Affirmative Action is for people not smart enough to get in without it

[Dano]

So you would assume that lower socioeconomic white candidates are less represented on LSN?  I doubt it.  Refer to http://www.aahperd.org/iejhe/2004/ragon1/Internet%20Use%20Among%20College%20Students%20brAre%20There%20Differences%20By%20Race-ethnicity.htm

where it states the following:

Including households of all income levels, blacks and Hispanics are less than half as likely to use the Internet as whites.

Interesting article.  However, I'm not assuming anything.  I'm just saying that I don't think that LSN is a legitimate source from which anyone can legitimately make an argument regarding AA either way. 

Fair enough, but given that blacks and hispanics are 1/2 as likely to use the internet, it  seems less likely that the LSN data is skewed towards more URMs than low socioeconomic whites.

[Ninja]

Oh, I'm sorry.  I wonder how many white people are living in poverty and trying to attend college or are FIRST GENERATION college students?  I think that's the better question to ask.  (That might help to explain why those numbers aren't out there at this point in time.)

I can count on one hand how many people that I know personally who fit the above criteria, and they did NOT have the average test scores/GPAs and received a significant amount of financial aid.

Actually there are a lot more white people living under the poverty line than minorities.  I forget what the exact number is, but if you look at the census data, you will find that there are more than twice as many whites living under the poverty line than minorities.

If I am not mistaken, and I am unwilling to actually look up the numbers, there are more whites living under the poverty line than there are blacks period, or at least close.  But lets remember that the poverty line is not the 'poor line.'

I looked at the data, and you are right.  Also, the poverty line is around $12K/year income for a for a person with one child.

[---------]

Oh, I'm sorry.  I wonder how many white people are living in poverty and trying to attend college or are FIRST GENERATION college students?  I think that's the better question to ask.  (That might help to explain why those numbers aren't out there at this point in time.)

I can count on one hand how many people that I know personally who fit the above criteria, and they did NOT have the average test scores/GPAs and received a significant amount of financial aid.

Yeah,hi.

I didn't get a boost in the admissions process.I am a white person w/a very unhappy background.I got a few 1k grants(gee,thanks!). Otherwise, I received nothing special.

I'm also not against AA, although I think the current system has more to do w/quotas than almost anything else. That's sad because I think diversity in the classroom is a great thing, and I agree that a large number of people of color are in worse circumstances than white people are. Even people of color who are in the same econ. area still have the added burden of racism to deal with. That's hard for a lot of white people to understand. Frankly, most white people,myself often included, really only notice racism when it's overt. We don't think about the smaller implications because we don't have to.

[sweatsandtees]

Do you have any statistics to prove that many white people get in with AA? 

--You don't need statistics it is pure numbers. There are more white people in this country thus there are more disadvataged white people in this country. AA is to level the playing field not just for URMs, but  for all disavantaged people. For example, Harvard's free-tuition program for students from families with less than $40K income to me is AA. I personally feel that full-tuition given to anyone solely based on financial need is not cool, and you know that this is not just for URMs either. I know that all people benefit from it, despite their race/ethnicity. There will always be a more "qualified" student who will miss out on something due to AA, but like I said AA is meant to level the playing field not to punish people for not being poor/URM/etc. If a school chooses to increase diversity in whatever form of AA they choose, so be it. The only time people should really take issue is if it's a state school that your taxes are paying for. Otherwise a private institution has and reserves the right to do whatever they want as long as it is in accordance with the law.

Why do you make statements about whites when you dismiss Xony's statements about blacks?  Shouldn't you apply your own standard to yourself as well?

--And I never referred to white people in general as having or not having a problem with AA. I addressed all AA haters. I had a problem with Xony assuming that all Black people in a certain situation behave a certain way. I addressed him first but continued on to say how I feel about this argument.

Law schools MAY look for diversity other than race.  However, the spreads from the median seem much higher for URM's (according to LSN data).  Are there any other sources of information you are aware of?

--Like another poster said, LSN is hardly a representation of the law school applicant pool. And you can get information about this from many schools, if not all, of their websites.That is why I said that there is a 25% mark in general. Not everyone is a high scorer on the LSAT or has a 4.0 GPA. The full application is what they consider, not just the numbers.

Many whites don't like AA for the same reasons that blacks did not like segregation.  They are both forms of discrimination.

