Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - mfs73

Pages: [1] 2
1
Affirmative Action / Re: QUESTION FOR AMERICANS ON AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
« on: October 26, 2008, 12:44:31 AM »
Don't be a dummy.



You need that advice more than I do.  By the way, that's a very silly and immature statement to make.  I'm assuming you're young and just don't know any better. 

Nevertheless, as I said earlier, white women are the primary beneficiaries of Affirmative Action policy (look it up if you need to; I'm assuming you know this already).  We are also STILL included in current university AA procedures.  The earlier comment about us now outnumbering men (if not equal in number) is very true.  Nevertheless... 

************************************************
Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 bars gender discrimination in all education programs at institutions receiving federal funds (all but a handful of colleges). But Title IX has an important exemption: On admissions decisions, the statute covers all vocational, graduate and professional programs, but for undergraduate admissions, it applies only to public institutions.
************************************************

That's in regard to affirmative action in universities, since you spoke of that specifically.  I can also address it in the workplace if you'd like, but in my initial post, I was speaking of AA overall (professional and academic). 

So my initial question remains....

2
You didn't have any response to the study I posted detailing the benefits of HBCUs, so I didn't see any reason to continue that aspect of the discussion.  If you actually have something relevant to say, by all means, be my guest.

I'd advise not even responding to this nit anymore.  It's only enabling him and clearly this is someone that really needs attention and hasn't much to do in life with his time.  Being sensational or "controversial" (NOT) on an online forum is just his way of filling that void and that need for attention...no matter how negative the attention may be.   

Just be glad it's not you in his shoes.  It sounds sad...

3
I've been in on this one for a bit, yes, but it's just because I'm easily entertained and need something to distract myself, and this thread just keeps delivering. I really don't care much one way or another about HBCUs, but damn can you pick some good fights over them. For some reason, everyone that is, for lack of a better term, "Pro-HBCU" always has these super-pedantic arguments for HBCUs (and most of everything else, as most of your posts illustrate). Needless to say, I enjoy taking some shots at those types.

Like I said, the internet should generally not be taken seriously. Learn to have some fun. If I thought the issue was worth addressing in a serious way, I would, but I don't, so I have a good time (as much as you can on a message board, anyway). And everyone that does think the issue is worth addressing in a "normal, forward-thinking" (whatever the @#!* THAT means) way can do so and pay me no attention along the way.

Oh, and good work screwing up the quote a few posts back, now it looks like we're both functionally retarded and don't know how to use the quote button.

I am not sure what about my posts you thought was "super-pedantic," but I certainly don't think it's pedantic to ask that you try to avoid deploying bigotry or offending people for idle kicks.  Get a hobby.

p.s. It's not that hard to fix the quoting.  HTH.

I'm in complete agreement.  It's strange to me that anyone would have so little to do in their life that they would actually find spreading thinly veiled bigotry about the webosphere entertaining.  It's posts like that that really make me feel grateful for my own life.  I can't imagine being that embittered. 

4
Hey, I am having troubles finding a hbcu school the offers pre-law as a major. Every site I look up I find blog about nonsense that is not needed. PLease help me!

                                     :-\Mellie

Mellie, I don't know about Howard's curriculum in particular.  But perhaps you may want to look into Political Science majors (be it at HU or otherwise).  I majored in political science and many of the courses at my university were similar to first year courses at law schools (albeit a lot easier):  Constitutional Law, Civil Liberties, etc.  Maybe HU has the same major, I'm not sure.  But you can perhaps also try looking at any other universities of interest to you and see if they offer a Political Science track with similar courses.  HTH and good luck with your search.  :)

5


FINALLY, someone else is on board with me.

What's that LDS v. Non-LDS tuition bull they pull? And then they do the thing where they compare their LDS tuition to out of state and private tuition at far better schools like Harvard, UCLA, USC, and so on in their promotional materials to show what a great value they are.

Seriously, @#!* BYU.


Ninja, actually I'm not with you AT ALL.  (Sorry about that.)  I was using thinly-guised sarcasm to make a point and to expose an imbalance/inconsistency in your judgment (that applies to anyone else that may have shared your thinking).  I am curious (slightly) to know if you think Columbia's Barnard College shouldn't exist...or Wellesley for that matter. 

But no, I don't agree with you at all. 

