I did't enslave anyone! Why cannot people get in based upon merit?

[Andie203]

First of all, yes of course my little hypothetical situation would include UG, major, extracurriculars, etc.  I should've included resume when I listed GPA, LSAT, writing samples and recommendations.

Secondly, I'm really don't think that explaining about your personal hardships should be a factor.  Because you know what?  I am a white, middle class girl.  I have two parents and enough money to be comfortable and my life seems great.

However, that does not mean I haven't had hardships in my life.  The hardships didn't stem from discrimination, but my life has not been all sunshine, lollipops and rainbows.  However, my hardhips are extremely personal and not only do I not want to write about them in a PS, I don't think that they should be used as an excuse for why I did this or why I got that B or why my LSAT score is 167 or whatever.  I guarantee you that everybody applying for law school could write a PS about some obstacle they overcame.  And I just think, "No.  Life's tough, suck it up."  Put your best resume, LSAT, GPA, recs, and writing sample forward and let the chips fall where they may.  Because everybody's life has been hard in some way.

Has anybody ever heard of the old game show Queen for a Day?  The gist of it was 3 housewives would come on this show and basically talk about how crappy their lives are. ("Well, Bob lost his job and I have a wooden leg and little Billy's iron lung doesn't work and we had to sell little Susie's kidney in order to pay for little Mary's glass eye") (That was supposed to be humorous, by the way.  If you have a glass eye, wooden leg or iron lung, I did not mean to offend.)

So after these 3 women got done prattling off their laundry list of hardships, the audience voted for whichever woman they thought had the worst life and then she won a washer and dryer or something.  It was ridiculous.  But my point is that I don't want to hear about everybody's problems.  I think that because everyone can point to hardships that it just should all be considered a wash.

Also, about this URM thing.  I don't really understand how they determine what gets to be a URM.  I mean, homosexuals are a URM and one could argue that they face more discrimination and hate crimes than any ethnicity.  Why does diversity automatically equal racial diversity?  I bet Yale's class of 2007 doesn't have any female-Hawkeye-football-fan-Theatre-majors.  Consequently, I would make their class more diverse.  

Also, I hope that I did not make anyone angry (Like Maricutie, who by the way has the cutest avatar I've ever seen.  Makes you wanna hug her or smack her.  )  I truly was just offering a hypothetical idea.  I'm not trying to be offensive or anything.  And I also don't appreciate my comments being called "effin' ridiculous."  If you want to oppose me, just state your argument.  No need to drag degrading remarks and profanity into this.

Andie

Drew: What holds you to the Earth?
Greg: Why, my love for you Drew!

[russian_concussion]

"No.  Life's tough, suck it up."  Put your best resume, LSAT, GPA, recs, and writing sample forward and let the chips fall where they may.  Because everybody's life has been hard in some way.

I agree. The only truly fair way to do it.

[RocketBot]

"No.  Life's tough, suck it up."  Put your best resume, LSAT, GPA, recs, and writing sample forward and let the chips fall where they may.  Because everybody's life has been hard in some way.

Your parents not give you money for the movies once or something? 

[russian_concussion]

"No.  Life's tough, suck it up."  Put your best resume, LSAT, GPA, recs, and writing sample forward and let the chips fall where they may.  Because everybody's life has been hard in some way.

Your parents not give you money for the movies once or something? 

Wow, very intelligent. 

[RocketBot]

"No.  Life's tough, suck it up."  Put your best resume, LSAT, GPA, recs, and writing sample forward and let the chips fall where they may.  Because everybody's life has been hard in some way.

Your parents not give you money for the movies once or something? 

Wow, very intelligent. 

Congrats it was a joke 

[maricutie]

First of all, yes of course my little hypothetical situation would include UG, major, extracurriculars, etc.  I should've included resume when I listed GPA, LSAT, writing samples and recommendations.

This was probably the biggest complaint I had with the hypo. But glad it was a mistake ...   

