Post: #1

Quote:A high school senior who wrote an open letter to the Ivy League universities that rejected her has sparked a firestorm of anger, with readers accusing her of being 'entitled', 'whiny' and even racist.

But others have praised Suzy Lee Weiss, from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for the honesty and 'accuracy' of her article, which appeared in the Wall Street Journal on Friday.

She said she wrote the piece after she was rejected from a string of schools in one day.

Despite the teenager's 4.5 GPA, an SAT score of 2120 and work experience as a U.S. Senate page, she was shunned by Princeton, Yale, Vanderbilt and the University of Pennsylvania.

In her article she blamed not getting into the schools on the fact that she was not 'diverse' enough, and she even accused her parents of giving up on her because she is the last of four children.

She started out with an attack on diversity, suggesting that her white skin, business-owner parents and good education worked against her in the application process.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...ead_module

Post: #2

Her piece was satirical and mostly focused on the 'arms race' of extracurricular activities. But you know the drill on pointing out a victim class entitlement - the butthurt flies.

Post: #3

Im going to defend her: I think the "entitled brat" title is not warranted. When you're a "normal" teenager at around 18 everyone hates their parents and blames their own shortcomings on their parents. I did. Most of my friends did. Fuck, I didn't get over that till my mid 20s. Parents are the closest and most influential outlet you can release your anger on. And when you dont get into the school that you're led to believe will change your whole future for the BEST, you're gonna be angry.

I do think it's bullshit that she didnt get into all those schools with those qualifications. All those schools have all the alumni donors' children, dumbass athletic scholarships and shit, that it is really does become unfair for the middle class white people.

I applaud her for actually trying to expose "the game" of admissions. i.e. going to Africa on vacation for your dad's diplomatic mission but posturing it as volunteering, and all that similar bullshit. But she hasn't had the ephiphanical insight yet that "the game" is "the game" and there's no other way than "the game." She wanted to stick to her own beliefs Ayn Rand style, which are neither correct nor incorrect, but are in opposition with the mass beliefs of "the game." And that's where she fucked up.

What I learned is that you have to embrace those lies and sell yourself in all that fiction rather than in reality. I didn't learn that shit till I was 25-30 years old. It's too bad that she still doesn't realize that her problem was not lying enough, and that she thinks that being honest is the "right" way.

Eh well, maybe she'll get there one day.

Post: #4

Wow the SAT goes really high up now. It used to be 1600 for genius level. She will probably get a job though which is more important I think than an IV league education in liberal arts.

Post: #5

2120 might be impressive to laymen, but that's really not all that impressive when you're applying to HYPSW (or even non-Wharton Penn). The average scores there are something like low-to-mid 1400s on the old scale, so 2120 is pretty average.

Getting snubbed by Vanderbilt though with a 2120? That hurts. That school though, while not the tops in either, is a great combination of chicks and academics--could really maximize a utility function defined by academics, chicks, and academics * chicks.

She is ultimately right, however, about the diversity--which is what drives the PC crowd up a wall. If she were black or latino she would be a shoe-in. As discussed in the 2005 Espenshade and Chung paper: Being white is the equivalent of a 230 point penalty on the SATs vs. being black when it comes to admissions at top schools, a 185 point penalty vs. being latino, and a 50 point bonus vs. being Asian. This was on the old scale too. The gaps have only widened since then, according to follow-up work by Espenshade.

She is also right about extracurriculars being an arms-race.

Post: #6

Suzy Lee Weiss, well we can assume she's probably Jewish. Ron Unz has already shown Jewish students receive a massive advantage in entrance to Ivy League universities compared to other whites and to Asian students, so I'm not sure if she has much of a leg to stand on here.

Unfortunately, America's university system is utterly compromised not just by affirmative action but by absurd court decisions like Griggs v. Duke Power Co. that basically compel employers to search for the most highly credentialed candidate simply as a proxy for looking for the smartest people, all because generalized IQ tests are verboten. If employers could just test job applicants for cognitive ability much of the rationale for liberal arts degrees would vanish overnight.

Post: #7

If she was that smart she would start a website and learn email marketing. College is obsolete.

Post: #8

Like Kabal said, 2120 is nothing special for those schools. Her point is valid, but not really in her own case. And that's how it's often been, ironically - the times when someone has publicly criticized the policy, it's usually someone who wouldn't have gotten in if there was no affirmative action.

