Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: challenge to urm's  (Read 25405 times)

Jamie Stringer

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 8588
    • View Profile
Re: challenge to urm's
« Reply #70 on: March 29, 2009, 10:21:35 PM »
Nay. Reading comp problem. I mean, I guess it wasn't super-elementary or anything, so maybe that can count against me...

Did you even sort of read the preceding posts? "Limited", as being used here, was a reference to people artificially limited by society in some way. That can include, but is not limited to, URMs of all flavors, really any minority, poors, women, young white males theseadays, Mid-Westerners, Southerners, etc. Basically, "limited" can be applied to anyone that has been hosed on some occasion on account of something outside of their control. Rich, old, white males are about the only people that don't fit the definition, but I'm sure if you dig deep enough, you'll find some legit gripe in most of their cases. Like I said, society limits everyone in some way all the time.

Personally, I don't think anyone is really, truly limited unless they have some sort of serious medical ailment. Society certainly screws people on a regular basis almost indiscriminatly, but without society, what do you even have anyway?

Yeah, I read all the prior posts and I still don't think that you're making your point clearly.  If you are mistaking clear writing with elementary school, then perhaps we've identified your fundamental problem (or at least one of them). 

Also, your definition of "limited" as quoted above is a fucktarded mess.  I can't even begin to deal with that, so I'll skip down to the last point.  When you say "Society certainly screws people on a regular basis almost indiscriminatly [sic]," you do realize that's basically false, right?  There certainly is a pretty sizable amount of discriminatory screwing going on in this country and AA is, in part, an attempt to address said screwing.  If you don't believe there is discriminatory screwing of people going on in this country, please just say so outright and I'll be sure to end the conversation.
Quote from: Tim Mitchell

F*cking bi+ch drinks a 1 oz bottle of goose and thinks she's French

Ninja1

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3089
  • ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: challenge to urm's
« Reply #71 on: March 29, 2009, 10:23:31 PM »
So people just need to get over it?

Indeed. You either let your life be dictated by the past, or you move on and begin to dictate your future.

What a strange way of seeing things.  If I get hit by a car and I sue the driver, am I allowing my life to be dictated by the past or am I moving on and dictating my future?  And I am not trying to suggest that this is analogous, so please don't bother arguing that point.

And it's not analogous. You're within your rights to sue the driver, but you shouldn't let the fact you got hit mean that your life is forever altered by it. Even if you get seriously screwed up in said car accident, you take you cane and hobble your way on down the road. That, or you spend your life rolling out of the way anytime a car comes within 15 feet of you.

I already said it wasn't, but I imagine for different reasons.

What if by some strange turn of events, you get hit by cars over and over again?

I was just reinforcing the point.

If you're continually getting hit by cars, that probably has more to do with you than the other cars.

So you think that racism is the fault of people who belong to racial minority groups.  Got it.

Way to overextend the car analogy, which was a poor analogy to begin with.

Unless you were saying "aa = a car wreck" from the very start, and even then...

Oh I wasn't saying anything about affirmative action.  I'm just pointing out that sometimes you let things go, sometimes you go back and address the problem. 

Thus bringing us back to the question of when is enough enough? How long will it take for aa to fix the problems caused by things well beyond its control, or how long until URM culture addresses the problems itself?

Okay so you're conceding at that "getting over it" is not always appropriate, and should only be done when enough has actually been done?

Interesting read of that post.

What I was saying is, how long do we continue to not get over it (discrimination and such) as a society by continuing aa, and how long until URM culture fixes its own unproductive value system and doesn't need aa anymore? Or, put another way, how much can aa do and how much does URM culture have to do for itself before real gains are made by URMs?

I'm still saying getting over it at some point is not only appropriate, but necessary. Yeah, that point is when enough has been done, but enough is usually done fairly quickly, especially in the case of the examples that got us on this topic way back about 5 pages ago.
I'mma stay bumpin' till I bump my head on my tomb.

Jamie Stringer

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 8588
    • View Profile
Re: challenge to urm's
« Reply #72 on: March 29, 2009, 10:25:50 PM »
Interesting read of that post.

