UPDATE: “White People… PRETTY White People” – Yale’s 50 Most Beautiful List is, well, Racist
There was something about Rumpus’ recently released 50 Most Beautiful list that seemed a little off. No, not the typos, falsifications, or numbers accidentally written in Arabic (seriously). We couldn’t quite put our finger on it. Something about the gradient: white after white after white. Maybe their printers ran out of black ink? If only…
Apparently, in the gossip rag’s esteemed opinion, a disproportionate number of Yale’s pretty people are, well, of the Caucasian variety. We’ll let the ’50 most’ numbers speak for themselves.
For comparison’s sake, here are the racial demographics of Yale as a whole, courtesy of Questbridge:
(FYI, 20 out of the 29 Rumpus-ites who worked on the issue are white… yup, about 68%)
So, using the power of math, our crack quants at IvyGate HQ have calculated that Rumpus’ 50 Most Beautiful List is 21.6% whiter than Yale in general. Ouch.
So much for the post-racial America, Barry.


March 4th, 2010 at 7:03 am
Small win for African-Americans….I guess. but yea otherwise this is just a shame.
March 4th, 2010 at 2:03 am
Small win for African-Americans….I guess. but yea otherwise this is just a shame.
March 4th, 2010 at 7:13 am
And where are you counting the Turkish twins exactly?
March 4th, 2010 at 2:13 am
And where are you counting the Turkish twins exactly?
March 4th, 2010 at 7:25 am
how different are those percentages different from the school’s makeup? e.g., the list isn’t discriminatory against asians if yale isn’t far from 14% asian.
March 4th, 2010 at 2:25 am
how different are those percentages different from the school’s makeup? e.g., the list isn’t discriminatory against asians if yale isn’t far from 14% asian.
March 4th, 2010 at 7:34 am
may bad, i mistook the demographics listing for the rumpus %s
March 4th, 2010 at 2:34 am
may bad, i mistook the demographics listing for the rumpus %s
March 4th, 2010 at 3:24 pm
A quick back of the envelope calculation using online tools, copied right from results at graphpad.com:
Chi-square test results
P value and statistical significance:
Chi squared equals 7.109 with 4 degrees of freedom.
The two-tailed P value equals 0.1302
By conventional criteria, this difference is considered to be not statistically significant.
The P value answers this question: If the theory that generated the expected values were correct, what is the probability of observing such a large discrepancy (or larger) between observed and expected values? A small P value is evidence that the data are not sampled from the distribution you expected.
The chi-square calculations are only reliable when all the expected values are 5 or higher. This assumption is violated by your data, so the P value may not be very accurate.
Row # Category Observed Expected # Expected
1 white 43 35.36 68.000%
2 black 5 4.68 9.000%
3 asian 3 7.28 14.000%
4 hispanic 1 4.16 8.000%
5 native 0 0.52 1.000%
—
So, if we make the rather large assumption that Yale’s student body is normally distributed, and ignore the minimum category n requirement, statistically this list -probably- isn’t that racist, at least for P<0.05. But still, this is a lame ass list.
March 4th, 2010 at 10:24 am
A quick back of the envelope calculation using online tools, copied right from results at graphpad.com:
Chi-square test results
P value and statistical significance:
Chi squared equals 7.109 with 4 degrees of freedom.
The two-tailed P value equals 0.1302
By conventional criteria, this difference is considered to be not statistically significant.
The P value answers this question: If the theory that generated the expected values were correct, what is the probability of observing such a large discrepancy (or larger) between observed and expected values? A small P value is evidence that the data are not sampled from the distribution you expected.
The chi-square calculations are only reliable when all the expected values are 5 or higher. This assumption is violated by your data, so the P value may not be very accurate.
Row # Category Observed Expected # Expected
1 white 43 35.36 68.000%
2 black 5 4.68 9.000%
3 asian 3 7.28 14.000%
4 hispanic 1 4.16 8.000%
5 native 0 0.52 1.000%
—
So, if we make the rather large assumption that Yale’s student body is normally distributed, and ignore the minimum category n requirement, statistically this list -probably- isn’t that racist, at least for P<0.05. But still, this is a lame ass list.
March 4th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
What about the correlation with sex? How many of the black were men; how many of the asian were girls?
March 4th, 2010 at 10:36 am
What about the correlation with sex? How many of the black were men; how many of the asian were girls?
