fuck. You can’t get more woke than me. I’m a card-carrying woke social-justice-fucking-warrior. > [@](#): > > Just like not every Trump voter is a racist. LOL. > [@](#): > > I did answer your question. You asked “what lawsuit”. I don’t know how to answer it any more clearly than that. You missed my point. > [@](#): > > What question did you answer? “is that enough background?” > [@](#): > > Wait. So you are saying that you don’t think that woke SJWs are supporting Harvard’s side in this lawsuit? Pfft. I’m saying you haven’t demonstrated “woke SJWs are supporting Harvard’s side in this lawsuit.” > [@](#): > > Once again I would say, look at that long list of amicus briefs written by SJWs. You need to provide names of these alleged “SJW’s”, you need to define how you are using the word “SJW.” > [@](#): > > Look at the parade of articles written by SJWs. You don’t see any woke SJWs there? How the fuck should I know? You haven’t cited a parade of articles allegedly written by SJW’s. What the fuck are you talking about? > [@](#): > > Watch the first episode of Hasan Minhaj series. This isn’t a cite. Its a handwave. > [@](#): > > “Do YOU believe that harvard is or may be discriminating against asians in the admissions process?” What part of “I really don’t give a fuck” did you not understand? > [@](#): > > Yes, that is becoming quite clear. LOL. I don’t think it is. > [@](#): > > Then how the fuck is it relevant that you haven’t formed a baizuo-like opinion on the harvard lawsuit? It’s like saying “racists in the 1960s used to lynch black people in the south” and you saying “I was a racist in the 1960s and I’ve never lynched anyone” Oh, BTW I’ve never been to the south. This thread isn’t about Harvard. Its about woke SJW’s. How is Harvard relevant to the OP? It isn’t my job to put 2 and 2 together. > [@](#): > > Yes of course, you don’t want to read the evidence, and you won’t take my word for what it says but think I’m making it all up. It’s like I’m arguing with a global warming denier. What the fuck does the Harvard lawsuit have to do with the OP? The lawsuit was only mentioned once on the first page, and that mention wasn’t even by you. This thread isn’t a Great Debate. Its a rant. > [@](#): > > So I say some woke SJWs do X and the only people doing X seems to be woke SJWs. And your response is I am a woke SJW and I don’t do X so that proves you’re wrong and therefore no woke SJWs do X. Which woke SJW’s are you talking about? Because what you claim these woke SJW’s are saying and what woke SJW’s actually say and believe are very different things. I’ve NEVER seen a woke SJW who holds the beliefs and says the things you claim we say ever. You haven’t cited a single person who has expressed those views. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/125 "2019-09-08T03:06:54Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Uh, yeah, I really fuckin do. I’ve been involved in leftist groups for nearly half a century, and I have never heard a leftist saying that “success is impossible for any minority group.” What a dumbass claim that would be. > > I think you’ll find, if you look for cites, that this is an imaginary claim. You may consider saving face by citing something different, but I urge you not to go that route, and instead admit that no significant leftist has ever made this claim. That way lies real learning and personal growth. So this is perhaps the 4th request for cites supprting the notion that woke SJWs hold particular views. But I am told that they must be from significant people. Anonymous posts on message boards etc. don’t count. Things said by people at marches and rallies don’t count. This tells me that you (along with others) might agree that there are in fact woke SJWs that talk this way. I will concede that the baizuo are not the Richard Delgados and Mari Matsudas of the world. They tend to be journalists, rally attenders and anonymous message board posters ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/126 "2019-09-08T03:16:25Z")
[quote=“Banquet\_Bear, post:124, topic:839749”] …I’m as woke as fuck. You can’t get more woke than me. I’m a card-carrying woke social-justice-fucking-warrior. > [@](#): > > How the fuck should I know? You haven’t cited a parade of articles allegedly written by SJW’s. What the fuck are you talking about? So you’ve developed a strong opinion on an issue that you know almost nothing about? Hrmm. Perhaps you are a woke SJW. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/127 "2019-09-08T03:25:56Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > So you’ve developed a strong opinion on an issue that you know almost nothing about? Hrmm. …I’m an expert on woke SJW’s. I know lots about woke SJW’s. The behaviour you attribute to woke SJW’s is not behaviour that woke SJW’s actually do. You claim there are a “parade of articles written by SJWs” that back up your narrative. But you haven’t shown that “parade of articles.” Cite these articles. Name names. > [@](#): > > Perhaps you are a woke SJW. What part of “I’m a woke SJW” are you failing to understand? Did you think I was making that up? ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/128 "2019-09-08T04:42:09Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > I believe you. It’s just I hadn’t thought of the reasons in that way before and it seems inhuman and overly exploitive. It’s exaggerated. Even elite colleges need non-full-pay students for their own sake, as the pool of full-pay students is too limited, both numerically and in all sorts of other ways. Yes, colleges try to “build a community” by choosing a student body that will help make the college look good in a lot of different metrics. But that doesn’t mean that the non-full-pay students are merely “props” or “extras” to improve the experience specifically for the full-pays. In fact, sometimes full-pay students are rejected because they seem unlikely to be beneficial to the experience of the other students. It’s not in fact all about pandering to the rich, though I won’t claim that pandering to the rich never happens. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/129 "2019-09-08T04:44:41Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Anonymous posts on message boards etc. don’t count. Things said by people at marches and rallies don’t count. Well, are you even citing any of those? Things that you claim without any evidentiary support that alleged “woke SJWs” post on messageboards and say at marches and rallies **definitely** don’t count. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 6:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/130 "2019-09-08T06:05:50Z")