Are you insinuating that all white people are clones coming from the same backgrounds?  Have you ever met or talked to a white person outside of the internet?

--Never said anything about white people being clones I said some AA haters are clones. And as a matter of fact I have always been in predominately white school and have witnessed white kids getting benefits from affirmative action (i.e. white women getting into engineering schools with less than stellar grades/SAT scores to increase women in engineering). So please don't assume my comments don't have merit. And if what and how people choose to present to the ad comms is the same then that is why I consider them to be clones. Obviously no too human beings live the same life, despite having the same criteria. But if one person makes their situation alot more interesting than the other, who is the other person to think that because they have the same credentials they should be on the auto-admit list?

[sweatsandtees]

You lose credibility when you attack the person and not the position they take.

--I wasn't attacking Xony with this post. first I dressed that he/she need not assume how all Black people in a certain situation live. After I addressed hinm I continued on with my input to the conversation.

I don't feel that using merit alone produces clones.  For example, I will get into a top law school on merit (I am a white man from a barely upper-middle class family) But I am a southerner and a conservative.  I know that this combination is unheard of, I will let it sink in for a second.  Anyway, there are not many people like me in top law schools, I gaurentee that, but that is not why I will get in, for me its numbers, and if it were numbers across the board, we would have a more efficient outcome.

-I can see where you're coming from but think about this. If after a while everyone URM or not has the same test scores and GPAs where then do you start to pick who you should take? I do agree to some extent with another poster when they say that it is probably more about quota than anything else, however wouldn't everyone be a clone then? That is why you have to factor in socioeconomic beckground, extracurriculars, work experience, and what have you. And in your case i doubt that it is all numbers. It is also presentation. I am not from the South nor am I conservative, but I can imagine that you definitely have a very unique perception of the world, considering your background, and I feel that all-around if you presented yourself favorably to whatever ad comms you would get accepted regardless of how your stats compare to others.]

Not to stray, but in my personal statemnt, I honestly addressed the fact that I disliked writing and avoided it for a while, but I then went on to talk about how engineering changed my perception and how technological advancements opened my eyes to the legal needs of may of the technology companies and how I could help. I also had 5 consistent years of extracurriculars, great reccommendations (including a personal one from the Dean of the College of Engineering), and about 2 years worth of work experience through co-ops at companies like Hewlett Packar and Raytheon. I will admit that my scores did fall below the 25% rank of some schools that I was accepted to, but I refuse to discredit my acceptance because of AA. I busted my behind to have a high engineering GPA (for EE) and continuously stayed involved in the community and employed.

Some people may read this and pass it off to AA, but if they never took a look at my numbers or race I am sure almost all the schools I applied to would accept me and I beleive that has been the case for others as well. I beleive that regardless of your scores your personality has to shine first and foremost if you want to get accepted. And to support my claim, there are a few white women (lawyergirl rings a bell) who do NOT have very high stats and still got into some great T1 schools based off of their credentials.

In closing, I don't deny the existence of AA or even the inherent unfairness it sometimes has, but let us not forget that we are all individuals  with unique experiences and if we don't present ourselves that way then we can't expect the ad comms to assume it when evaluating applications. But we muist give proper credit to those who do succesfully.

[Dano]

--You don't need statistics it is pure numbers. There are more white people in this country thus there are more disadvataged white people in this country. AA is to level the playing field not just for URMs, but  for all disavantaged people. For example, Harvard's free-tuition program for students from families with less than $40K income to me is AA. I personally feel that full-tuition given to anyone solely based on financial need is not cool, and you know that this is not just for URMs either. I know that all people benefit from it, despite their race/ethnicity. There will always be a more "qualified" student who will miss out on something due to AA, but like I said AA is meant to level the playing field not to punish people for not being poor/URM/etc. If a school chooses to increase diversity in whatever form of AA they choose, so be it. The only time people should really take issue is if it's a state school that your taxes are paying for. Otherwise a private institution has and reserves the right to do whatever they want as long as it is in accordance with the law.

Law schools MAY look for diversity other than race.  However, the spreads from the median seem much higher for URM's (according to LSN data).  Are there any other sources of information you are aware of?

--Like another poster said, LSN is hardly a representation of the law school applicant pool. And you can get information about this from many schools, if not all, of their websites.That is why I said that there is a 25% mark in general. Not everyone is a high scorer on the LSAT or has a 4.0 GPA. The full application is what they consider, not just the numbers.

