From Andrew Ferguson, writing in the Weekly Standard, "The Quotas Everyone Ignores: Why universities are quietly favoring white males once again":
"After a half-century of battles over racial and gender preferences for URMs (admissions-speak for “underrepresented minorities,” a term that has traditionally comprised nearly anyone who isn’t a white male), colleges and universities have boldly embarked on a policy of affirmative action preferences for . . . white males. It’s like old times.
Few admissions deans like to talk about their latest innovation in recruitment, understandably enough. Less understandably, the United States Commission on Civil Rights decided earlier this month it didn’t want to talk about it either. And even harder to figure, women’s rights organizations are staying mum too.
Since the early 1980s, when a brief period of parity was reached after generations of male dominance, more girls than boys have applied to college each year (MP:..and graduated, see chart above); in 2011, 60 percent of college applicants will be women. Girls—sorry, fellas—are by any objective measure more attractive applicants than boys, with higher average GPAs and test scores. They have fewer behavioral problems. They write better application essays. They have a wider range of extracurricular interests. They clean up better for interviews.
On any fairly balanced scale, the acceptance rate for women at selective colleges should be far higher than for men. Instead it’s the other way around. William and Mary, for instance, accepted 40 percent of the boys who applied in 2006 and only 26 percent of the girls
. The reason is “affirmative action,” sometimes called preferences, sometimes called quotas—though never publicly."
HT: Steve Bartin