Law School 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 - PaddyWack

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8
something tells me not too many people are like Brian

"We laugh defiantly about how we are race traitors/mixers, but seriously, we fully understand the deep implications of having an interracial marriage. Brian is willing to change his last name to mine so that I won't have to lose a part of my cultural identity, allaying one of the biggest reservations my parents legitimately have"

I wouldn't do that.  But more for vanity than reasons of group identity.

I don't see wanting to protect racial purity as a desirable goal - for anyone of any race.

You didn't directly answer my question.  I asked about culture.  Is it okay for our culture to be diluted into nothingness?  I presume that since, to some extent the duration of Af-Am culture is dependent on the existence of an Af-Am racial identity, you are fine with the elimination of Black culture.  Is this a fair presumption?

I don't agree with holding on to a culture just for its own sake.  On an individual level everyone should be free to choose what culture they choose to adopt and indentify with, without fear of being perceived by anyone as abondoning your group or culture.  After centuries of struggle, the option now exists to step across lines that would have previously meant death, and there are clearly reasons that are beneficial to both the individual and to society as a whole for doing so.  So why thumb our noses at someone who happily utilizes that option?  If you strongly identify with your race, be it Black or White, that's fine so long as there is no intentional negativity towards another race, or towards anyone of your race that does not share that identity, but likely uses other factors to define who they are.

I don't see wanting to preserve the Black bloodline as a lofty goal, anymore than I see wanting to keep wealth within a small group as a worthy endeavour.  I see nothing wrong with the assimilation of the Black culture into the dominant culture, because that's simply the way of things.  When two groups exist within proximity of each other for an extended period without much assimiliation, that familiarity eventually turns into contempt.  It's simply human nature.  Black culture will not suffer for it, anymore than White culture will.  The relationship will likely be dynamic with both cultures influencing the other.  There will be pros and there will be cons, but the pros of doing so will greatly outweigh the cons of not doing so.

Sometimes I think people, especially older people, hold onto their culture as they would a life preserver.  To them change is the equivalent of death, and so they treat those who might bring about change as those who would just as soon murder them during sleep.  The mentality runs something like "this is who we are".  That necessarily implies "that is who they are", and that is the genesis of seperatism and racism.  In-group/out-group bias.  There is us and we are good.  And there is them...and they are not us.

Nothing will change as long as people staunchly refuse to give an inch.  You must give up something in order to gain something.  It is for the dominant group to relenquish some measure of their power to us, and it is for us to be willing to leave something behind as we accept our roles and responsibilities and move forward.  Black people, as with any minority group dominated by a majority group, stand to lose a great deal more by refusing some measure of assimilation than to hold to misguided notions of group identity.

I think it's great that you are open to this, but its more than just having cute kids and harmonizing everyone in some pot.

I agree here, too.

I don't think separatism or melty assimilation cut it.

(And I'm definitely more subtle than a damn spinach leaf, I'll have you know, so I'm skeptical about the tossed salad idea.)

Then again, I'm pretty into PoMo, which makes things like race tricky--we live our constructed realities.

Oh, for Chrissakes.  I was being facetious.  Not that there's any reason you should know this, but I studied racism, prejudice and discrimination and wrote a thesis on it.  I'm well aware of the plight of stigmatized groups and the underlying causes of prejudice and discrimination.  It's not going away.  Ever.

I'm just going to assume that the internet didn't adequately convey the light-heartedness I was going for - likely my own failure - and tentatively reject the idea that you're just being contentious for it's own sake.

This is not a knock at the OP but more of a general statement, and could possibly go under a new thread.  But...

I think you may be overshooting your psychology (I think that's where you wrote your thesis) accomplishments.  I mean, in the grand scheme of things, who really cares about your research.  What psychologist, professor, or researcher is really going to take into serious consideration what a college undergraduate wrote.  Meaningful research is done by PHD's who spend years to complete their thesis, and it is much more comprehensive than what an Undergrad could have written.

Furthermore, I doubt that the research you preformed was very groundbreaking.  If it was on a subject that is/was very important then I'm sure there are many professors out there who have dedicated their lives to the subject.  And even if there isn't anything out there, don't you think that among the THOUSANDS of PHD candidates each year, one person would have stumbled upon this subject to use for their doctoral dissertation and are probably working on it as we speak.  I mean they are the ones who are supposed to be working on new groundbreaking things.

I guess I just feel that a lot of people place too much value on certain things that they did as an undergraduate.  In the grand scheme of things, most of the time the stuff they do is very insignificant.  I.e. undergraduate research, stupid things they do for clubs that "better" the community.  If you look at it from an outrider point of view, does what you did really make a difference, probably not (of course there are the exceptions, please don't get me wrong).  I think that it is pretty pointless to write a thesis unless you plan on going on to do some graduate work, and only for the purpose of gaining practice on how to do a major research paper.  Too many people believe they are going to do something groundbreaking when that clearly is not the case.  And if you do write one, please donít act like it was something truly amazing; come on now (Iím sure there are plenty of people who do write a thesis but understand itís not world changing).

But, OP, having a thesis published, while insignificant in the grand scheme of things, does set you apart from other applicants (I didn't write one), and certainly does make you a better applicant and would help you out in admissions.  (I'm sure you had other awesome stuff as well).