I fail to see how LSN is not an indicator of the bias toward URM's.  What schools have statistics listing race, socioeconic level, and lsat scores for each candidate?  Aggregated numbers are not helpful since they cannot be attributed to particular candidates.  LSN has this information.  Furthermore, as I showed, college-level URM's are less likely to use the internet.  You guys can ignore the LSN data if you want, but you are only kidding yourselves.

Harvard is a definite exception.  Very few schools provide much need-based aid.

The playing field IS level.  Almost everyone receives discrimination at some point in their lives.  Every single white candidate is facing discrimination as we speak when they try to obtain jobs and/or enter law school.  Older people face age discrimination.  Irish Catholics face discrimination from Jewish firms.  American laborers are discriminated against in favor of illegal Mexican laborers.  I can keep going on and on and on.  American computer programmers are discriminated against in favor of H1-B and L-1 Visa holders.  Gays are discriminated against in certain occupations like the military and blue collar-oriented positions.

What makes the hispanic and black populations so special?  Basically, a loud and vocal community that ensures all are aware of their hardships in life.  Another thing.  As you stated, income alone is not a good factor for determing aid.  The COL in many URM communities is less allowing them to live a similar lifestyle to those living in more expensive communities.

URM's have specific organizations that help them obtain employment.  Blacks have specific schools they attend, which have almost all black students.  Where is the diversity there?  They have specific scholarships for them exclusively.  If anything, the playing field is tilted in favor of URM's.

AA actually unevens the playing field for URM's.  When they enter the workplace, many believe they got there without merit even when the URM was an exceptional performer.  Without AA, there would be no question about how someone got there.

[sweatsandtees]

I fail to see how LSN is not an indicator of the bias toward URM's.  What schools have statistics listing race, socioeconic level, and lsat scores for each candidate?  Aggregated numbers are not helpful since they cannot be attributed to particular candidates.  LSN has this information.  Furthermore, as I showed, college-level URM's are less likely to use the internet.  You guys can ignore the LSN data if you want, but you are only kidding yourselves.

Harvard is a definite exception.  Very few schools provide much need-based aid.

--  Black people use the internet and there are a whole lot of them. Second I am tired of people making this seem like Black people are the only ones who benefit from AA. When you speak of AA don't forget the others who benefit. It is not ALL race biased that is why I brought up the Harvard example. Regardless of it is one school, it is still AA.

And LSN is NOT a good representation. If I did not find and use LSN that does not make me disappear nor does it indicate the lack of my computer savvy. Now put all law school applicants across the world on LSN then talk to me about it. Just because a bunch of non URM kids and a few URMs choose to post their info does by no means represent sh#t about the applicant pool. You're kidding yourself if you thin that all the internet using Black people applying to law school use LSN. And don't let me even go on about how it is the internet and there is no proof as to the validity of any of the information on LSN.

The playing field IS level.  Almost everyone receives discrimination at some point in their lives.  Every single white candidate is facing discrimination as we speak when they try to obtain jobs and/or enter law school.  Older people face age discrimination.  Irish Catholics face discrimination from Jewish firms.  American laborers are discriminated against in favor of illegal Mexican laborers.  I can keep going on and on and on.  American computer programmers are discriminated against in favor of H1-B and L-1 Visa holders.  Gays are discriminated against in certain occupations like the military and blue collar-oriented positions.

What makes the hispanic and black populations so special?  Basically, a loud and vocal community that ensures all are aware of their hardships in life.  Another thing.  As you stated, income alone is not a good factor for determing aid.  The COL in many URM communities is less allowing them to live a similar lifestyle to those living in more expensive communities.

--Ther you go again only addressing Blacks and Hispanics. Native American's benefit. Poor people benefit. And Black and Hispanic people do not think that they are "so special" as you say. The Black/Hispanic community doesn't have to say Sh#t about their struggles. Just walk into an impoverished Black/Hospanic community and see for yourself. And not all Black/Hispanic communities have a lower cost of living. Last time I check in Bosotn, Ma, the cost of living in the hood was just the same as it was in Downtown Boston. Just because people make do with what they have does not mean that it is an equivalent lifestyle. And many of your other seemingly racist comments about the Black and Hispanic communities I will not address. Obviously you blame AA way too mcuh for your problems or what you perceive to be your future problems.

