[munchbunny]

I think you're coming at this from the wrong perspective. The fact that someone is grappling with their sexual identity isn't by itself a qualification.

On the other hand, if in the essays or interviews you get the feeling that this candidate has matured beyond his/her peers as a result of it, or if this candidate demonstrates resilience dealing with growing up this way in an extremely conservative culture, then you'd probably consider betting on this person's upward trajectory. The context is important, and I don't think the NYT article captures it.

[dev_dull]

At that point why specifically call out sexuality? Why not just say “candidates whom have matured behind their peers because of difficult life experiences”?

[hn_throwaway_99]

Because that was specifically what the student was dealing with. If the student was dealing with the stress of a laid-off parent, or a serious disease, or a sibling with a drug problem, I wouldn't be surprised if those details were mentioned, and not just vague language about "difficult life experiences."

[PacifyFish]

For specificity's sake.