Given his previous comments on ethnic box checking, I asked George Tolley if he felt that my daughters should be given preference over his sons by the Williams admissions office. For those who don’t know, George and I, while not the two brightest stars in Carter House firmament, were smart enough to marry wonderful women from the class of 1989. Although both Kay and Kirsten are as American as apple pie, Kay (my wife) is of Chinese descent while Kirsten is of German ancestry — my guess, on the basis of Kirsten’s maiden name along with her blond hair and blue eyes. George replied as follows. I (unfairly!) interspersed my comments below. Of course, if I were really smart/geeky, I would be able to set up this blog with a proper comments section, but that will have to await the summer.

Let me be clear (and equally provocative): Yes, I do.

Further, I trust the admissions people at Williams to assign a degree of preference to that element of their application that adequately balances the multitude of competing interests that come into play. Thus, your daughters may get a large boost, because of a perceived need in that class year to check that particular box; or they may receive only an infinitessimal boost, because of the relative surplus of mixed-race marriages in our generation. In either instance, the admissions office can and should have the discretion to make those judgments — both to improve the class and to improve the four-year educational journey of the students offered admission.

George may be my buddy and ex-roommate, but I find this delusional. In what meaningful way will the race of my daughters — the shape of their eyes, the pigment of their skins — effect the education of their classmates at Williams? How will it change what they write in their papers or say in their classes or through out for discussion during the late night bull sessions? The answer, of course, is that it won’t. Pigmentation, in and of itself, does not matter.

George will respond that, of course, he (and the admissions office) is not interested in pigmentation for its own sake. He (and they) care about the experiences that are correlated with that pigmentation. And, certainly, my daughters have something of an exposure to Chinese culture. They eat Dim Sum. They get “lucky money” in red envelopes on Chinese New Year. But these attributes are about as important to who they are as my father’s preference for green ties on St Patrick’s Day is to who he is.

And that is the difference between ethnic box checking (EBC?) and meaningful diversity. An 18 year old who immigrated from China when she was 10 and speaks Chinese at home to her parents might (might!) deserve some sort of preference over George’s sons in applying to Williams. Such a woman would add more diversity of opinion and world view to a Williams classroom than my own daughters would, charming as they might otherwise be. To argue that my daughters deserve a preference over George’s sons — My but their eyes are so unsually shaped! And look at the color of their skin! — is to care more about appearence than substance.

In either instance, I approach the issue without believing that “getting into Williams” is the be-all and end-all that getting into the University of Michigan seems to have been for the plaintiffs in their case. Living with crushing disappointment is a valuable lesson — one that some of those Groton kids probably needed more than actually getting into an Ivy school. After all, I didn’t get into most of the Ivy schools where I applied, but I landed on my feet and turned out okay.

Mainly because you were smart enough to marry Kirsten! ;-)

Correspondingly, I fully expect that my boys will be better writers, clearer thinkers, happier people, and more comfortable with diversity or whatever after their college experience (as I certainly was), whether they attend Williams or Swarthmore or the University of Maryland (in this, perhaps I display a bias — I do expect my sons to attend college somewhere).

On top of that, I join those who believe that diversity of opinion and experience is a good thing in higher education. And in a country where the precise thing that would disadvantage my sons in college admissions grants them an advantage in virtually every other aspect of their lives, I add ethnic diversity to the list.

Perhaps George and I agree more than we disagree. Diversity of opinion and experience is good. But the experiences of my daughters is, for most practical purposes, no different from the experiences of George’s sons. Williams parents. Surburban living. Good schools. Soccer teams. Trips to Disney World. Given that, why should Willams favor my daughters?