(04-04-2013 10:41 PM)Therapsid Wrote:  Suzy Lee Weiss, well we can assume she's probably Jewish. Ron Unz has already shown Jewish students receive a massive advantage in entrance to Ivy League universities compared to other whites and to Asian students, so I'm not sure if she has much of a leg to stand on here.

So you're in favor of racial preferences? I agree that Asians are getting shafted, but I fail to see how Jews are receiving a 'massive advantage' in admissions, when compared with the standards by which similar whites are admitted.

La Griffe Du Lion Wrote:So who is getting the shaft? Enrollment at Harvard is not exactly a mirror of America, but in a meritocratic society, our elite schools would no more mirror our population than does the National Basketball Association. Ron Unz's assertion that "Jews and Asians constitute approximately half of Harvard's student body, leaving the other half for the remaining 95% of America," is almost accurate.

2120 is in the 97th percentile of test-takers. http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalSer...W-2011.pdf

Post: #9

just looked this shit up.

2120 is just slightly above 90th percentile i guess

most of those schools the avg score is 2000 (Vanderbilt) - 2200 (Yale)

so she's basically middle of the road for the "avg" accepted student who got in based on grades and "merit", and its the extracurricular stuff that got her.

but maybe this is her game: get an oped published in WSJ and ride the wave!!!!! So maybe this angry outburst is carefully premeditated?!! who knows!

Post: #10

(04-04-2013 10:41 PM)Therapsid Wrote:  Suzy Lee Weiss, well we can assume she's probably Jewish. Ron Unz has already shown Jewish students receive a massive advantage in entrance to Ivy League universities compared to other whites and to Asian students, so I'm not sure if she has much of a leg to stand on here.

Unfortunately, America's university system is utterly compromised not just by affirmative action but by absurd court decisions like Griggs v. Duke Power Co. that basically compel employers to search for the most highly credentialed candidate simply as a proxy for looking for the smartest people, all because generalized IQ tests are verboten. If employers could just test job applicants for cognitive ability much of the rationale for liberal arts degrees would vanish overnight.

.....what ????? .....

many employers have exams, tests, interviews, that are required in order to gauge aptitude - what are you talking about ?

the un iversty system utterly compromised ???/ whatever.....

Post: #11

(04-04-2013 10:45 PM)MidniteSpecial Wrote:  If she was that smart she would start a website and learn email marketing. College is obsolete.

College is obsolete, but not the IVYs

they represent lifelong accomplishment that no one can ever take from you: no matter how much or little success you have thereafter.

Post: #12

(04-04-2013 10:41 PM)Therapsid Wrote:  Suzy Lee Weiss

Well "weiss" is jewish but "suzy lee" sure as hell aint

Post: #13

I will reserve my judgement until I see what she looks like.

Hot = I'm with her.

Fat = she can shut the hell up.

Post: #14

(04-04-2013 10:36 PM)Kabal Wrote:  2120 might be impressive to laymen, but that's really not all that impressive when you're applying to HYPSW (or even non-Wharton Penn). The average scores there are something like low-to-mid 1400s on the old scale, so 2120 is pretty average.

Average SAT for my class (at an Ivy) was a 2170. 2120 is standout for a minority (black or hispanic), but less remarkable otherwise.

Quote:She is ultimately right, however, about the diversity--which is what drives the PC crowd up a wall. If she were black or latino she would be a shoe-in.

If she were black, her SAT score would be in the 99.9th percentile for her group. The number of blacks who score at that level (north of 2000 on the new SAT scale) is very, very small, much smaller than the number of whites and Asians who manage the same (and that is true even after you account for disparities in population size).

Affirmative Action is most useful for the top .1% of blacks and hispanics. If she were black and among this group (read: able to outdo 99.9% of other blacks), she'd be fine. Anything less and she'd be in exactly the same position barring some sort of other hook (athletics, legacy, etc).

Quote:As discussed in the 2005 Espenshade and Chung paper: Being white is the equivalent of a 230 point penalty on the SATs vs. being black when it comes to admissions at top schools, a 185 point penalty vs. being latino, and a 50 point bonus vs. being Asian. This was on the old scale too. The gaps have only widened since then, according to follow-up work by Espenshade.

