The BBC is claiming Cambridge University is failing black male students…
Of 3,449 students accepted into Cambridge during the 2015/2016 academic year, 38 defined themselves as black, a proportion of just over 1%. This figure did not include any students who defined themselves on their application as mixed race.
Er….BME students make up 25.3% of all students and around 37% of post-graduate students…oh the racism at Cambridge…..
Students from a BME background comprised 21.9% of home undergraduate applicants, 20.1% of all offers and 20.0% of all students who accepted a place in 2015-16
Students from a BME background made up 25.3% of undergraduate students, 36.9% of Taught postgraduates and 38.7% of Research postgraduate students in 2015-16
And what of that ‘3,449 students accepted into Cambridge’...only 1%, 38, are black male……er what about the actual total figure of 1,143 being BME…33.7%?……not such a ‘racist’ picture after all……
In 2015-16 applications were received from 7,664 White and 7,927 BME students (49% and 51% respectively). Of those who accepted offers from the University, 1,143 were BME and 2,247 were White (33.7% BME).
The BBC has cherry picked a very select figure and group…..why not pick gay black muslims accepted into Cambridge or red-heads who have a Brummy accent?…we can all make a case for some sort of discrimination by rigging the context and questions…..just look at this quote…complete bollocks…
Matthew Ryder, deputy mayor of London for social integration, social mobility and community engagement, said the photo makes a “powerful statement” in an “understated way”.
Mr Ryder said Cambridge has been keen to find ways to improve diversity in applications but “the results have been poor”.
What? The results have been poor? BME students making up over 25% of undergraduates and 37% of postgraduates? Clearly Cambridge can’t be that hard to get into if someone of the intellectual calibre of Mr Ryder managed it.
Full diversity will only be achieved when ALL students are ‘Pakistani heritage’ Muslims, I think that is how it works now.
To quote the ‘Paki-in-the-Park’ that I had the misfortune to hear, your picture shows F***ing N***ers, an objective observation from someone who can’t, by PC-definition, be racist.
And I demand that Cambridge let in more white chaps like me who are over 6’3″ but under 6’5″ and enjoy meeeja studies [ watching the tele [not the al beeb] ]. This because Cambridge should show that is understands and cares for so called tall people. Ridiculous .
Wouldn’t it be funny if enough white males at the uni got together and ‘self identified as black’.. problem sorted!
Cambridge has of course not failed with its famous female alumnuts…
https://goo.gl/images/TnftH0
… slouched like an over-ripe pudding on the BBC tv sofa … once had a fling with Red Jerry … and her son —-
This self defining lark has, of course, presented great opportunity in the area of the law of unintended consequences and precedent.
Next census, I am presuming my being a follower of May the Fourthism will this time have to be recognised.
Old, white, problematic white male communities can live in fits of giggles as the BBC and fellow Gordians implode.
The idea that all students, and “all” here means students defined by race, religion, ethnicity, colour, gender inclination, etc, must all have equal representation at Cambridge/Oxford university. Not equal opportunity but equal representation.
But an elite university, that is one which aspires to a continuing high standard in learning, can never have equal representation. If it is forced to, its standards will fall, just as they have done in universities in California, and the Ivy League.
The way to avoid the charge of racism is to have entrance examinations, and no interviews. In subjects such as the Physical sciences, it is an easy matter. More difficult are subjects in the soft disciplines. But these subjects, by their very nature should not be in a university. “Soft” subjects by definition, have no place in a high academic standard university.
But if such a policy is implemented, it will be criticised that their graduants are elitists and one dimensional. But that is how it should be. One does not have physically disabled players in the Premier league. Why should intellectually challenged students be in Engineering or Physics, just to make a quota.
In the USA, ever susceptible to such charges, Admissions are now governed by many factors, among one is that students are taught to live in a diverse atmosphere. But that is not the job of the university. Universities are by definition centers of excellence.
American universities are no longer academically vigorous places but “safe places” nonsense, where the weak minded are protected.
A few decades back, entrance to American universities was by SAT scores. The result was that the entrants were overwhelmingly Chinese, Indians, Japanese and Whites. Latinos and Blacks were virtually non-existent, particular;y in the Physical sciences, Medicine and Law. That is, where there was intense academic competition. Admission criteria was then changed, to stop what was really a success story.
