WHITE TEEN SUES UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS OVER ADMISSIONS RULES

April 8, 2008, 6:47AM
White teen sues UT over admissions policy
Sugar Land student, in top of class, challenges racial preferences
RESOURCES
FISHER V. TEXAS
See the complaint at www.projectonfairrepresentation.org.
Click on “current litigation”

An 18-year-old Sugar Land student sued the University of Texas at Austin on Monday, challenging the school’s use of racial preferences in its admissions policy.
 
Abigail Noel Fisher, a senior at Stephen F. Austin High School in Sugar Land, was named in the lawsuit filed on her behalf by the Project on Fair Representation.
 
Project director Edward Blum, an activist against race preferences in Houston before he moved to Washington, D.C., said Fisher, who is white, will graduate in the top 12 percent of her class next month but learned in late March that she was not accepted at UT-Austin.
The lawsuit doesn’t challenge the top 10 percent law, which guarantees admission to those who finish in the top 10 percent of a Texas high school’s graduating class. Instead, it contends that UT-Austin unlawfully uses racial and ethnic criteria to select other students.
 
Blum and Fisher’s lawyer, Bert W. Rein, said Fisher did not want to talk to reporters.
 
“She’s still in high school,” said Rein, who practices in Washington. “She isn’t looking to become a national symbol. She just wants to go to the University of Texas.”
 
Patti Ohlendorf, vice president for legal affairs at UT-Austin, noted in a statement that “every year, we … receive applications from thousands of very able high school seniors, but as with many universities around the country, we are limited in the number of applicants we can admit.”
 
She said the university believes its admissions policies comply with U.S. Supreme Court guidelines.
 
The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Austin, and by mid-afternoon, Blum said he had heard from several other students who wanted to join as plaintiffs. His organization has a Web site, www.utnotfair.org, to draw interested students.
 
The top 10 percent law was adopted after a 1996 court ruling stopped Texas colleges and universities from considering race and ethnicity in deciding admissions; UT-Austin’s minority enrollment is higher now than at any time since the law passed.
 
A 2003 Supreme Court ruling said colleges and universities may consider race and ethnicity in order to create a diverse student population only if race-neutral methods haven’t worked.
Blum argues that the top 10 percent law has worked, making it illegal to use race-conscious considerations for students who do not graduate within the top 10 percent of their class.
 
Ohlendorf didn’t address that specifically but said: “we believe that our undergraduate admissions policies are … in compliance with Supreme Court precedent and all other applicable law.”
 
Fisher, meanwhile, will soon have to decide her future, perhaps before the case is settled.
UT-Austin has 20 days to respond. The lawsuit asks that she be re-evaluated by UT-Austin in a “race-neutral” manner and admitted if she qualifies. It also asks that the school be stopped from using race-conscious criteria for students who fall outside the top 10 percent law.
 
Fisher, who plays cello in her high school orchestra, has been accepted at Louisiana State University and Baylor University, according to the lawsuit. But accepting one of those schools, or a spot at another UT system campus, would require a deposit that wouldn’t be refunded if she were later accepted at UT-Austin, Rein said.
 
 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

RACHEL’S TAVERN:  “SERIOUS QUESTION FOR EVERYONE ABOUT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION”:  http://www.rachelstavern.com/?p=916

______________________________________________________________________________

White women continue to step up their relentless, savage assault against Affirmative Action.

 

Many white people scream against AA saying that it benefits so-called “unqualified” black people.

Many jobs (firefighter, police officer, government jobs) REQUIRE and have strict standards in order to be hired for such jobs. AA that covers government contracts in construction (MBE as well as WMBEs) are in place to give some measure of equal access to federal, state and local monies via POC subcontractors bidding on jobs (schools, universaties, etc.) to gain access to this work via prime contractors.

Many cities have set requirements (10-15% of the sub bidders with a prime contractor) to receive bids on construction jobs. This requires the general contractor to in “good faith” seek out subs to bid on these jobs.

Because whites have kept the construction industry closed to POC contractors for decades, AA had to step in the allow fair and equal access not just to money to be had from bidding on (and successfully) obtaining the job.

Experience would have been acquired as well.