What I was saying is, how long do we continue to not get over it (discrimination and such) as a society by continuing aa, and how long until URM culture fixes its own unproductive value system and doesn't need aa anymore? Or, put another way, how much can aa do and how much does URM culture have to do for itself before real gains are made by URMs?

I'm still saying getting over it at some point is not only appropriate, but necessary. Yeah, that point is when enough has been done, but enough is usually done fairly quickly, especially in the case of the examples that got us on this topic way back about 5 pages ago.

Perhaps it's difficult to just get over it when "discrimination and such" still exists today?

Or maybe AA will end when "discrimination and such" does?
Quote from: Tim Mitchell

F*cking bi+ch drinks a 1 oz bottle of goose and thinks she's French

heartbreaker

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3817
    • View Profile
Re: challenge to urm's
« Reply #73 on: March 29, 2009, 10:26:38 PM »
Except the fundamental problems underlying negative race-based discrimination have NOT been resolved, nor are they really anywhere near being resolved. Until they are, or even until there is an earnest, honest, national effort to discuss, nevermind, correct these issues, the inequalities that necessitate affirmative action will continue to be perpetuated.

bl825

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 693
  • There are just so many reasons to smile.
    • View Profile
Re: challenge to urm's
« Reply #74 on: March 29, 2009, 10:26:48 PM »
So people just need to get over it?

Indeed. You either let your life be dictated by the past, or you move on and begin to dictate your future.

What a strange way of seeing things.  If I get hit by a car and I sue the driver, am I allowing my life to be dictated by the past or am I moving on and dictating my future?  And I am not trying to suggest that this is analogous, so please don't bother arguing that point.

And it's not analogous. You're within your rights to sue the driver, but you shouldn't let the fact you got hit mean that your life is forever altered by it. Even if you get seriously screwed up in said car accident, you take you cane and hobble your way on down the road. That, or you spend your life rolling out of the way anytime a car comes within 15 feet of you.

I already said it wasn't, but I imagine for different reasons.

What if by some strange turn of events, you get hit by cars over and over again?

I was just reinforcing the point.

If you're continually getting hit by cars, that probably has more to do with you than the other cars.

So you think that racism is the fault of people who belong to racial minority groups.  Got it.

Way to overextend the car analogy, which was a poor analogy to begin with.

Unless you were saying "aa = a car wreck" from the very start, and even then...

Oh I wasn't saying anything about affirmative action.  I'm just pointing out that sometimes you let things go, sometimes you go back and address the problem. 

Thus bringing us back to the question of when is enough enough? How long will it take for aa to fix the problems caused by things well beyond its control, or how long until URM culture addresses the problems itself?

Okay so you're conceding at that "getting over it" is not always appropriate, and should only be done when enough has actually been done?

Interesting read of that post.

What I was saying is, how long do we continue to not get over it (discrimination and such) as a society by continuing aa, and how long until URM culture fixes its own unproductive value system and doesn't need aa anymore? Or, put another way, how much can aa do and how much does URM culture have to do for itself before real gains are made by URMs?

I'm still saying getting over it at some point is not only appropriate, but necessary. Yeah, that point is when enough has been done, but enough is usually done fairly quickly, especially in the case of the examples that got us on this topic way back about 5 pages ago.

Since you were willing to concede that getting over it is not the right course of action when enough has not been done, I'll concede that getting over it is the right course of action when enough has been done.  ;)

I think that was all I was going for here so I'll hand it back over to Buffy.  8)
Oh yea...you're delicious and lean, but unsustainable and not to be consumed daily.

Ninja1

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3089
  • ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: challenge to urm's
« Reply #75 on: March 29, 2009, 10:29:27 PM »
Nay. Reading comp problem. I mean, I guess it wasn't super-elementary or anything, so maybe that can count against me...