I suppose that's a simple way of framing it. The core of it all comes down to supply and demand, which is where the "bonuses" come from. Admissions directors have a rough idea of the kind of classes they want, and admit accordingly. The supply of high-scoring individuals varies by group, which forces the admins to dig deeper into some pools than others in order to create the ethnic "image" they want. That is what creates the "bonus" scenario outlined above.

Why are they so concerned with creating that image?

Politics and money, with a little bit of ideology thrown in. The motives are actually not as charitable as many think.

(04-04-2013 10:53 PM)guerrilla Wrote:  just looked this shit up.

2120 is just slightly above 90th percentile i guess

97th.

(04-04-2013 10:45 PM)MidniteSpecial Wrote:  If she was that smart she would start a website and learn email marketing. College is obsolete.

The truth of this statement varies by individual, field of study, and the institution granting the degree.

(04-04-2013 11:08 PM)HeyPete Wrote:  I will reserve my judgement until I see what she looks like.

Hot = I'm with her.

Fat = she can shut the hell up.

She's a plain Jane. Not unattractive, but not particularly hot either. Like nearly all of the females in her (almost certainly upper-middle/upper class) segment of society, she's in decent shape. The description I gave there is actually quite typical for the kinds of schools she was shooting for, save perhaps for Vanderbilt. She'd have blended right in where I'm at.

Post: #15

One of the tenets of this forum is that blue pill people react negatively when someone shines a light on one of their cherished false perceptions of reality, and this girl is doing just that by showing that we don't really live in a meritocracy. The established line of bullshit that everyone snorts up as if it were coke in Scarlett Johannson's buttcrack is that all these Ivy League schools are scooping up the best and brightest Americans and rich Chinese have to offer in order to give our smartest and most determined people and opportunity to reach their fullest potential.

The reality is that there are three ways to get into an ivy league school, only one of which can be done by anyone willing to invest the time and energy.

1. Be an member of the elites. Wealthy and connected people just happen to be alumni donors, and surprise surprise their children get admitted. Even if you don't have the connections, if you have the money you can bruteforce the application with professional essay writers, private school, and trips to Africa to have their picture taken holding one of those black skeleton children.

2. Be an upper middle class minority. The top schools need their diversity applicants, but they aren't going to go the Sean Connery route and show some brilliant but disadvantaged inner city youth that there's more to life than basketball and getting hopped up on goofballs. Not when there's a small army of ethnically interesting high school kids with upper middle class parents willing to temporarily change their name from James to Jamal. Or Barry to Barack... And before you call me a racist, let me spell out clearly that my point is that it is in fact racist to pretend to be combating racism by only providing benefits to the non-disadvantaged members of a disadvantaged group while claiming that the disadvantaged ones are disadvantaged through their own fault because they listen to angry music and dress in baggy pants.

3. This is the only way to do it that could be considered "by merit", but since we've already filled out like 90% of the available spots with rich kids and token minorities, the stakes are quite high. This is what Suzy Lee Weiss is talking about when she describes the extracurricular arms race. If you're middle class and white and have perfect grades, perfect SAT scores, varsity sports, music, volunteer work, and a relative with a particularly trendy type of cancer, there's a slight chance you can get in. Of course anyone who's that self-driven at the age of 17 would probably do better for themselves starting a business...

Which brings me to the red pill of this whole thing: anyone who can get through college can get through ivy league college. It's not harder or more demanding of one's intellect, but it does provide more opportunities because we've all been conditioned to view an Ivy League education as only being the province of geniuses. Which works out swimmingly for the elites who can get their kids in, now little Pubert Q. Mancyfondle III will be regarded as "intelligent" and superior to everyone else simply by breeding, just like back in the good old days when they were just telling everyone that having a bunch of inbred retarded Austrians ruling Europe was ordered by Jesus. Rich people have a vested interest in convincing everyone that they deserve to be rich and are better than everyone else, otherwise the masses will start itching for a revolution.

Hmmm, that was more of a rant than I intended.

Post: #16

I wouldn't say the returns to human capital are zero or even near-zero for most people going to college, but the returns to human capital for marginal education are certainly sub-linear with respect to years, and is much closer and sooner to logarithmic for most people than the Western Zeitgeist thinks.

And this is before you factor in the opportunity cost.

Most of the "benefits" of education can be explained by self-selection, survivorship bias, and signaling. It is also an arms-race.

