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 - Trivium
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5  7 8 9 10 11 ... 13
« on: April 14, 2008, 10:40:45 AM »
Do you really think you'll get a straight forward answer?
I ended up calling the assistant dean. He opened up my file, read pretty much every comment he made on my file to me and explained to me exactly why I hadn't gotten in originally. I went ahead and fixed the problem and was accepted two days later.
« on: April 14, 2008, 10:38:38 AM »
Relating to those questions about calling admissions people if you are on a waitlist, I think this is a pretty good idea. I was WL'ed at a school, called and asked why I was waitlisted and they explained everything to me. I fixed the problem and got in two days later.
« on: April 12, 2008, 12:26:25 PM »
I'm sure its happened before, but I would imagine its very very rare. Schools have to have an incentive to give scholarships to people and there is no reason for them to give a scholarship to somebody who they're pretty much positive is going to end up going there. That said, admissions is usually pretty nice at most schools. Call them and ask, say just what you said here....You're really pumped to be going to school there but you were also wondering if maybe they had some funds available to offer you a small scholarship, or something along those lines. I'm not guaranteeing it will work but there is no reason not to.
« on: April 11, 2008, 03:19:19 PM »
What exectly do you know?
Basically that the class is filled.
« on: April 11, 2008, 02:20:20 PM »
Based on what I know about what's going on with Iowa's admissions right now the answer is probably no.
« on: April 10, 2008, 02:36:09 PM »
I know that my chances of getting off of this school's WL are slim. I also do not yet know how much money I will have in Stafford loans vs. private loans. That's why I would have to do some thinking and wouldn't be able to drop everything and go if I unexpectedly got the call in mid-summer. In this situation, is it still OK to state that the school is my top choice?
well, technically yeah i think it is. It's not like its binding or anything to say that. i just wouldn't do it if you're planning on dealing with the school in the future. Why don't you just find out from somebody that goes there or something what the aid package would look like? mine have been pretty similar at every school.
« on: April 10, 2008, 02:19:18 PM »
I'm in need of advice. I want to mention in my LOCI that the school to which I am writing the letter is my top choice. All things equal, it definitely is my favorite law school and I would truly love to go there. Unfortunately, even if I was accepted off of the waitlist I would still have to carefully consider my financial situation at that school (financial aid package) before deciding to go there instead of the school that I currently plan to attend. Should I simply say that the school "remains one of my top choices" or is it OK to say that it is my #1.
they're not going to offer you money if you're accepted off the WL.
« on: April 10, 2008, 01:54:56 PM »
ETA: but really, most of what I've said hasn't been about parenting, but rather about conceptions and misconceptions about gender identity and gender roles.
Exactly. Your point here does nto require being a parent. It just requires holding a particular viewpoint about females and males, specifically, that these qualities may be based in social constructions. That view informs your view on parenting.
« on: April 10, 2008, 01:51:50 PM »
Some men, yes. Some men, no. Also, some women yes, some women, no. I don't see a difference in parenting skills between men and women. Generally, people are people and the degree of parenting skills they have is generally a result of the type of person they are.
You, my friend, are Naive. I appreciate what you are saying, but I'm afraid most children can see a SIGNIFICANT difference in the way they are treated by their mothers and fathers.
The most important point is that having two loving and involved parents is the best situation for a child.
I agree fully on your last point. I do see a difference in how I was treated by my two parents, however, I see that difference as more of a social construction. They both came from traditional families where these norms are solidly enforced, so I learned manly values like responsibility, hard work, etc. from my dad while I picked up stuff like compassion and generosity from my mother. This is because that's how their parents treated them.
« on: April 10, 2008, 01:47:00 PM »
Come on. I said that there were some exceptions. But generally, I don't care if it's genetics, or experience or tradition. If men and women suddenly switched roles you'd have a huge increase of crap-filled diapers, and toddler concussions.
If we're going to accept that statement, then I suppose women being crappier drivers, less intelligent, etc. are all true as well.
Ooooh good one. Rather than arguing directly with my point you came up with a completely unrelated example.
Do you really think that the majority of men have the instincts, experience, desire, and patience to do as good of a job as women?
Its not really that unrelated, the same principle is at issue. If you're willing to accept the fact that women are genetically predisposed to being better parents, then you would have to be willing to at least accept the possibility that women are genetically inferior in some ways, examples being intelligence, driving, etc.
Possible - why not? In practice, I'd say it's perhaps the opposite. Women receive lower insurance rates than men because they're less likely to drive in such a way that would make the insurance companies have to pay out on claims. Does this mean that actuaries are sexist?
I meant these more as conventional wisdoms about inborn differences between men and women.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5  7 8 9 10 11 ... 13