Secondly, I'm really don't think that explaining about your personal hardships should be a factor.  Because you know what?  I am a white, middle class girl.  I have two parents and enough money to be comfortable and my life seems great.

However, that does not mean I haven't had hardships in my life.  The hardships didn't stem from discrimination, but my life has not been all sunshine, lollipops and rainbows.  However, my hardhips are extremely personal and not only do I not want to write about them in a PS, I don't think that they should be used as an excuse for why I did this or why I got that B or why my LSAT score is 167 or whatever.  I guarantee you that everybody applying for law school could write a PS about some obstacle they overcame.  And I just think, "No.  Life's tough, suck it up."  Put your best resume, LSAT, GPA, recs, and writing sample forward and let the chips fall where they may.  Because everybody's life has been hard in some way.

The thing is, there's a range here. For ex, when I went to berkeley I was amazed at the relative advantages people had had. Like, people could afford SAT prep courses. I had to get a job to pay for the AP tests I wanted to take. And I just grew up poor, but not, like, poor in the middle of East LA or anything. That's another extreme. And then, on the opposite side, there are those who've had everything handed to them on a silver platter. I just think things like your background do have the potential of affecting how well you're going to do with what you've got, so it just makes sense (in my opinion) to judge what you've managed to accomplish in light of this.

Also, about this URM thing.  I don't really understand how they determine what gets to be a URM.  I mean, homosexuals are a URM and one could argue that they face more discrimination and hate crimes than any ethnicity.  Why does diversity automatically equal racial diversity?  I bet Yale's class of 2007 doesn't have any female-Hawkeye-football-fan-Theatre-majors.  Consequently, I would make their class more diverse. 

Yeah, I don't think you're going to get anyone who agrees with the status quo of AA. Most people, minorities and non-minorities alike, believe that there's some level of change necessary.

Also, I hope that I did not make anyone angry (Like Maricutie, who by the way has the cutest avatar I've ever seen.  Makes you wanna hug her or smack her.  )  I truly was just offering a hypothetical idea.  I'm not trying to be offensive or anything.  And I also don't appreciate my comments being called "effin' ridiculous."  If you want to oppose me, just state your argument.  No need to drag degrading remarks and profanity into this.

No anger here, and no profanity, either! Sorry if it seemed the other way ... it's actually pretty funny, though, because I'm the last person to use a curse word. Even when I use "effin'" it's usually in the spirit of humor. It's a lesson learned, though, that things don't come out the same way on message boards! 

[BigTex]

Uh, yeah everyone's life has been hard.  But the 'hardships' referred to in the AA debate are those factors over which URMs have no control over whatsoever.  (societal prejudices, etc.)  Not middle-class white-girl anorexia hardships

I agree. Life is hard. It's never really easy, no matter your background. Even rich kids deal with rejection, acne, puberty, first loves, abuse, rejection, etc. Those are the kinds of background hardships we ALL go through be we black, white, mexican, whatever. AA is not about addressing these common hardships of the human condition. It's about addressing the hardships peculiar to and endemic to certain groups.

[WoeIsMe]

For whatever reason, it is 'white' people who question why asians aren't in the URM category and as the counter it's the groups currently in URM who are perfectly content to justify why asians should not be included?

[russian_concussion]

For whatever reason, it is 'white' people who question why asians aren't in the URM category and as the counter it's the groups currently in URM who are perfectly content to justify why asians should not be included?

LoL, on a similar note, I don't think I've ever seen an asian person complain either way 

[BigTex]

For whatever reason, it is 'white' people who question why asians aren't in the URM category and as the counter it's the groups currently in URM who are perfectly content to justify why asians should not be included?

1. X = group A's percentage of the population in the United States.
2. X is a 'minority' percentage (say < 30%, pick some number)
3. Y = group A's percentage of the population in United States law schools.
4. If Y < X then someone from group A should be given URM status.

If Asians, or some subgroup thereof, satisfy the above then I'm perfectly willing to have them considered as a URM. What exactly do you want?