With more POC bidding on jobs covered by AA, more POC sub contractors would gain more access to government jobs, building up a resume of experience, financial gain, and eventual independence to strengthen their companies and start a move away from AA-based government contracts.

POC starting small businesses had to start somewhere————AA gives that chance to many up-and-coming small businesses run by POC.

When one group (whites) have held the strings, stingily and greedily, there will be gains at the expense of others (whites gains at the expense of POC).

POC will gain when AA helps them to help themselves.

Whites, too, will benefit when POC gain more access to AA-based programs that were created to help them raise themselves up economically. Whites, like POC, will gain a strong economy with POC creating a strong financial base from more access to the benefits that AA should accrue them. And a srong people (educationally, and economically) menas a stronger America.

White women’s husbands and sons should not be the only ones who benefit from AA; POC have just as much right to benefit from it as well.

And what is so sick and sordid is that the Jennifer Gratz’s and the Cheryl Hopwoods of America are working with Ward Connerly to tear down and destroy a program that helps not only POC, but also helps white women as well.

Connerly is a master also of self-hate and lies.

His title he has given his anti-AA initiative includes in the title “Civil Rights Initiative”:

https://kathmanduk2.wordpress.com/2008/04/01/ward-connerlys-deceptivelying-use-of-the-words-civil-rights-initiative-against-affirmative-action/

Can’t get anymore hateful or deceptive than that.

As for unqualified black people and AA.

I have been on many jobs where I have been over-qualified compared to many whites who worked at that same job.

Same thing at the job I have now.

But, then again, since I have obtained jobs in my life on my own without AA (as have millions of black people), I guess the many black people like me who obtained jobs because of our skills are proof that with (or without) AA, many black people obviously go after jobs THEY ARE QUALIFIED FOR.

Maybe if less white people went after jobs THEY WERE NOT QUALIFIED for and went after jobs they were best suited for, probably many of them would not snot and cry about losing jobs to black people.

Go after the job you are qualified for.

Not after the job you have not the capabilities to do.

If all else fails……….then white people can do what any INTELLIGENT people do:

-upgrade your job skills

-try bringing a little more to the job than what is asked of you when you are hired.

That is how I have obtained jobs.

By bringing more than what was asked of me when I landed the job. (Of course, these qualifications were found out by the employer AFTER I was hired.)

Believe me, many employers are DELIGHTED when they find out they have an employee who has more qualifications than what the employer sought when they advertised for an employee.

Then again, many white people are boo-hooing and bellyaching because they see that it never was incompetence that kept many a black person off a job (before OR AFTER AA).

Often it was the institutionalized/structural racism that kept (and still does) millions of POC from a fair, equal and prosperous life.

Whites have hogged up more than their fair share of a good education, good housing, decent standard of living, high wages/salaries for generations.

And many are angry that what they thought would be theirs forever is being somewhat equitably being distributed as fairly to ALL in this country.

Somewhat…equitably…..distributed.

Whites will feel that POC of color are benefiting from AA.

Whites have benefited from White Affirmative Action for over 450 years.

POC are centuries behind whites (wage gap, wealth gap, etc.) BECAUSE of racism. Whites ARE ahead at the EXPENSE of POC.

Have been for centuries.

White-run America created this bed of inequality.

Afraid it is their bed.
They are gonna have to lie in it.

Radfem, a frequent commentor on Rachel’s Tavern, spoke of California’s Proposition 209, to which I responded:

 

This initiative measure is submitted to the people in accordance with the provisions of Article II, Section 8 of the Constitution.

This initiative measure expressly amends the Constitution by adding a section thereto; therefore, new provisions proposed to be added are printed in italic type to indicate that they are new.

PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE I

The passage of proposition 209 amended the California Constitution to include a new section (Section 31 of Article I), which reads:

(a) The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.

(b) This section shall apply only to action taken after the section’s effective date.

(c) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as prohibiting bona fide qualifications based on sex which are reasonably necessary to the normal operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.

(d) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as invalidating any court order or consent decree which is in force as of the effective date of this section.

(e) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as prohibiting action which must be taken to establish or maintain eligibility for any federal program, where ineligibility would result in a loss of federal funds to the state.