URM's have specific organizations that help them obtain employment.  Blacks have specific schools they attend, which have almost all black students.  Where is the diversity there?  They have specific scholarships for them exclusively.  If anything, the playing field is tilted in favor of URM's.

--And white people don't? All those secret societies and country clubs where all the members are white and will continue to be white. Where the advantages are just the same. A group that helps to place URMs into the workforce, etc. is hardly lacking a promotion in diversity. Coming form a predominantly white city like Boston, many opportunities are obscured from URMs because we do not have the access to this information. Now if someone works to see to it that we are well informed of what's going on around us that ia hardly lacking in diversity. And just because an organization helps to get URMs work, etc. does not mean that they gaurantee it. Obviously these people need credentials and getting the door opened for an interview hardly means that if a company/school/etc. chooses to hire/admit/etc. URM it is because they are a URM. The playing field is far from level. There are many jobs that URM people apply for and do not get because of the color of their skin, or because of their ethnicities. Obviouly no one in their right mind would admit to that practice, but it still happens. I know classmates dumber than doorknobs with jobs lined up all because of WP so if AA must go, so should WP.

AA actually unevens the playing field for URM's.  When they enter the workplace, many believe they got there without merit even when the URM was an exceptional performer.  Without AA, there would be no question about how someone got there.

--Sounds easy in theory but is hardly practical. There are still super racist people in the world and they would defnitely discriminate if they had to in order to keep URMs out of thier companies/schools/etc. I do beleive that AA exists, but I hardly see it as a deciding factor in all URMs entering higher ed or applying for jobs requiring a great deal of qualifications. Some people hate outsourcing because their jobs are being sent to countries like India all to save $$ when qualified workers are here. AA is not discriminating against everyone. If you continue to think that every Black/Latino person that you come across in law school or in life only got their because of AA, but remember that AA doesn't keep people from getting fired/rejected/etc. It is being able to put in the work. AA is no different in that sense if a person is hired with less qualifications becase he/she is the son or daughter of the boss's best friend. You can get in the door, but ultimately you have to attain that and that is what I see URMs doing in higher ed and in the workplace.

[Dano]

I fail to see how LSN is not an indicator of the bias toward URM's.  What schools have statistics listing race, socioeconic level, and lsat scores for each candidate?  Aggregated numbers are not helpful since they cannot be attributed to particular candidates.  LSN has this information.  Furthermore, as I showed, college-level URM's are less likely to use the internet.  You guys can ignore the LSN data if you want, but you are only kidding yourselves.

Harvard is a definite exception.  Very few schools provide much need-based aid.

--  Black people use the internet and there are a whole lot of them. Second I am tired of people making this seem like Black people are the only ones who benefit from AA. When you speak of AA don't forget the others who benefit. It is not ALL race biased that is why I brought up the Harvard example. Regardless of it is one school, it is still AA.

And LSN is NOT a good representation. If I did not find and use LSN that does not make me disappear nor does it indicate the lack of my computer savvy. Now put all law school applicants across the world on LSN then talk to me about it. Just because a bunch of non URM kids and a few URMs choose to post their info does by no means represent sh#t about the applicant pool. You're kidding yourself if you thin that all the internet using Black people applying to law school use LSN. And don't let me even go on about how it is the internet and there is no proof as to the validity of any of the information on LSN.

Your statements are based on little fact.  I showed a study that demostrates that URM's use the internet 1/2 as much as whites.  You ignore that and continue to argue about whether blacks use the internet or not.  I know they use it, but fewer do relative to the whites making the LSN data more compelling.

The playing field IS level.  Almost everyone receives discrimination at some point in their lives.  Every single white candidate is facing discrimination as we speak when they try to obtain jobs and/or enter law school.  Older people face age discrimination.  Irish Catholics face discrimination from Jewish firms.  American laborers are discriminated against in favor of illegal Mexican laborers.  I can keep going on and on and on.  American computer programmers are discriminated against in favor of H1-B and L-1 Visa holders.  Gays are discriminated against in certain occupations like the military and blue collar-oriented positions.

What makes the hispanic and black populations so special?  Basically, a loud and vocal community that ensures all are aware of their hardships in life.  Another thing.  As you stated, income alone is not a good factor for determing aid.  The COL in many URM communities is less allowing them to live a similar lifestyle to those living in more expensive communities.