(04-04-2013 11:19 PM)Athlone McGinnis Wrote:  

Quote:As discussed in the 2005 Espenshade and Chung paper: Being white is the equivalent of a 230 point penalty on the SATs vs. being black when it comes to admissions at top schools, a 185 point penalty vs. being latino, and a 50 point bonus vs. being Asian. This was on the old scale too. The gaps have only widened since then, according to follow-up work by Espenshade.

I suppose that's a simple way of framing it. The core of it all comes down to supply and demand, which is where the "bonuses" come from. Admissions directors have a rough idea of the kind of classes they want, and admit accordingly. The supply of high-scoring individuals varies by group, which forces the admins to dig deeper into some pools than others in order to create the ethnic "image" they want. That is what creates the "bonus" scenario outlined above.

Why are they so concerned with creating that image?

Politics and money, with a little bit of ideology thrown in. The motives are actually not as charitable as many think.

It's a simple way to frame it, indeed--as it's borderline definitional--the "race premium/penalty" is essentially the market price, the equilibrium at which the supply of quality candidates of a given race meet the admission officer demand for quality candidates of a given race. "Quality," of course, is a multivariate distribution function.

Post: #17

Watched the segment with her on the Today show. She's very annoying, but she has a point. With that said, if she had to interview with any of those schools, I can see why she didn't get in. Her personality is atrocious.

Post: #18

(04-04-2013 11:19 PM)Athlone McGinnis Wrote:  Average SAT for my class (at an Ivy) was a 2170. 2120 is standout for a minority (black or hispanic), but less remarkable otherwise.

Quote:She is ultimately right, however, about the diversity--which is what drives the PC crowd up a wall. If she were black or latino she would be a shoe-in.

If she were black, her SAT score would be in the 99.9th percentile for her group. The number of blacks who score at that level (north of 2000 on the new SAT scale) is very, very small, much smaller than the number of whites and Asians who manage the same (and that is true even after you account for disparities in population size).

Affirmative Action is most useful for the top .1% of blacks and hispanics. If she were black and among this group (read: able to outdo 99.9% of other blacks), she'd be fine. Anything less and she'd be in exactly the same position barring some sort of other hook (athletics, legacy, etc).

Like I said, most miss the ironic reality that if there were no affirmative action, she still would not be admitted. It's a little like seeing the one handicap parking spot that's empty while all the other spots are filled - if you took away the handicap only designation, you'd probably still not have a parking spot.

Elite college admissions in America is shot through with so much bullshit it's hilarious. You have these phony extracurriculars that were first instituted to keep the Yids out, and are now used against Asians and middle class whites. Legacy admissions, same story - keep Yids out before, now discriminates in effect against Asians. Then there are the sports teams, 90% of which no one gives a fuck about, and most are used by upper class parents to get their kids into the school.

You do have to wonder if some of it is rational though. Spend enough time in the scene, and you'll notice that the biggest donors are old line WASP families and new Jewish money. Asians aren't giving much, and it's very possible the whites would desert a school if it got 'too Asian,' but the Asians themselves are not going to turn down Yale because Yale is discriminating against Asians. And maybe those pointless athletes make up for it with donations and future prominence.

Plus, I bet if you control for test scores, a white guy with a 2300 is more likely to end up a CEO than an Asian kid with the same score. Elite colleges are obsessed with breeding future leaders.

Post: #19

What do you think about this Athlone?

Post: #20

Yeah, I don't really see how a Jewish girl is going to argue that she was a victim of affirmative action. When I was at an Ivy (many years ago), the class was about 1/3 Jewish, a majority of the professors were Jewish and there were odd set asides for Israelis in various graduate programs, which would all suggest some institutional cultural bias/racism. 33% of the class v. 2% of the population is hard to justify on merit alone (Asian were also overrepresented but not to nearly the same extent despite being a much larger % of the population).

Post: #21

I've witnessed preferential treatment of Black Americans in several of my jobs. Both in government.

I worked for the Federal Reserve Bank in NYC as a graphic designer once, most of the old Black women working there, had their radios on constantly and did everything very slowly. Some of them did it with attitude: my white boss was obviously afraid to discipline them as he was much harder on virtually every other race, including the hispanics who worked there. I should note that ALL the young Black employees were good. But this is the Fed, it's a pretty prestigious place to work.