(f) For the purposes of this section, “state” shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the state itself, any city, county, city and county, public university system, including the University of California, community college district, school district, special district, or any other political subdivision or governmental instrumentality of or within the state.

(g) The remedies available for violations of this section shall be the same, regardless of the injured party’s race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin, as are otherwise available for violations of then-existing California antidiscrimination law.

(h) This section shall be self-executing. If any part or parts of this section are found to be in conflict with federal law or the United States Constitution, the section shall be implemented to the maximum extent that federal law and the United States Constitution permit. Any provision held invalid shall be severable from the remaining portions of this section.

 

In the case of California’s Proposition 209 ( http://aad.english.ucsb.edu/pages/Prop-209.html ), the emphasis on advertising to get out the vote, was more on race and reverse racism arguments than on gender and reverse sexism arguments. A line was drawn in the sand for white women:  choose racism or chose genderism. White women made their choice.

Which is why many white women voted with their race, as opposed to voting with their gender. In the end, they remained white women.

They instead shrouded themselves in their whiteness, instead stepping out of that whiteness and being WOMEN, instead of being “white” women.

In the end, MANY WHITE PEOPLE will think of their own intetests before they act on the interests of many black people.

For example, take voting.

Black people have always voted for whom they considered the best candidate for them, the best candidate who championed their best interests REGARDLESS of the candidate’s race.

I have voted, like many black citizens, for candidates who were not the same race/skin color as I. If that candidate stood up for my rights, my needs, my interests—that candidate received my vote again. That candidate in essence—earned the right to my vote. I vote along how candidates stand on issues of importance to me. I do not vote against a candidate because they are of a different paint shade from me:

https://kathmanduk2.wordpress.com/2008/04/08/in-ex-steel-city-voters-deny-race-plays-a-role/

He does not wear a flag lapel pin.
Shit.

How craven and stupid can some people be?

Black citizens for generations have been voting for white candidates because that was (and still is) the only option we had. Is it too much to ask that white people vote for a candidate who is offering CHANGE instead of the same ‘ol, same ‘ol hells?

Is it too much to ask that white people in this country stop seeking the destruction of that which in the end works in THEIR interests?

In the end, apparantly, it is too much too ask such a thing of many white people.

Black women have by and large, sought to work with white people on issues which affected all Americans;

Black people have moreso than white people sought soldarity with not only white people…but, all citizens in this country on important issues: the War in Iraq; the economy; Affirmative Action; the prison system and its racial disparity.

Black people have reached out more towards white people more than white people have reached out towards black people.

Black people have sought to make America a better country that lived up to its ideals of so-called democracy.

White people, in the majority, have not.

So, when white women voted overwhelmingly against AA, when white women hear “reverese racism” (which is a lie) instead of realizing that genderism is just as destructive; when white women think that their white husbands, white sons, white male relatives of all kinds are losing out to black people who seek to better themselves through AA—-that is white racism, plain and simple.

White men are not the only ones in this country who have used, abused and stomped black people into the earth.

So, too, have white women done the same.

When white women cease thinking like “white women” and instead think like human beings and have the best interests of this country at heart FOR ALL, they will continue to in the end, remain “white women”.

It is not just the white man who has stood on the necks of black people. Many white women have stood on the backs of black people as well, especially in how they have so shittily treated black women.

White women benefit from the same degradation of black people just as much as white men benefit.

White women are just as guilty as the white man in their hatreds of black people.

White women, just like many white men, have turned their backs on black people; white women have stabbed black people in the back just as much.

In the end, in my question posed to the millions of white women who have (and are voting against) AA, they will have to face up to the fact that in tearing apart what helps black people, white women are also tearing apart what helps and benefits them as well.

This is not the first time that white women remained white women. It will not be the last time.

History speaks to the treachery of white women, time and time again:

-The racism of the Suffragette movement
-The turning away of white women from not addressing the rapist brutality of their husbands, fathers, sons, nephews against defenseless black women and girls;
-Their taking 100 years to finally speak out against the depravities of lynch mob injustice against black men, women and children

White women STILL benefit from the degradations of black people. Degradations against both black men and black women.

And they know it.

So, for them it has never stopped being open season on black people.

