Current mood:	annoyed
Current music:	Violins

The Conservatives are being repressed!
Background info: The College Republicans group at the University of Washington held a bake sale a while ago that caused a lot of controversy (during and after). In protest of Affirmative Action, they sold baked goods with cost being based on the race of the buyer. (American Indians: 35 cents, Blacks: 30 cents Whites: $1)

Apparently there was supposed to be another thing on Tuesday (which never happened), but it was enough to get this guy to write a letter to The Daily (UW's newspaper), wailing about conservative suffering:

"While some students worry about financial woes or "racist" admission boards, other students must worry about earning negative points in their classes just for having a conservative viewpoint. This is an equally serious problem that can seriously effect the outcome of someone's education and life after college."

Later on he clarifies: "there are students who are AFRAID of this sort of thing happening. To them, it is a realistic fear of being discriminated against, which may POSSIBLY lead to future ramifications, just like the fear many minority students claim to have coming to a university like this and facing racial or sexual discrimination."

Yeah, it's exactly the same thing.

Anyway, People respond. There are even trolls.

Edited: Hm, noticed that my focus seems to be just on the conservative guy, which although I found him wanky, isn't really the entire wank. (I was just too lazy to go back into the comments and pull out the other wanky comments) Like:

"Recognizing that adamforest is an asshole with santorum for brains is essential to understanding the key components of his side of the debate" ... "If adamforest wasn't such a douchebag and could hold up his side of the debate, then maybe the discussion could have included more than peoples' reactions to him being an asshole."

(Post a new comment)

rann
2003-12-11 04:16 am UTC (link)

Yeah, it's exactly the same thing.

Um... I'm unclear on how it's not.
Supposedly, minority students have to worry about not getting into college because of their race, so Affirmative Action was created, because apparently college admissions boards are full of racists.
However, it's been pretty well proven that college professors, the guys who determine students' grades on a whim if they care to, are very liberal, going so far as to stage walkouts in protests against war. So a student could, quite reasonably, worry that should they speak up about their conservative views, or even be honest about them should they come up in an assignment, that the professor would fail them just for having an opposing viewpoint.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	girl_friday 2003-12-11 07:03 am UTC (link)
	I agree. I'm personally against affirmative action, because race shouldn't matter at all. It shouldn't even be asked on college applications. (Reply to this)(Parent)

Re:

celfry
2003-12-11 09:57 am UTC (link)

Not to get this into a debate on affirmative action, but my comment was referring to the almost hysteria he had about how conservatives were oppressed. ("I believe this is an epidemic") I can understand him feeling pressure for being conservative in a more liberal atmosphere, but I think that goes with any setting where your beliefs aren't in the majority. There's not this conspiracy out there of liberals trying to screw with conservative students' grades, which he seems to imply. (Especially as TAs, whose beliefs are probably a lot more diverse, usually end up doing a lot of the grading.)

And I personally don't think that this "liberal bias", whether it exists or not, can really be equated to what has gone on with minorities.

Also, the grading system is hardly so capricious. There tends to be grading policies and a body of work from the student supporting the grade they receive which can be used as evidence for or against a professor if it's contested. This teacher wrote a very thoughtful letter regarding grading in response to this guy's post.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	crickets 2003-12-11 11:16 am UTC (link)
	This teacher wrote a very thoughtful letter regarding grading in response to this guy's post. Yes. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	sepiamagpie 2003-12-11 05:10 am UTC (link)
	I'm trying to figure out how they priced things. So far I'm coming up with dice. (Reply to this)(Thread)

rann
2003-12-11 05:42 am UTC (link)

Probably based on the preference given to particular races by affirmative action... I actually saw a small sheet of those, once, and it had a whole sliding scale of "if you're this race and have this GPA, you have this chance of getting in." White students had a much lower chance of getting in under affirmative action... if your grades were too low, you don't get in, obviously, but also if your grades were too HIGH, they might actually tell you to -go to a different school- so they could make room for minority students with lower grades.
Personally, I just see affirmative action as an all-around racism... it's unfair to students who earned their way in but got denied, and it's also telling minority students that they're not good enough to get into college any other way.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

oxydosic
2003-12-11 03:49 pm UTC (link)

Personally, I just see affirmative action as an all-around racism... it's unfair to students who earned their way in but got denied, and it's also telling minority students that they're not good enough to get into college any other way.