> [@LAZombie](#): > > Are you equating Asian males to females? > > I thought diversity is our strength. I guess that doesn’t apply to liberal Hollywood and NBA and NFL. It was something of an extreme, jokey example, because I thought your point was ridiculous. The point was just that “equality of outcome” is something of a strawman IMO; I only ever seem to hear people arguing against it. Campaigning for equal pay for equal work or trying to improve prospects for inner city blacks are not trying to equalize outcomes. Let alone claiming there should be equal outcome in all things. While we’re talking sports though, extrapolating from professional sports to the general population is fallacious, and I even started a thread on this topic a while back. For many sports it is just a function of how much a culture values a particular sport and therefore how much money gets spent on scouting, training facilities and teaching, and how many kids make it the focus of their lives. It’s unlikely that Brits have sailing genes or Norwegians have skiing genes. And we can’t say Jews have some natural aptitude for basketball just because they dominate the sport. Oh wait, I mean black people. There are a few sports where partipation is broad enough that perhaps natural aptitude becomes the dominant factor. But even here people make bad extrapolations, e.g. that because jamaican sprinters are, let’s say, on average 2% faster than, say, german sprinters than jamaican people as a whole population must be 2% faster. But to draw such a conclusion would be a misunderstanding of statistics and selection. > [@octopus](#): > > Since you are in China, where the term originated, is that attitude actually common? Is there actually a sizable amount of folks who think western liberalism is nutty? Or is it more of a Chinese Internet thing? I have never heard it, but I’m not a big participant in social media communities, and I’m not always up to date on the latest slang. I have to say, it doesn’t surprise me. When I talk to locals about politics, there is a dismaying amount of ignorance and repetition of standard talking points, usually right wing ones. For example, prior to the full blown trade war, and even a little now, there was strong admiration for Trump. He’s a “strong leader” fighting “political correctness”. And people will come up with WTF statements like “Boris Johnson…he’s a genius, right?” like a turd out of the blue. And this is in cosmopolitan, relatively well-informed, Shanghai. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 10:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/131 "2019-09-08T10:36:05Z")
I’ve learned three things in this thread: 1. Only true woke SJWs eat their haggis this way. 2. Only true baizuo eat their haggis that way. 3. The OP couldn’t provide a cite if his life depended on it. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 11:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/132 "2019-09-08T11:35:35Z")
I’m sure he could, but he has reasons not to. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 11:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/133 "2019-09-08T11:56:34Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > So this is perhaps the 4th request for cites supprting the notion that woke SJWs hold particular views. But I am told that they must be from significant people. Anonymous posts on message boards etc. don’t count. Things said by people at marches and rallies don’t count. This tells me that you (along with others) might agree that there are in fact woke SJWs that talk this way. It should tell you that I’ve been around messageboards. I could cite you people who think that Carlos Castaneda was a nonfiction writer and world-class shaman; that aliens built the pyramids; that handshakes are the moral equivalent of rape; that adoptions are child abuse–and I could do all that without ever leaving this one messageboard. But that doesn’t mean any of those are positions that have any influence whatsoever on public policy. It just means that messageboards sometimes attract nutjobs. So I’m asking you if there’s anyone in any of these categories who’s made the **specific claim** you’ve attributed to them: -Published journalists or other authors (i.e., someone has paid them for their words) -Elected officials -Tenured professors -Members of admissions offices -Organizers of rallies that attracted more than 100 people I’m trying to cast a really wide net here. And if you can’t cite anyone in any of these categories who’ve made these claims, why should we give the tiniest of shits about these claims? But just for shits and giggles, why don’t you cite anyone – ANYONE – who has made these claims? I’m pretty sure I know why you won’t. It’s the same reason I won’t give you the GPS coordinates of the ten-meter-high cat fur sculpture of a viking. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 12:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/134 "2019-09-08T12:08:37Z")
And here’s the thing: while nobody (aside from, possibly, a vanishingly small number of nutjobs with zero influence on society) has made the claim you’ve attributed to them, there are plenty of people who have made different claims in support of the rationale that Asian immigrants to the United States are as a cohort qualitatively different from the descendants of African slaves, or from Latinx immigrants, and therefore should be treated differently as a cohort by public policy. But those claims are a lot more subtle, and require a lot more knowledge and thinking to rebut. I submit that you have, consciously or unconsciously, substituted the ridiculous “success is supposed to be impossible for anyone that is not white in America’s white supremacist culture” because that stupid claim is instantly rebutted; and by attributing it to the people you disagree with, you can have the satisfaction of beating them in an argument. ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/135 "2019-09-08T12:59:09Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > And yet places like Harvard have a higher threshhold for recruiting asians from flyover country compared to the white kids in [flyover flyover]. Why is there a higher threshhold for an asian student to be recruited based on their PSAT? PSAT recruitment has very little to do with who is actually admitted. I mean, yes, I would love to hear the exact conversation that lead to THAT decision, and I’m very open to the possibility that it was entirely bigoted in intent, but, again, recruitment is like a totally different thing than admissions. PSAT recruitment is about building brand awareness and harvesting mass applications to keep acceptance rates low. I have kids who got a 1300 on the PSAT getting slammed with T20 recruitment materials. No one involved in that decision thinks any of those kids will be admitted. > [@Kimstu](#): > > It’s exaggerated. Even elite colleges need non-full-pay students for their own sake, as the pool of full-pay students is too limited, both numerically and in all sorts of other ways. > > Yes, colleges try to “build a community” by choosing a student body that will help make the college look good in a lot of different metrics. But that doesn’t mean that the non-full-pay students are merely “props” or “extras” to improve the experience specifically for the full-pays. In fact, sometimes full-pay students are rejected because they seem unlikely to be beneficial to the experience of the other students. It’s not in fact all about pandering to the rich, though I won’t claim that pandering to the rich never happens. It’s less exaggerated than the popular counter-narrative, that states that all the white kids “deserve” to be there because they had the stats, and the URM kids were “allowed” in because of an altruistic, selfless dedication to social justice–and those generous scholarships are pure charity. Sure, there are lots of rich kids who don’t get in because they seem like they won’t improve the school community, just like fancy country clubs don’t let in every rich applicant: they want to be an appealing place for the community as a whole. Highly selective schools didn’t start recruiting a more diverse environment over the objections of their existing clientele. Again, most admissions officers are good people, in my experience. They want to build good classes that are a positive experience for everyone. But if their marketing research showed that once an URM % got over X%, “development” applications began to decline, you bet your ass they wouldn’t cross that threshold. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/136 "2019-09-08T13:12:04Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Espenshade did the study and it was based mostly on stuff available to admissions offices i believe. I don’t know if they had the information to correct for wealth but they did correct for legacy, extracurriculars and sports. I figure legacy might be a proxy for wealth. This is the same Espenshade who says his data do not prove that Asians are being discriminated against in college admissions. Specifically because he does not have access to all the application data that factor into selections. ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/137 "2019-09-08T13:31:14Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Espenshade did the study and it was based mostly on stuff available to admissions offices i believe. I don’t know if they had the information to correct for wealth but they did correct for legacy, extracurriculars and sports. I figure legacy might be a proxy for wealth. It’s a poor proxy. A kid whose parents went to Harvard and Yale and who went to Phillips Andover is going to be a lot more likely to get in that a kid who went to a local “great” private school that’s only 100 years old and whose parents went to state schools–even if household incomes are similar. The feeder school bump is [real](https://www.thestreet.com/story/13325695/1/top-us-private-schools-with-the-most-graduates-getting-into-ivy-league-universities.html). It’s expected that 30% or more of each class will be accepted by an Ivy League school (no one is tracking admittance to other highly selectives, but I imagine it tracks). The party line is just that since they are great schools, they have great kids and it’s all a perfect meritocracy, but I’ve spoken to admissions officers who will tell you differently. The presence of these kids significantly distorts the perception of how easy it is for white kids to get into highly selectives. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/138 "2019-09-08T13:34:53Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > You are very dismissive of anti-asian discrimination You haven’t given us anything concrete to dismiss. But as for unquantifiable factors, an applicant’s poor critical thinking skills, inability to cite data, or tendency to rely on straw men might be reflected in his or her essay or in teacher recommendations. That would certainly outweigh something unimportant like SAT scores. Other factors: Demonstrated leadership Demonstrated ability to overcome adversity and persist through challenges The school wants a bassoonist ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/139 "2019-09-08T13:56:15Z")
> [@Ruken](#): > > You haven’t given us anything concrete to dismiss. > > But as for unquantifiable factors, an applicant’s poor critical thinking skills, inability to cite data, or tendency to rely on straw men might be reflected in his or her essay or in teacher recommendations. That would certainly outweigh something unimportant like SAT scores. > > Other factors: > Demonstrated leadership > Demonstrated ability to overcome adversity and persist through challenges > The school wants a bassoonist It’s even more complicated than that… It’s also quite possible that implicit bias on the part of teachers (most of whom are white) plays up the accomplishments of white students and discounts similar accomplishments on the part of Asian students–which is reflected in letters (and, as or more importantly, in counselor’s assessments. Counselor assessments carry a lot of weight and counselors spend less time with students). Look, it’s a dirty, imperfect, messy problem. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2019, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749/140 "2019-09-08T14:31:29Z")
Personal assessments certainly can be biased. The evidence is compelling that they are for employment decisions, so I would expect to see that elsewhere. It’s harder to run the same blind studies with schools though. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/baizuo/839749.md?page=8)