Result – lowered standards. Followed by a class action law suit by academically bright students with high SAT scores, denied the opportunity of an Ivy League education because of their race and intelligence. Monty Python, where are you? Cambridge seems to be heading that way.
Would these students have a case against the Basket Ball league, Ice Hockey Federation, Football and Soccer federations, Boxing Federations etc, for discriminating against them? If not, why?
BTW, if you know a really bright young person, interested in an intellectually demanding discipline, advise him/her to apply to Singapore or Hong Kong university. The teaching language is English, and there is no concession to political correctness.
Cambridge/Oxford are good at research, but not so good in teaching. There may be an inverse relation between the two.
Another unintended consequence. Industries that require high quality graduates in IT, Artificial Intelligence, Solid State Physics, Chemistry and Engineering, are now forced to fish in India and China. No option really.
Shame they put up such a poor spokesman on WatO yesterday. (BBC Radio4 1-1.45pm 3 May)
Poor lad – overcome by nerves, perhaps – couldn’t answer any question, put to him by Ed Stourton, with any clarity. Ed was very generous and didn’t ask why Chinese, other Asians, in all their varieties, as well as Latinos, in all their varieties, at Cambridge University had been excluded from this group photograph.
Racist?
It did rather appear so.
Sexist?
Definitely.
Campaigning?
Obviously. And a worthy aim. Get young, British males of African origin to consider working hard at school to win (note the traditional words used there) a place at Cambridge University. I endorse that wholeheartedly. I am actually guessing that was partly or mostly the motive. The group’s spokesman was not at all clear on that.
Of course, if you know something of the history of Cambridge University before the creation of a Racism Industry in the UK, you will recall that places at the University have always been open to young men of African origin, even if non-resident in the UK. I seem to recall some photographs of the Cambridge Seven with their fellow students from around the globe. Or am I mis-remembering some 19th Century history?
Get young, British males of African origin to consider working hard at school to win (note the traditional words used there) a place at Cambridge University.
It has been tried many times in the last few decades. There are reasons that even this will not succeed in any significant manner.
… Ed treads too carefully as he could be chopped again at any time … the chappie stumbling on about “”people who look like me”” … ! … was sad … but – he will be in the pulpit soon and no doubt on TFTD …
Its the old ‘selective reporting’ routine again.
I dare say one-armed Barnsley fishmongers are also under-represented. So what?
Notice it is the Afro-caribbean society? Afro caribbean kids tend to underperform at school.
Indian kids on the other hand tend to do as well or even better than all those racist whiteys.
So you’ll notice no mention of Indian Asian student numbers in the article.
No, the biased BBC narrative is the only thing that matters…….
Sluff, you are right. They do. That’s why this could and should have been a positive message opportunity. Hence my endorsing of the probable motive. But it was messed up. By the guys themselves.
lojo has it right there in his or her last sentence.
I also blame the Racism Industry for their failure. The sooner we move beyond that, and it becomes as redundant in the UK as the coal industry is at present, the better.
Sluff
It got so bad in California unis in 1990’s, with Indians and Chinese, hogging virtually all places in the hard disciplines – Engineering, Medicine, Law, that major universities were forced to put Chinese and Indians in the “White male” category.
It does not pay to be intelligent and hard working in this Politically correct but “Gone to the Dogs” society that we now live in.
And yes. Innate Intelligence is the most important factor, or should be, for entrance to a prestigious university. Hard work not that important.
I have been there before – I am afraid that non-withstanding the ‘sympathetic marking’ and the easy ride given to foreign payers at Cambridge, apart from a very small proportion of very hard working black male students, statistics tells us that they are going to fail all by themselves…..
Or go on to be shadow ho… oh, hang on.
Not just sympathetic marking but full deployment of statistical tools to ensure that almost everyone passes.
In more innocent times, eloping with the Master’s daughter, could get you sent down. Now I don’t know what one has to do to earn such high merit.
One wonders how three future prime ministers of India managed to get places at Cambridge if it’s so racist. Oh I forgot, racism can mean whatever the grievance-industry wants it to mean.
A few facts:
In 2011, of the 56 million residents in England and Wales, 86% were White, 8% were Asian/Asian British and 3% were Black/African/Caribbean/Black British.