--Ther you go again only addressing Blacks and Hispanics. Native American's benefit. Poor people benefit. And Black and Hispanic people do not think that they are "so special" as you say. The Black/Hispanic community doesn't have to say Sh#t about their struggles. Just walk into an impoverished Black/Hospanic community and see for yourself. And not all Black/Hispanic communities have a lower cost of living. Last time I check in Bosotn, Ma, the cost of living in the hood was just the same as it was in Downtown Boston. Just because people make do with what they have does not mean that it is an equivalent lifestyle. And many of your other seemingly racist comments about the Black and Hispanic communities I will not address. Obviously you blame AA way too mcuh for your problems or what you perceive to be your future problems.

URM's have specific organizations that help them obtain employment.  Blacks have specific schools they attend, which have almost all black students.  Where is the diversity there?  They have specific scholarships for them exclusively.  If anything, the playing field is tilted in favor of URM's.

--And white people don't? All those secret societies and country clubs where all the members are white and will continue to be white. Where the advantages are just the same. A group that helps to place URMs into the workforce, etc. is hardly lacking a promotion in diversity. Coming form a predominantly white city like Boston, many opportunities are obscured from URMs because we do not have the access to this information. Now if someone works to see to it that we are well informed of what's going on around us that ia hardly lacking in diversity. And just because an organization helps to get URMs work, etc. does not mean that they gaurantee it. Obviously these people need credentials and getting the door opened for an interview hardly means that if a company/school/etc. chooses to hire/admit/etc. URM it is because they are a URM. The playing field is far from level. There are many jobs that URM people apply for and do not get because of the color of their skin, or because of their ethnicities. Obviouly no one in their right mind would admit to that practice, but it still happens. I know classmates dumber than doorknobs with jobs lined up all because of WP so if AA must go, so should WP.

AA actually unevens the playing field for URM's.  When they enter the workplace, many believe they got there without merit even when the URM was an exceptional performer.  Without AA, there would be no question about how someone got there.

--Sounds easy in theory but is hardly practical. There are still super racist people in the world and they would defnitely discriminate if they had to in order to keep URMs out of thier companies/schools/etc. I do beleive that AA exists, but I hardly see it as a deciding factor in all URMs entering higher ed or applying for jobs requiring a great deal of qualifications. Some people hate outsourcing because their jobs are being sent to countries like India all to save $$ when qualified workers are here. AA is not discriminating against everyone. If you continue to think that every Black/Latino person that you come across in law school or in life only got their because of AA, but remember that AA doesn't keep people from getting fired/rejected/etc. It is being able to put in the work. AA is no different in that sense if a person is hired with less qualifications becase he/she is the son or daughter of the boss's best friend. You can get in the door, but ultimately you have to attain that and that is what I see URMs doing in higher ed and in the workplace.

Of course other groups are part of AA, but listing them all would get exhaustive.  I'll stick to the 2 primary groups benefiting from it.  Native Americans are not represented as well as blacks and hispanics.  They are not constantly whining about their status on the media.  They might whine but their whining is more subdued because their numbers are smaller.

If the cost of the ghetto is the same as better areas of Boston, why are people staying in the ghetto?  I think you're full of it on that one.

There are plenty of super-racist Blacks and Hispanics as well.  I've run into quite a few.  Racism cuts many ways ... all the wrong way. 

I don't continue to believe that every Black and Hispanic got there via AA.  Read my post and you will see that.  I state that AA is a facilitator to that type of sterotyping and have no qualms with URM's that are qualified.

I am equally against nepotism (except for family businesses where it makes sense) as I am against AA.

[sweatsandtees]

Of course other groups are part of AA, but listing them all would get exhaustive.  I'll stick to the 2 primary groups benefiting from it.  Native Americans are not represented as well as blacks and hispanics.  They are not constantly whining about their status on the media.  They might whine but their whining is more subdued because their numbers are smaller.

--A few Black or Hispanic people whining is hardly enough to say that the masses whine. And I do recall a great deal of white people whining about AA.....

If the cost of the ghetto is the same as better areas of Boston, why are people staying in the ghetto?  I think you're full of it on that one.

