Rob Long · Apr 26, 2011 at 10:19am

More working women than men have college degrees, according to the recent census.  Which is a problem, if you're running a college admissions office. 

"Gender balance" is supposed to be a goal of affirmative action programs across the country.  Especially at colleges and universities, who never met a quota they didn't embrace.

Until now.  Boys, apparently, are the new protected class.  From Good Magazine:

With college acceptance letters hitting mailboxes in full force this month, high school seniors are either celebrating being accepted to their dream school, or learning to love the idea of attending a safety school. But, for female students rejected from private liberal arts institutions, that rejection might have happened precisely because they're female. Yes, so-called male affirmative action continues to roll on in private college admissions, and it's all, supposedly, in pursuit of gender balance.

The issue first came to the forefront back in 2006 in "To All the Girls I've Rejected" a New York Times op-ed by Kenyon College dean of admissions and financial aid Jennifer Britz. Britz described the real angst of sitting in a room of admissions officers rejecting women in favor of sometimes less-stellar male applicants all because of school's desire for gender balance. Women earn 57 percent of bachelor's degrees and, if admitted according to merit, they'd easily be two-thirds (or more) of the students on a given campus. Apparently, in pursuit of diversity, campuses don't want the student body to be more than 60 percent women.

Tell that to the talented, qualified Asians who apply every year to the UC system in California, and are routinely subjected to quota limits, despite their higher test scores, better grades, and fully rounded extra-curricular activities.

And also: note the tone of the piece.  Note all of the "so-called's" and "apparently's" and "supposedly's."  When affirmative action is implemented in a way they don't like, suddenly it's subjected to withering snark.  And note, too, that college admissions officers seem to be shocked, shocked that "less-stellar" applicants are getting into college due to affirmative action quotas:

Fast forward to a month ago when the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights suspended its investigation into discrimination against women by the admissions offices of private liberal arts colleges, and they've refused to reconsider opening the case. Richard Whitmire, the author of Why Boys Fail: Saving Our Sons from an Educational System That’s Leaving them Behind calls the issue out again in Inside Higher Ed, saying it's a missed opportunity for the nation's boys since they're being held to lower expectations and allowed to succeed.

So, all of these quotas are hurting boys?  Because they're being "held to lower expectations?"  In other words, the left has discovered the "soft bigotry of low expectations."

A little late.

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Tripedis Canis
Joined
Jul '10
Tripedis Canis

From the quoted article:

Britz described the real angst of sitting in a room of admissions officers rejecting women in favor of sometimes less-stellar male applicants all because of school's desire for gender balance.

"Real angst"; different from the "virtual angst" of rejecting white males, asians or any other non-favored ethno-gender group with true accomplishment?

No word on the angst reality quotient of those rejected by their school of choice through no fault of their own. Just another unintended consequence of your tax dollars at work.

FeliciaB
Joined
May '10
FeliciaB

Whew!  I'm glad I have all boys.  Since they're now officially part of the victim class, I can encourage them not to have to strive very hard in their studies or work ethic.  And when they go to college, I'm going to encourage them to marry an heiress.

Nyadnar17
Joined
Dec '10
Nyadnar17
Tripedis Canis:  Just another unintended consequence of your tax dollars at work.

We need to come up with a new name for these things. "Unintended" makes it sound like the consequence were also unexpected.

Rob Long:

A little late. ·

Didn't Ann Coulter come up with a formula or time line for how long it takes liberals to "realize" what conservatives have been warning of them for years?

KayBee
Joined
Jun '10
KayBee

As the mother of two boys, one in elementary school and the other in middle school, I am concerned that the real story here of WHY boys are not going to college and WHY those who are going are "less than stellar," will continue to be ignored.  Public schools are failing our children, and--in particular--failing our boys.  

Schools--and individual classrooms even more so--are matriarchal societies.  Tough to see how boys can learn in classrooms that are ill-suited to their academic and physical needs.  Our society and our schools tell boys that their uniquely masculine characteristics are problems that need to be disciplined or medicated away. 

Samwise Gamgee
Joined
Jun '10
Samwise Gamgee
KayBee: Our society and our schools tell boys that their uniquely masculine characteristics are problems that need to be disciplined or medicated away. 

Spot on.

StickerShock
Joined
Jun '10
StickerShock

 Rob, I don't think boys are held to lower expectations at all.  It's just that schools reward female behavior over male behavior, starting in kindergarten.  

This topic has been studied for years, and there are plenty of great books on the way schools have been trying to mold boys into girls.  Look at the literature choices in grammar schools for a clue --- it's all about girl power.  Why do you think The Dangerous Book for Boys was such a hit?  Sitting still, neat penmanship, fancy book report covers (extra points for using a glitter pen) are not boy strengths.  Years of facing the anti-male attitude can turn a boy off to school altogether.  Add in the push to get every kid to college, ignoring wonderful and appropriate skilled trade training, & it all leads to boys not even attempting college because they've been soured on the education system.

If a college becomes gender-imbalanced, the girls no longer apply!  Colleges are only looking for that type of diversity because it hurts their pocketbooks.

Steven Drexler
Joined
Sep '10
Steven Drexler
FeliciaB: Whew!  I'm glad I have all boys.  Since they're now officially part of the victim class, I can encourage them not to have to strive very hard in their studies or work ethic.  And when they go to college, I'm going to encourage them to marry an heiress. · Apr 26 at 10:47am

I certainly married above my class. I heartily recommend it!

FeliciaB
Joined
May '10
FeliciaB

Steven Drexler

FeliciaB: Whew!  I'm glad I have all boys.  Since they're now officially part of the victim class, I can encourage them not to have to strive very hard in their studies or work ethic.  And when they go to college, I'm going to encourage them to marry an heiress. · Apr 26 at 10:47am

I certainly married above my class. I heartily recommend it! · Apr 26 at 1:51pm

Sold!


Joined
Feb '11
david foster

We as a society have delegated considerable power to university admissions officers--especially admissions officers for "elite" colleges---but how much do we know about who these people are and what their values might be?

Edited on Apr 26, 2011 at 7:31pm

Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading

Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In