UCLA student's anti-Asian rant

So a white guy doing an Ebonics riff isn't a racial slur?

Right.

 

A black guy doing a goofy white voice is comedy!

 

I guess I don't understand how making fun of the way a minority talks isn't a racial slur.

 

I loved how she said she'd be deep in thought and study and "about to reach an epiphany," when she claimed she'd be disturbed by the Asian kids on the phone.

The only epiphany she looks like she's ever reached is that hot chicks get away with shit.

 

agreed...slur can be used as a noun or a verb.

 

She's another example of how American youth can be so sophisticated in the use of their computers, cell phone/video cameras, YouTube and the internet, yet so dumb about the consequences. They still haven't learned that the internet is forever.

 

She's in the library because it has quiet places to snog in.

 

I don't think she's hot, and I don't see it as relevant to her comments, although her sloppy-yet-self-assured appearance does make it easier to dislike her.

As for UCLA, at least they accept students based on aptitude. Do you think it'd be 36% Asian if the admissions department had the autonomy to craft its perfect little bubble like the private schools? Forget about it. It's much harder for Asians to get into top-tier private schools, especially in tech/science, because their disproportionate scholastic aptitude doesn't mesh with idealized demographics. That's why Cal and UCLA etc. have so many more Asians than Stanford does. Same state, same applicant pool to a significant degree, and vastly different makeups.

Stanford undergrads 19.8% Asian-American (2.3% Native American, 1.6% Hawaiian, 11.1% African-American)
UCLA undergrads 37.2% Asian-American or Pacific Islander (0.5% Native American, 4.1% African-American)
Cal undergrad admits 2010 45.7% Asian-American (0.8% Native American, 3.4% African-American)
UC system statewide 32% Asian-American (3% African-American)

I would've included Hispanic/Chicano/Latino etc., but frankly accurate statistics of that group are so hard to come by given the ongoing issues with nomenclature and self-identification.

 

Very true. She probably posted the ignorant rant thinking only her friends would see it and then, for whatever reason, it blew up.

 

Stanford also recruits nationally, which skews the in-state demographics.

 

She makes the rant to her dorm buddies, it's a 2.

She makes the effort to record it and place it on the web, it increases by a power of 2.

 

That's a valid and interesting point. If she was a professor, or an administrator or any kind of public figure I agree that it's probably a four. The fact that she recorded and posted it, even if she thought only her friends would see it makes it worse. But in the context of a college kid making these comments, it's not that bad.

Your point is a good one.