--There is a huge housing crunch in Boston. Alot of elderly people and older families uprooted in Boston have been living in the same places form decades and they happen to be the places where most people (esp. college students) want to live. This then causes the price of rent and housing to increase due to the demand. My father is in real estate in MA so I am not full of it. I know exactly what I am talking about. If you look into some of the poorest neighborhoods you either have people of all nationalities and ages living in subsidized housing (an option many landlords like because at lead 80% of the rent is guaranteed and paid by the state), or they are living in sh*tholes that cost $700+ per person and to top it off they share 1 bathroom.

There are plenty of super-racist Blacks and Hispanics as well.  I've run into quite a few.  Racism cuts many ways ... all the wrong way.

--I wonder why they are super racist??? 

I don't continue to believe that every Black and Hispanic got there via AA.  Read my post and you will see that.  I state that AA is a facilitator to that type of sterotyping and have no qualms with URM's that are qualified.

--If you have no qualms, please don't generalize about Black and Latino people. I agree that there are plenty of URMs who are against AA, but like I will always say it comes in many forms so if people are that ignorant to beleive that someone is where they are because of AA with no facts to base it on, then let them stay ignorant. The world will keep passing them by. I do think that as the gap in education and opportunity closes we will get closer to an end of AA. But you have to admit that AA's intentions were never to reverse discriminate or to give preferential treatment. That is why I feel like many people who do not get what they think that deserve are so quick to assume AA if a URM got what they wanted instead. I am not saying that you are racist or that you are wrong in your disapproval of AA, however, you do need to realize like with anything given a bad reputation, the positive aspects of AA will be far outweighed by the perceived negative aspects. I hardly beleive that underqualified people of color have stormed into higher education or into the workforce only because of their color. It can be argued that the entire process of selection is like AA. Why choose one thing over another if they are both identical?? In the real world all selection is based on several criteria that some may see as fair and others not.

And just a question to ponder: Had AA not been a whole publicized program, would you guess that the URM candidate that got the job or got acceptance to a certain school because of race?? I personally think not. Media has made a big deal out of AA like it is something that will ruin the country. There are hardly enough Black people in the US, let alone qualified enough, to benefit from AA to take all the jobs from white people.

As for your comment on Black and the internet again, There is a significantly smaller number of Black people in the US and an even smaller amount who use the internet. FIne. But to say that the fact that half of Black people use the internet than white people still does not make LSN an accurate depiction of the pool of Black applicants for law school, let alone all applicants, and thus boggles my mind that you find that data compelling. There is no correlation between the use of the internet and the accuracy of LSN. Some guy started LSN so people could have a place to compare and contrast their #'s stats, etc. I am 100% certain that he doesn't run background checks to validate all users. Even some of the non URM iusers of LSN alter or withold information about themselves. But if you feel that Black people are accurately depicted by LSN, keep on beleiving that. But do remember that there are so many unclassified and incorrectly classified people on LSN.

I am equally against nepotism (except for family businesses where it makes sense) as I am against AA.

--Well Dano, nice to know we agree on something

I truly enjoy this debate and I definitely hope you're not getting all fired up about it. I respect your opinions and I appreciate your rebuttal skills. You will make a fine lawyer Dano!!

[angmill08]

Almost everyone receives discrimination at some point in their lives.  Every single white candidate is facing discrimination as we speak when they try to obtain jobs and/or enter law school.  Older people face age discrimination.  Irish Catholics face discrimination from Jewish firms.  American laborers are discriminated against in favor of illegal Mexican laborers.  I can keep going on and on and on.  American computer programmers are discriminated against in favor of H1-B and L-1 Visa holders.  Gays are discriminated against in certain occupations like the military and blue collar-oriented positions.

Most of these groups have not demonstrated a pattern of discrimination spanning generations which has led to an ongoing underrepresentation of members of said group in the field you mention. This is the crucial distinction that makes AA different from, say, Jim Crow segregation. Both are systems which take race into account, yes, and some people have a problem with that, period. But these two systems do not have the same causes or the same effects.

Now for some of the groups you mention -- gays in the military, for one -- there is a documented, long term pattern of discrimination which has led to an ongoing underrepresentation. Why has AA not been implemented there? Well, the gay rights movement didn't reach the national stage until the 1970s. The civil rights movement reached the national stage in the early 1960s... some might say much earlier, if you include the abolition movement... But if more and more GLBTs desire military careers and advocate for the right to pursue that, I predict that over the next 20 years we'll see a change in military policy (becoming fully open to GLBTs) or, in the absence of that, some kind of policy mandate, like AA.