Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!ll-xn!cit-vax!amdahl!bnrmtv!timlee
From: timlee@bnrmtv.UUCP (Timothy Lee)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.sci
Subject: Re: Why are there so few [female|black] physicists?
Message-ID: <547@bnrmtv.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 29-Jul-86 14:45:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: bnrmtv.547
Posted: Tue Jul 29 14:45:25 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 1-Aug-86 07:46:10 EDT
References: <1970@brl-smoke.ARPA> <320@rtech.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Northern Research, Mtn. View, CA
Lines: 87
Keywords: This is long
Xref: watmath net.women:11690 net.sci:1399

> In article <526@bnrmtv.UUCP> timlee@bnrmtv.UUCP (Timothy Lee) writes:
> >> Well, then, be skeptical of me.  I was severlly insulted by the employment
> >> divisions of two companys that offered me high paying jobs that had nothing
> >> that they needed done, that simply took advantage of the fact that I was a
> >> double minority and formerly a student without taxable income (some states
> >> with employment drives give Big tax breaks for hiring someone that was
> >> formerly unemployed or employed below a subsitance level).  If I had taken
> >> those jobs I would have had saved them more money and fulfilled enough
> >> Quotas to make it worth their while to hire me and not have me to anything.
> >> The assumption that I resented was that I *would* do nothing.  And, being
> >> above all an arrogant Techer, that angered me enough after a cursory
> >> questioning of my supposed soon-to-be boss to say to the face of the
> >> employment manager that I was not going to take their job and why.
> 
> >Similar situations happen in colleges and universities.  The emphasis nowadays
> >is on `enrollment and retention', a euphamism for admitting as many targeted-
> >group students as possible, then making sure that they stay as long as
> >possible.  This means discouraging them from taking difficult courses or
> >majors (so they don't flunk out) and getting them to take a lesser number of
> >courses per semester/quarter (so they graduate in 5 or 6 instead of the
> >usual 4 years;  such a 5 year student counts 5/4 as much as a 4 year student
> >in figuring quotas).  
> 
> You're talking about the children of the rich and famous right?  You 
> mean like kids with last names like "Rockefeller" and "Watson" right?

It applies to them as well.  See below.
> 
> I won't even start on what's been going on with James D. Watson's
> son at Prep school -- one that he wouldn't have gotten into without
> Dr. Daddy's big name.  All I have to say is that it serves the guy
> right to have his son screw up so badly after what he did to 
> Rosie Franklin.   There is justice after all.

What did he do?  This sounds interesting.

> 
> >The result is that the really well qualified student
> >who would have gotten in and succeeded anyway to feel inferior because of
> >his/her race/sex.  The presence of a large number of `quota admits' lowers
> >the college community's perception of the student's race/sex, thus causing
> >others to see him/her less favorably than a student from a non-targeted
> >group.  
> 
> Let's throw in socioeconomic status and let the word "race" mean WHITE
> and "sex" mean MALE.  Honey, I've seen some *DUMB* WHITE BOYS around the
> IVYS, I mean DUMB.  And the reason they need that OLD BOY SHIT is that
> they need daddy daddy and uncle so-and-so around to make them look good,
> and to power-muscle other people away who would make their darling
> WHITE BOY look bad.  
> 
> Says one woman to another at the polo arena:
> 
> "He has no right to look so dumb.  He's not *that* rich!"
> 
> >Those who are the actual `quota admits' would face the same prejudice,
> >but also would likely receive an education of marginal value (the easiest
> >major and course selection).
> 
> Spoken like a true white boy.
> 
> 
> Cheryl

WHat I was really talking about was that colleges and universites often have
ulterior motives when they are considering minority students in admission,
etc.  Admitting and retaining more minority students increases a public
college's image in a state legislature, so a college will go out of its
way to admit them.  Its interests are not the minority students themselves,
but with their PR with the state legislatures (only applies to public colleges,
but that is what I was originally referring to).

As for the rich dumsh!ts who get into prestigious colleges, well there is also
an ulterior motive:  very generous family and alumni (assuming the rich
dumsh!t actually graduates) contributions.

And to add another example, how about revenue producing athletes?  Surely they
aren't held to the same standards everyone else is.  Their benefit to the
institution should be obvious;  they are only there for that reason, not
because the school thinks they will flower into honor students.

All of these students face similar situations:  all are there because of
ulterior motives, not because the school thinks they are late bloomers or
whatever;  all are minorities* within the school;  all are seen as boneheads
by their fellow students;  most don't derive much academic benefit.

*I don't mean RACIAL minorities, I mean NUMERICAL minorities.