I also experienced it as a Special Ed Teacher in the hood (East New York, Brooklyn). I had 6 teaching assistants. All Black. 4 of them were decent. But I had these 2 that constantly gave me shit. Would curse and yell at me. Call me names. All in front of my students. Sometimes right in front of my boss. They knew they could get away with it. And they did.

They made teaching very hard for me.

I was responsible for their work: if they did a shitty job, it reflected poorly on me.

But how could I whip them into shape if I wasn't even allowed to write them up? (I almost never lost my cool and always tried to talk things out and compromise sometimes).

One of my paras called me a "faggot" in front of my class. This was after a severely disabled student fell out of his wheelchair and he refused to help him up. I was like "do your job, come help." And he start yelling "faggot" at me. Did anything happen to him for this? Nope. In fact, he was told to go chill out in the break room. So he was rewarded with an hour of chill time with his smartphone.

You also have to understand that I have a Master's Degree in Teaching and they don't even have Bachelor's. They're high school graduates getting paid $43,000 THOUSAND A YEAR! And apparently, you can be a total asshole to your boss (me) and get away with it. Public education, folks.

I've worked in several predominantly white schools, and virtually all the paras there, mostly white, some hispanic, were great. Some of them did the teacher's paperwork, which in a unionized job is rare to see.

All of the above happened because the bosses were scared of allegations of racism. They feared publicity and even prospective lawsuits.

I think all this is bullshit, but I can't blame all of the above people per se. It's the system that allows this. And they're just taking advantage of it: a petty, yet intelligent move. So fuck the system.

And this isn't me saying whites, or reds, or whatever the fucks are better than blacks or vice versa. I don't think anyone's superior here. It's just reality. The bell has swung like crazy: blacks used to be murdered and oppressed and now the government has been giving them privileges. Same with women, except American women were never opressed. So fuck the feminist movement piggybacking on the much-needed Civil Rights Movement and falsely co-opting the genuine plight of the African American.

Maybe I'm supposed to feel some white guilt here? Fuck no. I'm half Russian/half Jew. All of my ancestors were illiterate 100 years ago and living in dire poverty. Often times, they went through famines. The Jewish side was killed in Pogroms. My Jewish Grandmother's first family, husband and 3 daughters, were wiped out in the Holocaust.

Post: #22

her high school isn't that impressive in addition to her mediocre SAT scores. A 4.5 GPA on a 4.5 scale, unweighted, from a non-rigorous high school also isn't that impressive. These are the top schools in the country we're talking about. They can afford to be that selective.

True that colleges want diverse student bodies, not diverse students, but she should have known that and known how to stand out and make the universities accept her as part of the "diverse student body"

Post: #23

(04-04-2013 11:46 PM)Zebra_Cakes Wrote:  Watched the segment with her on the Today show. She's very annoying, but she has a point. With that said, if she had to interview with any of those schools, I can see why she didn't get in. Her personality is atrocious.

Yeah, I agree. What an annoying little bitch lol. I remember girls (and guys) like her in high school who tried so hard to act like adults, but just came off as socially awkward teens who nobody liked. I can only imagine how much of a bitch she's gonna be after she gets that college degree.

Post: #24

(04-05-2013 12:20 AM)basilransom Wrote:  Like I said, most miss the ironic reality that if there were no affirmative action, she still would not be admitted. It's a little like seeing the one handicap parking spot that's empty while all the other spots are filled - if you took away the handicap only designation, you'd probably still not have a parking spot.

Elite college admissions in America is shot through with so much bullshit it's hilarious. You have these phony extracurriculars that were first instituted to keep the Yids out, and are now used against Asians and middle class whites. Legacy admissions, same story - keep Yids out before, now discriminates in effect against Asians. Then there are the sports teams, 90% of which no one gives a fuck about, and most are used by upper class parents to get their kids into the school.

All of the above is essentially accurate, and the bit about the athletes is especially illuminating and often overlooked. Sports like Crew, Lacrosse, Sailing, and Equestrian are built for the elite. Those are the only folks who closely follow them and they tend to be the bulk of the actual competitors as well.

These parents know that if their kids gets good enough to be a recruited athlete in any of these sports, he/she will have a much easier path into an elite university/college. Only Ivies and a select few others compete at a high level in most of these sports, so they truly are pipelines to the top.

Quote:You do have to wonder if some of it is rational though.

It all is, make no mistake about that. You hit the nail on the head with the guess about donors. That is a big reason why things are the way they are.