By the way, why didn't you go into the field of psychology and get a PHD if you were such an outstanding student (seriously)?  Perhaps one day your research would, in fact, be quite meaningful.

Look up The Strawman Fallacy, then get back to me.  Or preferably, not.

The subject of my thesis has never been done before.  Ever.  I laid the groundwork for ongoing research being done by a very well-regarded professor and his graduate students.  When it's finally done, it'll be used by future researchers for decades.

I'm done with this thread.  Everyone here is spewing sh*t like they know something, both about me and what goes on in the minds of the admissions council.  Since I've made my decision, or rather my decision was effectively made for me, I have no more use for anything anyone has to say in this regard, even if what you're all saying was in any way relevant.

Just ask youselves this very simple question.  How many people with my numbers, URM or otherwise, get the kind of dough they throw at me?  By your reasoning, most, if not all black candidates with a 158/3.4 should be getting full rides to Cardozo, St John's, Rutgers, Seton Hall and NYLS.  Figure that's the case?  If you still feel like you have anything meaningful to say, read my post at the bottom of page two, then reconsider.

On the plus side, if you guys are my competetion, I'm feeling better and better at my chances of being in the top 10%.

"See you chumps on top."

TopGunna, I can't really relate to most of what you said, but I can respect it.  Except number 6.

Why on earth would you feel such profound shame being the only one with a white woman?  Awkwardness?  Sure.  Apprehension?  Understandable.  But shame?  Wow.  Shame is what you feel when you're caught stealing money out of your aunt's purse.

I can sort of understand number 1, but not really.  Wouldn't any money go directly to you and your wife?  I don't see that as a White family, so much as your family.  Why would your in-laws enter into the picture?

Again, I understand and respect that you want 100% black kids.  But I'm not feeling you on that.  I knew early on that I wouldn't marry a black woman.  I want interracial kids.  I'm in a very serious relationship with an asian girl right now, and I can't wait to see what our kids will look like.

Interracial relationships are the best.  It's up to each and every one of us to stir that melting pot.  Racism is not going to go away until everyone looks alike.

BTW, anyone here attending Rutgers-Newark?  I'm pretty sure I'm going there in the fall.

A lame tactic like attacking my mental/emtional state hoping that it'll serve to indirectly bring me down a notch is only likely to provoke further insults.  Dumbass.

Way to illustrate my point. 

You lack subtlely.

nothing against you paddywack, but your ad hominem attacks (ie. you moron) reflect an underlying insecurity.  if you are an accomplished academic (and i'm not doubting that you are), you should stick to your ideas instead of resorting to namecalling.

I calls 'em like I sees 'em.

Why does it have to be an indicator of insecurity?  Maybe I'm just losing patience and I genuinely think the guy is a moron.  If my tone bothers you and you want me to be nice, why not just say so?  A lame tactic like attacking my mental/emtional state hoping that it'll serve to indirectly bring me down a notch is only likely to provoke further insults.  Dumbass.

Please see previous page for rebuttal to everything kingofspain said...prior to his post, I might add.

i can't believe people's reaction on this topic- the OP only got the scholarship because of his race- no other reason.  with those numbers a non-urm would be very lucky to even get in.  he knows it, and so does everyone else, yet people jump all over someone who said it.
i know it might not be as big a boost to your self-esteem to think that the color of your skin got you the dough instead of your being a "super awesome, interesting person."  similarly, any money i got from schools was due to my lsat score, not my being a "super wonderful guy."  i've got no problem admitting why i got my scholarship monies and neither should the op or his defenders.

This again.  ::)

So maybe it wasn't because I'm a "super awesome, interesting person".  Maybe it's because I'm a highly accomplished academic who comes from a background where there are precious few of those.  I didn't say or imply that my race had nothing to do with it, you moron.  I fully admitted it.  More than once, even.  I am certain that my accomplishments are weighed against my race.  My point was that above and beyond race and LSAT/GPA (both of which are easily explained), my accomplishments dwarfs that of most other applicants.  Law schools are looking for people who will do their school credit both during and after law school.  Occasionally that means they have to look beyond those two all-powerful numbers and seriously take factos into account that distinguish an applicant as outstanding.

And no one was jumping down cannotpick's throat because he stated something obvious.  The point is that his observation was both highly irrelevant and contained a certain amount of inexplicable repellant bitterness.  Go back and read all my posts, publish an article or two, then win a couple of grants. Or just kindly STFU.

Sticking to the original topic:

My research isn't exhaustive but from what I can tell, going to dozo limits you to NYC, going to Rutgers, you are set in NJ and while you won't have the same edge that you would if you went to dozo, you still have a solid amount of options in NY. I would assume that Rutgers being essentially the top school in NJ in terms of rep, you would have more options nationally, while Dozo is 3rd at best in nyc...

Thanks!  This is exactly what I wanted to hear.

Just got an email from Rutgers.  They're offering me full tuition + fees + $450/week stipend for the first two years.  :o  It's still not a exactly no-brainer, but I think they just made my mind up for me.   ;D

I'm reading other threads and I don't understand how people can say that if you don't finish in the top 20% at Cardozo your options are bleak.  According to their employment numbers, nearly everyone finds a job within 6-9 months and the salary ranges are pretty good.

Also, if I go to Cardozo that means I'm stuck in the NYC area, whereas if I go to Rutgers I'm stuck in NJ somewhere, right?  Do either schools have a decent national rep?

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8