Skip to main content

Chinese Americans fear racial preferences today

I received two mass emails in the past month urging me to petition against Senate Constitutional Amendment 5 (SCA-5). And they obviously worked because the bill died in the womb. Here's how one email started out:

Hope you have all heard about SCA-5, which if passed, will reduce the ASIAN students enrollment at [University of California schools] by 60% from its current 38% to around 16%, purely because of being Asians.

The passage of SCA-5 as a state proposition would repeal the prohibition on consideration of race or gender in public education programs. This type of consideration is called affirmative action and was repealed in 1996 under Proposition 209.

Now imagine being a Chinese parent in Cupertino, Fremont, Palo Alto and other affluent bay area ethnic enclaves. Your kids live in a pressure cooker of AP classes, language immersion, sports, music, and legions of paid tutors and advisers. You hear stories about kids getting into elite schools because they started a company, wrote a book, have a patent, or performed groundbreaking cancer research. All your Chinese peers are no longer content with their sons and daughters being 1-2 years ahead in math or science so they sign them up for junior college courses before they can drive. And with each passing year, you read how the UC admissions rate keeps dropping as applications increase. 

An aspiring tiger mama reads an email like this and would seriously freak out. You mean you're going it make it EVEN HARDER for my precious not-so-genius tiger cub to get into UC Irvine just because he's CHINESE?

Putting aside the misinformation in the email (before prop. 209, the Asian population at UC flagship Berkeley campus was 37% and now runs around 44%), I can understand why Chinese American parents are upset about what is going on.  

I'm unsure where I stand on using race and a gender as a factor in university admissions. It's a complicated issue. But it doesn't feel like fear should be one's main motivation for opposing racial preferences. And I can't help wondering how many of these parents, if transported back 20 years, would protest against affirmative action when it would have benefited their children. 

We want it both ways

Comments

  1. Pretty sure that twenty years ago the UC system had quotas limiting the asian population, since that's what prop 209, passed in 1996, prevented. Do you mean 40 years ago? Did affirmative action EVER benefit asians?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No they didn't Fred, I'm pretty sure I got into Berkeley on test scores alone and I specifically remember there weren't quotas. The percent Asian population in the UC system grew more in the ten years before Prop. 209 than afterwards. I can't find the source but I will.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Dad's Review of Passport 2 Purity

[3,100 words, 11 minute read] The sex talk is one of the most dreaded conversations parents anticipate having with their children. To make things easier, an entire industry exists to help parents with sex education. Dozens of books have been written to help parents navigate this treacherous topic with their progeny. One of the best known among evangelicals is called the Passport 2 Purity Getaway package . It is produced by FamilyLife, a division of Cru (former Campus Crusade for Christ) and consists of a five lecture CD package including a journal and exercises designed as a weekend retreat for a pre-pubescent child and his/her parent(s). Passport 2 Purity was not my initiative. Our trip came about because Judy had heard from several home-schooling mom friends how they had taken their daughters on a road trip to go through the CDs. She even heard how a mom took a trip with husband and two sons to through the curriculum. So a couple months ago, Judy suggested we take our two older boy

Why Asians Run Slower

My brother got me David Epstein's book The Sports Gene . It is a fascinating quick read. If you're interested in sports and science, it will enthrall you.  I finished it in three days. Epstein's point is that far more of an athlete's performance is due to genetics than due to the so-called "10,000 hour" rule promulgated by books such as Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell and Talent is Overrated by Geoff Colvin (both which are very good). The 10,000 hour rule states that any person can reach expert level of performance in a sport if they devote 10,000 hours of deliberate and intentional practice.  That's a lot of hours. Most people aren't capable of anywhere close. And that's precisely Epstein's point. Someone who devotes 10,000 hours of sport-specific practice is likely genetically gifted for the sport in extraordinary ways AND genetically gifted in their ability to persevere and benefit from practice. Therefore, a person who can pra

Unsolvable Problems in Marriage I: Lowering Expectations

Different expectations of conflict From a recent Facebook post: Working on a post about unsolvable problems in marriage: For those who have been married five or more years, on a scale of 1 to 10, how much expectation did you have entering into marriage that communication could resolve any conflict between you and your spouse? How would you rate that expectation now? People often enter into marriage thinking that most if not all their conflicts can be resolved. Women come into marriage thinking "I can make my husband a better man". Men come into marriage thinking, "My wife will learn to see things my way". This idealistic view of marriage does not survive contact with the enemy. Even for couples for whom the first years of marriage are conflict-free, raising children is its own brand of unsolvable problem. And then there's sickness and mental health issues, job changes, unemployment, moving, and shifts in friendships. Conflict in marriage is inevitable. A number