Seeing as around 1/3 of the intake were non-white. Cambridge has gone above and beyond mirroring society. On that note I wonder when the bBC will get round to tackling the lack of diversity of this British school:
”” People who look like me “”” was the category relentlessly referred to by the Cambridge “divinity student” given many semi coherent minutes on R4 yesterday …
… the stench of dumbing down …
”’People who look like me ”’ seem to be over-represented …
So it’s OK for “people of colour” to want to see “People who look like me” around. But groups of “people of no colour” are described as hideously white, and need to be diversified.
I think I need a Cambridge education to understand all these paradoxes.
I think you’re all being a little cynical over this.
A Cambridge education worked wonders for Diane Abbott. How can you deny black men the same benefit?
Be fair !
Good one.
BbcEverydayRacism 3:30pm Radio 4 program Open Book.
“And as Donald Trump celebrates his first 100 days in office, this month’s guest editor recommends White Trash: The 400 Year Untold History of Class in America which looks at the roots of popular political opinion.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08njzhb
Is there a book about Black Trash?
If you want to be a news reader it looks like you must be black.
On sky news today, they had one of each, a male and a female sitting presenting the news.
It was approaching an ad break and they said “when we come back we will be looking at the plight of the Chechnian LGBT people.
I switched off.
They do seem well over represented reading the news though.
This article just shows how intolerantly remorseless the BBC have become in their mission for an some sort of ideal state.
Of course, just as the anti-globalists of 25 years ago now find themselves being the pro-glabalists, the UAFs and ANTIFAs are now the fascists, and the BLMs are now the racists, their idea of an ideal state will change and it will not matter. The impetus is always about control.
It’s about time the BBC told us what their ideal state is, what they are aiming for. Rather than demanding change, then more, and more, and never being happy about it, just tell us now what sort of society they want to achieve.
Isn’t this Mao’s idea of ‘Perpetual Revolution’? It doesn’t matter what the revolution is about, it is the state of chaos and uncertainty which is important – there is no ultimate goal other than the maintenance of power by a small elite at the top, who are always able to shape-change to show they are on the ‘correct’ side at the time.
Cranmer
Got it in one.
It was called “agitprop” when I was at university in the late sixties.
The BBC must love people that are as they themselves call them “mixed race”. Those lovely folk that can be included in their stories, excluded or both, depending on how they want to spin things.
Want to guilt trip white people into feeling racist about university places … exclude them … only 1% blacks at university. Oh no, that can’t do.
Want to promote something positive … include them … Obama first black US President. Yay, aren’t ethnics great.
Aren’t we racist … exclude them … black people overlooked in the NHS.
Aren’t BMEs great … include them … more black doctors in the NHS.
And so it goes, spin whatever way they want.
Agreed, always irksome to hear Obama descibed first and foremost as black as if his white heritage counted for nothing, first mixed race president would surely have been more accurate.
Al beeb are only happy when sniffing out racism, real or usually imagined. It’s their raison d’etre, their obsession, their religion.
The beeboids love their statistics, but one stat you’ll never see is IQ test scores by race,
which explain a lot about underachievement among certain groups.
How many of those Cambridge students will actually work in the UK after they graduate? Not just the black ones.
“The BBC is claiming Cambridge University is failing black male students”
Nowhere in the report does ‘The BBC’ claim any such thing.
Your whole post based on nothing but your own lie.
Yes it quotes Matthew Ryder who says the result of efforts to improve diversity “have been poor”; but then goes on to say the university was up for a reward for “eliminating racial inequalities”.
It also quotes Eilis Ferran who says; “The university is committed to creating an environment where students and staff can realise their potential regardless of their ethnic, racial or national background.”
“Er….BME students make up 25.3% of all students and around 37% of post-graduate students…oh the racism at Cambridge…..”
Neither the BBC nor anyone in the report accused Cambridge University of being racist.
“…er what about the actual total figure of 1,143 being BME…33.7%?……not such a ‘racist’ picture after all……”
Again, neither the BBC nor anyone in the report accused Cambridge University of being racist.
“The BBC has cherry picked a very select figure and group…”
It’s a report about why the are so few Black people at Cambridge and you don’t like it because it wasn’t about people who weren’t Black? How utterly predictable.
“…why not pick gay black muslims…”
Gays. Blacks. Muslims. You missed out Disabled, Alan.