March 4th, 2010 at 3:59 pm
so now lack of proportionate representation among all groups makes something racist? I guess that makes the NFL and NBA racist as well…
March 4th, 2010 at 10:59 am
so now lack of proportionate representation among all groups makes something racist? I guess that makes the NFL and NBA racist as well…
March 4th, 2010 at 4:46 pm
Yeah, I’m with pton09. Klein, shut the fuck up. This list is drawn primarily from the frat/athletic population, which is primarily white (and proportionally black). Just because something isn’t proportional to the overall breakdown doesn’t mean it’s racist… quite the contrary– it’s articles like these that demonstrate fucked up racial relations in this country.
March 4th, 2010 at 11:46 am
Yeah, I’m with pton09. Klein, shut the fuck up. This list is drawn primarily from the frat/athletic population, which is primarily white (and proportionally black). Just because something isn’t proportional to the overall breakdown doesn’t mean it’s racist… quite the contrary– it’s articles like these that demonstrate fucked up racial relations in this country.
March 4th, 2010 at 4:49 pm
@Reason: yea your right thats probably very disproportionate
@pton09: Dumbass comment. There is a difference between people being chosen because of their skill level and people being chosen because of aesthetic ideas of beauty. Just because more white males may enjoy hockey and thus are more likely to be drafted into the NHL does not make the league racist
March 4th, 2010 at 11:49 am
@Reason: yea your right thats probably very disproportionate
@pton09: Dumbass comment. There is a difference between people being chosen because of their skill level and people being chosen because of aesthetic ideas of beauty. Just because more white males may enjoy hockey and thus are more likely to be drafted into the NHL does not make the league racist
March 4th, 2010 at 5:18 pm
The NBA is actually an interesting case. There are a number of very good white players in the NBA — Dirk, Nash, Ginobili, Gasol, the list goes on. But, with the exceptions of Chris Kaman and David Lee, they’re basically all foreign players. It makes you wonder if being told that black kids are better at basketball from an early age doesn’t somewhat stunt the playing growth of white players.
March 4th, 2010 at 12:18 pm
The NBA is actually an interesting case. There are a number of very good white players in the NBA — Dirk, Nash, Ginobili, Gasol, the list goes on. But, with the exceptions of Chris Kaman and David Lee, they’re basically all foreign players. It makes you wonder if being told that black kids are better at basketball from an early age doesn’t somewhat stunt the playing growth of white players.
March 4th, 2010 at 8:26 pm
So, Hispanic and Asian were “off” by a couple people each, and suddenly it’s racist? Do you really believe the Rumpus should look up the Yale demographic and calculate that they need 4 Hispanics to make IvyGate happy?
March 4th, 2010 at 3:26 pm
So, Hispanic and Asian were “off” by a couple people each, and suddenly it’s racist? Do you really believe the Rumpus should look up the Yale demographic and calculate that they need 4 Hispanics to make IvyGate happy?
March 4th, 2010 at 11:57 pm
This really IS saying, “We really only think WHITE people are the prettiest.” You’re in total denial if you think otherwise. I’m really shocked that a bunch of Ivy Leaguers can’t figure out the significance of institutionalized racism.
What the hell do you guys study?
March 4th, 2010 at 6:57 pm
This really IS saying, “We really only think WHITE people are the prettiest.” You’re in total denial if you think otherwise. I’m really shocked that a bunch of Ivy Leaguers can’t figure out the significance of institutionalized racism.
What the hell do you guys study?
March 5th, 2010 at 1:09 am
Well Hispanic isn’t even a race, and you can’t always tell what race a person identifies as just by looking at them… look at the beautiful Liz Cui for example.
March 4th, 2010 at 8:09 pm
Well Hispanic isn’t even a race, and you can’t always tell what race a person identifies as just by looking at them… look at the beautiful Liz Cui for example.
March 5th, 2010 at 1:14 am
This is, by far, the single most absurd post (and ensuing comment thread) that I have seen on IvyGate in its history. Alex, do you want Rumpus to have a racial quota system for the 50 Most issue? Would that make you happy? Maybe we should do that for IvyGate’s writers, too. Hell, you and Dan are awfully white!