Consider what I mentioned above about why admissions directors care to even consider the ethnic composition of their classes:

Quote:Why are they so concerned with creating that image?

Politics and money, with a little bit of ideology thrown in. The motives are actually not as charitable as many think.

This is where those less than charitable motives come in.

Here is a typical breakdown for the ethnic composition of an Ivy League school:

Black: 8%
Hispanic: 8%
Asian: 15%
Native American: 1%
White: 51%

Ivies want to be diverse, but they can't go too far without compromising their financial model, which depends in large part on having wealthy donors provide a lot of cash and on having a bunch of parents who can handle full tuition as well (financial aid is costly to these schools, even with their huge endowments).

These crucial donors are generally white (jews included here), and this in turn limits the amount of "diversity" the schools can have. It ensures that most Ivies and similarly elite schools are still generally dominated by the (almost entirely white) socio-economic elite-these are the folks who keep the schools running, and their kids are still overrepresented in the student body for that reason.

Their hold on the Ivies may have taken a hit (they don't compose 90% of the student body the way they did 30 years ago), but this elite group still leads the way. Their financial clout allows them to make most of the rules discreetly and influence nearly all key administrative decisions, and their culture still dominates student life at the school.

Claims of "diversity" aside, there can be no doubt about who really runs things in these places. These institutions are part of the American Aristocracy's world-everyone else present merely lives in it and/or seeks to become a fully integrated part of it down the line.

Is this good or bad? Neither, in my opinion. It just is.

These realities also partially explain why Asians get the shorter end of the admissions stick. Schools can't provide the (deserved) increase in their representation without cutting into the more economically valuable white contingent or the politically valuable under-represented minority (URM) contingent.

This is also why the majority of the whites you see at Ivies are one percenters or very close to it-more middling whites lose out here. The school's white population is, as I mentioned, the source of most of the schools big money donors. Schools want as many of these elites in their corner as possible. There is little room for middle class whites in this model-they do not bring the scores of the Asians, nor the political value of the URMs, nor the money of wealthier whites. This is why they're not so easy to find at the institutions-a few trickle in as athletes, but further exceptions are quite rare.

Finally, you will also notice that the Blacks and Hispanics are still under-represented in this model. That is by design-schools admit enough of them to provide a sense of diversity and the political/economic value that comes with that, but want to make sure there is still plenty of room for members of the big money group and for talented Asians.

Blacks and Hispanics tend to eat up a lot of financial aid as well (they're the poorest of all the demographics), further ensuring that their numbers remain limited relative to their actual share of the population-schools can only support so many kids on 100% financial aid without breaking their business model. Add in the fact that black/hispanic alumni generally can't come close to matching the charitable clout of big money white donors and the motives for their continued under-representation (despite all the rhetoric about diversity) become very clear. Don't expect this to change anytime soon.

Quote:And maybe those pointless athletes make up for it with donations and future prominence.

Sports are still part of the mission for elite schools. They provide some financial benefit and plenty of exposure, hence the insistence of some smaller elite schools (ex: most of the Ivies) on remaining at the D1 level.

Athletics are also deeply ingrained in Ivy culture (games like American football were born there, remember) and in the culture of the demographic that sources most of the school's student body and donations (Elite whites, to whom fitness is important and whose upbringing and education tend to emphasize sport and competition). Schools will not let them go for these reasons.

Quote:Elite colleges are obsessed with breeding future leaders.

Yes, this is also very true and very important to understand.

(04-05-2013 12:33 AM)houston Wrote:  What do you think about this Athlone?

The girls makes a decent point or two, but is still an entitled try-hard and entirely too difficult to feel much empathy for. She'll still be able to go to a decent school if she wants it (the four she listed aren't the only ones on Earth), so she'll be fine.

Post: #25

(04-05-2013 01:05 AM)houston Wrote:  Yeah, I agree. What an annoying little bitch lol. I remember girls (and guys) like her in high school who tried so hard to act like adults, but just came off as socially awkward teens who nobody liked. I can only imagine how much of a bitch she's gonna be after she gets that college degree.

I shudder to think how bad she's going to be in a few years if she's already this much of a brat.

Prediction. She graduates college, goes to law school, moves to DC for a job, ends up on date lab, rejects a perfectly fine beta, ends up a spinster with 10 cats.