And that includes white women right in there with the white man. . . .

partners in crimes against the humanity of black people.

 

___________________________________________________________________________

On April 8, 2008, Sailorman (a frequent commentors on Rachel’s Tavern) gave the following link in response to my comments on Rachel’s post on Affirmative Action:

“Ann, you may be interested in this link and the article referenced therein: http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2008/04/05/on-prisons-borders-safety-and-privilege-an-open-letter-to-white-feminists/

To which I responded:

“There is no role for the white liberal [in social change]; he is our affliction. -James Baldwin, 1963.”

And there is no role for the white women who seek to destroy and annihilate those who have just as much right to live in this country as do white people.

Where were the white feminists? Out doing what many white feminists have been doing since the abolition of slavery: “Me, Myself, And I”.

So-called white feminists have stolen the blood, sweat, tears and SOUL of what TRUE feminism is. The all-inclusiveness of WOC feminism.

This article is preaching to the choir—the millions of WOC who have been putting their lives on the line so that ALL may live free.

“No one is free unless ALL are free” Fannie Lou Hamer.

It is their own white skin privilege that many white women will seek to preserve, no matter whose destruction it incurs.

“One of my co-interns had overheard a prominent leftist civil-rights attorney, a woman of color who was working with a former coalition organization, say, “The road to hell is paved with feminists.” I thought our work at the Feminist Majority was good and just and concerned with racial as well as gender equality; I didn’t understand.”

As well you cannot understand. It is not enough to speak only to your own interests. It is the height of greed and myopic selfishness to co-opt the suffering of others and then to become enraged when those very same people call you out on your hypocrisy. White women still seek to maintain their white-supremacy/class-privilege position in this country. And their SILENCE on so many issues that affect POC speaks volumes.

Silence on so many crimes against WOC that go ignored and disregarded by so-called white “feminists”:

https://kathmanduk2.wordpress.com/2008/04/06/the-greatest-silence-rape-in-the-congo/

https://kathmanduk2.wordpress.com/2007/08/10/dunbar-village/

https://kathmanduk2.wordpress.com/2008/02/18/from-the-archives-the-forgotten-women-and-girls-of-juarez-mexico/

https://kathmanduk2.wordpress.com/2007/11/25/rape-of-native-american-women-uninvestigated/

As for the scarcity of white feminist women speaking out against violence against immigrant women, of course they are silent. As long as it does not shake up the status quo of privileged white females, why should they give a damn? Only if the black/immigrant women babysitters/cooks/maids/servants called in sick, do the oh-so-put-upon-woe-is-me white woman really grow a conscious and give a damn about WOC. And that is only to hurry up the WOC to get well and get back to her job of taking care of the white woman’s family when that is what the privileged, upper-middle/upper class white woman should be doing herself.

FEMINISM is for the disruption and redistribution of power across society, but, that will never happen in America. Millions of white women have wedded themselves to the death-shroud of WHITE SUPREMACY, WHITE CRUELTY, WHITE RAPACIOUSNESS—-WHITE DEATH, that has been meted out to POC for over 515 years in this hemisphere and around the world.

Which is why the white women who are voting against AA, care nothing for the interests of black people and AA. If it means destroying the few, pitiable, paltry gains, SOME black people have received from AA—then many white women are willing to destroy the gains THEY may receive from AA.

Insanity, irrationality, unreasoning contempt towards the “Other” will do that to white people, time, and time, again.

Those women who work against AA (or anything else that concerns black people) in the end work against their own interests. In the end, what helps black people, helps ALL people.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the 14TH Amendment. . . .

ALL of the above attest to that.

Until many white people realize that by hurting black people, white people hurt themselves, this country will continue to go down.

What can the white woman say to the Black Woman:

https://kathmanduk2.wordpress.com/2007/03/18/what-can-the-white-woman-say-to-the-black-woman/

WE ARE LISTENING.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

2 responses to “WHITE TEEN SUES UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS OVER ADMISSIONS RULES

  1. Pingback: WHITE TEEN SUES UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS OVER ADMISSIONS RULES

  2. Antique

    This greedy, grasping white woman is proof positive that many white people like her hate to see black people advance in any way, especially in education.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s