Exactly why i am against affirmative action. It also gives the message to minorities that they don't need to work TOO hard in school, because their race alone can get them into college. It also seems to assume that minorities all have less opportunities for a decent grade/high school education, which really only helps to perpetuate harmful stereotypes about blacks all living in the ghetto, etc.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

beccastareyes
2003-12-12 02:50 pm UTC (link)

Hmm... reminds me of my college interview -- I had applied to a presigious school that focused mainly on science and engineering. Consequently, they didn't have very many women. The interviewer mentioned that various nonacademic factors would count on my admission, including the interview, and the fact I was a female from the Midwest who wanted to do a hard science. I flat out told him that if I got in because I was a female physics student from the Midwest rather than because of my GPA or SAT scores, I didn't want to go.

I didn't get in.

Eh, I'm probably better off at the state school I ended up at -- no student loans and a cushy job with the Physics Department here.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

necronomist
2003-12-11 05:13 am UTC (link)

"The College Republicans group at the University of Washington held a bake sale a while ago that caused a lot of controversy"

I saw pictures of that taken by a student. If they offered better baking goods, maybe they would have had more people coming to their table.

(And if they are so afraid of stating their views for fear of being discriminated against, what do they say about business majors who do not assume capitalism is the one true way? Probably get another major).

(Reply to this)

oxydosic
2003-12-11 03:53 pm UTC (link)

I'm against affirmative action myself, because i feel it really does no one any favors. It denies admission to well qualified students in favor of less qualified students on the, in my opinion, very racist assumption that minorities are automatically less intelligent and therefore need more lenient admission criteria. It does nothing but perpetuate stereotypes and encourage certain ethnic groups to continue to paint themselves as victims who need special rights.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	jfpbookworm 2003-12-11 06:45 pm UTC (link)
	You want Argument, room 12A. This is OTF_Wank. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	rann 2003-12-11 06:58 pm UTC (link)
	Look, if people bring up politics, there's gonna be talk about politics. I don't much like it either, and think we need Politics_Wank and that politics wank should ONLY be there, so that I can ignore it and not be tempted to meta, but it ain't happened. Until it does, just accept that there are going to be dissenting opinions when people post political wank. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	soy_latte 2003-12-11 08:42 pm UTC (link)
	Discussion like that has happened in other posts too, and it wasn't necessarily about politics. Which I actually don't mind, because it often gets to the point where "the wank is coming from inside the house." (Reply to this)(Parent)

	oxydosic 2003-12-11 08:34 pm UTC (link)
	Uhhh...other people expressed their opinions on it as well. Why are you only getting on me about it? And Rann is right. You can't expect something politically related to go through without people expressing their own opinions. In a case like this, some people may not see what was posted as wank, according to our own personal views. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	norabombay 2003-12-11 05:29 pm UTC (link)
	I like the fact that a random poster has used the phrase "Santorum for brains". Because a word coined by Dan Savage this spring has certainly spread. Santorum. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	norabombay 2003-12-11 05:30 pm UTC (link)
	Replying to self to clairfy. Not that Santorum is new- it's always been Rick Santorum's name. But the use of it as s derogatory, to indicate that frothy lube/shit mix left after anal sex? Well that's dan savage. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	(Anonymous) 2003-12-17 07:25 am UTC (link)
	I noticed that... I am almost tempted to email a link to Dan Savage. "Look, 'santorum' has even been used in lj drama!" -zahyr, a lurking lj user.. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	cairea 2003-12-20 01:11 am UTC (link)
	Well, he does have a website</b> for this sort of thing now. ^^ (Reply to this)(Parent)