Don't worry, I got that. You applied a thin layer of sarcasm and I sprayed it on with a fire hose.

My judgment is just fine. What needs work is your ability to not take the internet, and the random folks on it, so seriously.
[/quote]

My apologies, I assumed you were serious since there's about a week's worth of debate here on your part (and the part of many others here) in this thread (six pages worth).  HBCUs have a special history and place in American history and they are a source of pride and sensitivity for many Americans (and of course for many Black Americans).  To state that they are "crap", in jest, or otherwise, is insensitive, "mauvais goût", and just irresponsible/absurd.  Many people from all walks of life take them very seriously (particularly Howard, Spelman, and Morehouse).  Assuming you're a normal, forward-thinking adult, perhaps you might want to display a bit more savvy or exercise more care when addressing those issues as opposed to saying "F*** BYU", etc. 

That last sentence was not meant to be an insult.  I just realize that sometimes children troll forums (masquerading as adults) and write inflammatory posts...in such situations, trying to reason with them or expose them to a divergent/intelligent viewpoint is futile.  I'm assuming you're not one of those people is all I'm saying. 



6


FINALLY, someone else is on board with me.

What's that LDS v. Non-LDS tuition bull they pull? And then they do the thing where they compare their LDS tuition to out of state and private tuition at far better schools like Harvard, UCLA, USC, and so on in their promotional materials to show what a great value they are.

Seriously, @#!* BYU.
[/quote]


Ninja, actually I'm not with you AT ALL.  (Sorry about that.)  I was using thinly-guised sarcasm to make a point and to expose an imbalance/inconsistency in your judgment (that applies to anyone else that may have shared your thinking).  I am curious (slightly) to know if you think Columbia's Barnard College shouldn't exist...or Wellesley for that matter. 

But no, I don't agree with you at all. 

7
Affirmative Action / QUESTION FOR AMERICANS ON AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
« on: October 22, 2008, 08:36:51 AM »
I have the feeling I'm going to really regret posting this question.  PLEASE prove me wrong. 

I've lived in Europe and in the US for most of my life, so I don't know if I feel any special sense of "ownership" to issues here.  I usually feel like an outsider looking in with a very different perspective (definitely not an "American perspective").  As a result, the idea of "affirmative action" here and the debate over it really strikes me as simultaneously interesting and confusing. 

I've noticed that people usually argue the concept of affirmative action but only within the confines of "race".  For example, I scrolled through a few of the threads here, and I've noticed pretty much every single one I viewed was someone arguing their point on the basis of "race" (it feels strange to use that word here because Americans are overwhelmingly multi-ethnic/race, but I use that term to make a point).  No one seemed to be up in arms about it benefiting women.  "White" women in particular are the main beneficiaries of US affirmative action policies (look it up if you need guidance or clarification on this...I'm assuming you already know this).  In law schools, women are now making up the vast majority forcing universities to rethink their AA policies.  (Again, you can look that up as well...I don't really want to hold hands here.  I just want to get to the point.)

Anyway, it's strange to me that people do not hold the same contempt toward that group (which would include yours truly).  It seems that the widely held assumption is that if I'm a woman and I'm "White" and I was accepted to a university or law school...then it must have been based on my merit and not on the affirmative action policies that are there to benefit me (since I am a woman and therefore benefit from affirmative action).  On the other hand, if someone is "Black" and accepted to a university or law school, then the assumption is that they were admitted via AA policies...at the very least, many people seem to think they were NOT accepted because someone Black was.  On the other hand, they do not believe they were NOT accepted because a woman was.  I hope I'm making myself clear here. 

I know why people do this in legal settings - after all, the best way to rally Americans against a policy is to say it benefits/empowers Blacks or that it gives Black an advantage not shared by all.  It feeds into the latent hostilities this country holds toward that group and gets people to react in anger.  If you argue before a court that you want to rid the country of a policy that benefits his mom, his daughter, his sister (meaning women who are White)...it's not likely said court will find in your favor.  On the other hand, argue that it benefits a group that said court probably doesn't at all represent and very well-likely hasn't close ties to (personal or otherwise) and it's easier for said court (and the majority population in the US, for that matter) to embrace doing away with AA. 

I think that's a brilliant approach, actually.  Nevertheless, I don't understand why everyday Americans seem to be under the impression that it's a "Black/White" issue.  For one, Blacks aren't the main beneficiaries of affirmative action...White women are.  Can anyone answer that question for me?  (I'm really curious about how Americans think, so any thoughts would be appreciated...)

