NicoleC,

I see where you're coming from, and of course there will have to be a time when "Affirmative Action" stops because we don't need it anymore. But you're wrong about one thing. White middle class men (like me) ARE disadvantaged by affirmative action. But then, black people are still disproportionately excluded from a lot of other areas.

As an example, I have suffered in my career because I am white and male. If I am up against equally qualified black women, I lose.   I happen to know that the job I am in now called up qualified black women hundreds of miles away who had no interest in the job, while they held up my application, because the board of directors wanted diversity. In fact, I got this job because no black woman PhD would work for so little money! I then had to write grants to raise my salary to a liveable standard! So I definitely understand the feeling that "reverse discrimination" is a drag.

But on the other hand, if I want to buy a house in a certain area, or get a loan, I don't face the same challenges a black family faces. So I have a cushion provided by society that many black families wouldn't have. So here's the question: would it be "more fair" for me to be privileged in the loan department and equally treated in the career department, or "more fair" for me to be privileged in one but disadvantaged in another? These are tough questions with no simple answers. I think we all agree that the best thing would be equality in every area, and that's where we all want to aim. But how we get there is the tricky question.

[Just as an aside, I tend to take it all philosophically, and say, "this world IS unfair, but by and large I have a better deal than most of the world's population, so the unfairness benefits me." This helps me not feel victimized, like the plaintiffs in this case do. The ironic thing is, this applies to MOST americans, white or black! Try living in Congo or Tibet!]

Anyway, I ramble! But the point of my last post was that adding ethnic diversity to the educational environment has a value of its own outside of the equality question. I disagree, for example, that Beccy's ethnic background is irrelevant. There are many people whose stereotypes about Native Americans would be challenged by her energy and articulateness. I have a cousin whose freshman college roommate in Oswego, NY said to him (no joke)"wow, I've never seen a Jew before!" The degree of misunderstanding in the world was reduced by their becoming friends. That's the extra value that having people of color (as well as other groups) on campus can give us.

University these days is much more than school. It's the place where adolescents become adults, and much of the learning takes place outside of class. To limit people's opportunities to meet other people by applying a strict numbers game of how well they all did on the SAT makes very little sense.