Also, to “Holy Moly”, Rumpus is not an example of institutionalized racism. If you go to Yale, you know it’s not an example of institutionalized anything. It’s a bunch of drunk people who get shitfaced in Welch basement a few nights a year and somehow manage to cobble together a shitty magazine while they’re there.
March 4th, 2010 at 8:14 pm
This is, by far, the single most absurd post (and ensuing comment thread) that I have seen on IvyGate in its history. Alex, do you want Rumpus to have a racial quota system for the 50 Most issue? Would that make you happy? Maybe we should do that for IvyGate’s writers, too. Hell, you and Dan are awfully white!
Also, to “Holy Moly”, Rumpus is not an example of institutionalized racism. If you go to Yale, you know it’s not an example of institutionalized anything. It’s a bunch of drunk people who get shitfaced in Welch basement a few nights a year and somehow manage to cobble together a shitty magazine while they’re there.
March 5th, 2010 at 1:35 am
Alex couldn’t resist turning one small post about Yale into two equally irrelevant ones. In any case, OKCupid.com already did a study of this, or at least similarly, crunching real numbers and without the blowhard conjecturing of self-important Ivy League wannabe sociologists (that means all of you). Source: http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/2009/10/05/your-race-affects-whether-people-write-you-back/
March 4th, 2010 at 8:35 pm
Alex couldn’t resist turning one small post about Yale into two equally irrelevant ones. In any case, OKCupid.com already did a study of this, or at least similarly, crunching real numbers and without the blowhard conjecturing of self-important Ivy League wannabe sociologists (that means all of you). Source: http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/2009/10/05/your-race-affects-whether-people-write-you-back/
March 5th, 2010 at 7:18 am
The issue and website should be updated right after Yale’s spring break.
March 5th, 2010 at 2:18 am
The issue and website should be updated right after Yale’s spring break.
March 5th, 2010 at 9:51 pm
what are you counting mixed race kids as?
March 5th, 2010 at 4:51 pm
what are you counting mixed race kids as?
March 5th, 2010 at 10:21 pm
way to bow to frivolous demands, you spineless numbskull. You asked whom the people found most attractive, and they told you, and there is nothing you can do to “update” it.
In all of your race baiting have any of you stopped to wonder why a person would ever change their ideal of beauty just to reflect their local demographic? When I eat at a Korean restaurant should I become increasingly more attracted to Koreans as the other patrons vacate, leaving just me and the hostess? The answer obviously depends on how hot she is.
People define beauty within the culture they grew up in, and for Yale, that is mostly American culture. So the correct demographic is that of America, not Yale, and I would even go as far as to say that of American television and media, which is predominately white/black, with few Asians and no hispanics… much like your stupid list. Now you can all go back to discussing whether it is Cornell or Harvard that sucks.
March 5th, 2010 at 5:21 pm
way to bow to frivolous demands, you spineless numbskull. You asked whom the people found most attractive, and they told you, and there is nothing you can do to “update” it.
In all of your race baiting have any of you stopped to wonder why a person would ever change their ideal of beauty just to reflect their local demographic? When I eat at a Korean restaurant should I become increasingly more attracted to Koreans as the other patrons vacate, leaving just me and the hostess? The answer obviously depends on how hot she is.
People define beauty within the culture they grew up in, and for Yale, that is mostly American culture. So the correct demographic is that of America, not Yale, and I would even go as far as to say that of American television and media, which is predominately white/black, with few Asians and no hispanics… much like your stupid list. Now you can all go back to discussing whether it is Cornell or Harvard that sucks.
March 6th, 2010 at 4:54 am
By updated, I meant that the issue as is is going on the website after spring break. Back off, before we feed you to the Cock Goblin.
March 5th, 2010 at 11:54 pm
By updated, I meant that the issue as is is going on the website after spring break. Back off, before we feed you to the Cock Goblin.
March 8th, 2010 at 7:14 am
who is that chick in the picture?
March 8th, 2010 at 2:14 am
who is that chick in the picture?
May 22nd, 2010 at 6:27 pm
“So much for the post-racial America, Barry.”
Alex, how exactly does this “post-racial America” idea relate to who Yalies are attracted to? I am not a Yalie but to be honest, I have not seen a lot of Asians that I found attractive, especially Asian men. I believe the same applies to Yalies, the list has nothing to do with any racial issues.
June 3rd, 2010 at 4:10 am
It's the Rumpus.
*cough* That's why I read the Record! :D