I hope I made my question understood...thank you in advance for your feedback. 

8
Oh, for goodness' sake! I said that there were some benefits to students who attend HBCUs.  I didn't say that going to an HBCU was the correct or necessary choice for all black students.  Nor did I suggest that single-race education is generally a good idea, that the benefits would be similar in the K-12 context, or anything else that could conceivably promote "segregation."  (I'll also note that elsewhere on the board, I have railed against de facto segregation in public schools and promoted the kinds of voluntary desegregation policies that the Supreme Court recently rejected -- or curtailed, anyway.)

Here's the most famous study about HBCUs, conducted by the Educational Testing Service in the 1990s: http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/15/1f/d2.pdf.  There's plenty more elsewhere, but it's a start for those of you who don't want to google.

Howard University is not a "single-race" university (as if that could even exist in the Americas...unless you're a recent immigrant, just about EVERYONE here is multi-ethnic/racial whether they're White/Black/etc...no matter how ridiculously hypocritical their ideas of "racial purity" are here).  Howard is a predominantly "Black" university.  With that said, I would like to know if the same critique would be offered to universities such as Wellesley which has a female student population of over 97%. We all know the reasons for founding women's/predominantly Black universities (at least I should hope everyone knows).  If an HBCU is subject to such uproar and critique, then we can be consistent and throw the likes of Wellesley or Barnard in there, as well.  And while we're at it, let's put in that Mormon university too...Brigham Young University?  It's over 98% Mormon.  Let's decry their institution as well. 





9
Also, find a real school if at all possible.

What do you mean?


HBCU's are crap.

And Florida State is an Ivy?

No, our football program is actually well respected from time to time. That being said, it's a hell of a lot more respectable that any HBCU, and better than your school... oh... wait... ;)

Also, I'd shoot myself if I had to deal with Yalies all day.

What is the basis for the bolded?  I believe that Howard, for instance, is ranked similarly to FSU, and some historically black liberal arts colleges like Spelman and Morehouse have excellent reputations.  Moreover, study after study has shown that unique educational benefits that cannot be measured by college rankings flow to black students who attend predominantly black colleges and universities (HBCU or not). 

The basis is that it's a fact. No one has heard of Howard outside of its region, academia, and sections of the black community, and HUSL is easily the most respectable of the HBCUs with a law school. Everyone has heard of FSU. Insta-respect.



I almost don't want to reply to this because I feel that you're not really providing any logical basis for your argument...it's as if you're making wild statements based on your own preconceived notions or passions.  I suppose I'll state this anyway for those that may be open to divergent viewpoints/new information.  My entire career has been in investment banking (with a few years in equity research).  I've worked for only the top institutional firms on the client side (though I did spend one year at a large int'l firm with a fairly small presence in the US).  If you follow the markets, then you know my resume.

With that said, save for the int'l firm, EVERY firm that I've worked for recruits from Howard.  It's almost unfair that they look to Howard in particular for highly qualified diversity candidates.  We have some diversity candidates at Wellesley, for example, who aren't courted NEARLY as much as the Howard candidates.  Nevertheless, our Howard summer associates get offers.  Howard, Spelman, and Morehouse are the most respected HBCUs at our firm and we recruit form them very OFTEN. 

I'm sure that FSU provides a quality curriculum for their students.  It's just not a school that is highly represented at any of the firms that I've worked for (at all).  I did meet one VP that went to FSU, but she got the position because she then went back for her JD at U of M.  Spelman in particular is an excellent school and those three aforementioned HBCUs in particular get heavy recruitment from top NY firms.

10
Non-Traditional Students / Re: LETTERS OF RECOMMENDATION...
« on: October 17, 2008, 10:12:48 PM »
Thank you for that information, Ivan.  I'm going to try that approach and see what happens...  One of my professors said she already has a letter of recommendation written for me (immediately after I sent her the email request), so I'm hoping I can try and intervene in time to come up with a draft that may be more accurate and "personalized". 

I've been trying to find out...for the letter of recommendation, I would send that directly to the university?  Or I would send that to LSAC?  It seems that if I apply to let's say five to eight universities (at least) that I'd need an individual letter for each of them, no?  :o(

Pages: [1] 2