Did you even sort of read the preceding posts? "Limited", as being used here, was a reference to people artificially limited by society in some way. That can include, but is not limited to, URMs of all flavors, really any minority, poors, women, young white males theseadays, Mid-Westerners, Southerners, etc. Basically, "limited" can be applied to anyone that has been hosed on some occasion on account of something outside of their control. Rich, old, white males are about the only people that don't fit the definition, but I'm sure if you dig deep enough, you'll find some legit gripe in most of their cases. Like I said, society limits everyone in some way all the time.

Personally, I don't think anyone is really, truly limited unless they have some sort of serious medical ailment. Society certainly screws people on a regular basis almost indiscriminatly, but without society, what do you even have anyway?

Yeah, I read all the prior posts and I still don't think that you're making your point clearly.  If you are mistaking clear writing with elementary school, then perhaps we've identified your fundamental problem (or at least one of them). 

Also, your definition of "limited" as quoted above is a fucktarded mess.  I can't even begin to deal with that, so I'll skip down to the last point.  When you say "Society certainly screws people on a regular basis almost indiscriminatly [sic]," you do realize that's basically false, right?  There certainly is a pretty sizable amount of discriminatory screwing going on in this country and AA is, in part, an attempt to address said screwing.  If you don't believe there is discriminatory screwing of people going on in this country, please just say so outright and I'll be sure to end the conversation.

Look at you with your [sic]. My quick misspelling is like how fucktard's a word. It's a bulletin board, not a court report.

Sorry for thinking most people on here have an education above 6th grade and a reading level to match, I'll try to keep that in mind.

Good to see you don't contest my definition of "limited".

I know there's plenty of discriminatory screwing over of people going on. All I'm saying is it cuts all ways, aa being a big part of it. How you've failed to realize that we're both bitching about people getting discriminated against is beyond me. I suppose if it's against whites, it's alright?
I'mma stay bumpin' till I bump my head on my tomb.

Ninja1

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3089
  • ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: challenge to urm's
« Reply #76 on: March 29, 2009, 10:30:49 PM »
So people just need to get over it?

Indeed. You either let your life be dictated by the past, or you move on and begin to dictate your future.

What a strange way of seeing things.  If I get hit by a car and I sue the driver, am I allowing my life to be dictated by the past or am I moving on and dictating my future?  And I am not trying to suggest that this is analogous, so please don't bother arguing that point.

And it's not analogous. You're within your rights to sue the driver, but you shouldn't let the fact you got hit mean that your life is forever altered by it. Even if you get seriously screwed up in said car accident, you take you cane and hobble your way on down the road. That, or you spend your life rolling out of the way anytime a car comes within 15 feet of you.

I already said it wasn't, but I imagine for different reasons.

What if by some strange turn of events, you get hit by cars over and over again?

I was just reinforcing the point.

If you're continually getting hit by cars, that probably has more to do with you than the other cars.

So you think that racism is the fault of people who belong to racial minority groups.  Got it.

Way to overextend the car analogy, which was a poor analogy to begin with.

Unless you were saying "aa = a car wreck" from the very start, and even then...

Oh I wasn't saying anything about affirmative action.  I'm just pointing out that sometimes you let things go, sometimes you go back and address the problem. 

Thus bringing us back to the question of when is enough enough? How long will it take for aa to fix the problems caused by things well beyond its control, or how long until URM culture addresses the problems itself?

Okay so you're conceding at that "getting over it" is not always appropriate, and should only be done when enough has actually been done?

Interesting read of that post.

What I was saying is, how long do we continue to not get over it (discrimination and such) as a society by continuing aa, and how long until URM culture fixes its own unproductive value system and doesn't need aa anymore? Or, put another way, how much can aa do and how much does URM culture have to do for itself before real gains are made by URMs?

I'm still saying getting over it at some point is not only appropriate, but necessary. Yeah, that point is when enough has been done, but enough is usually done fairly quickly, especially in the case of the examples that got us on this topic way back about 5 pages ago.

Since you were willing to concede that getting over it is not the right course of action when enough has not been done, I'll concede that getting over it is the right course of action when enough has been done.  ;)

I think that was all I was going for here so I'll hand it back over to Buffy.  8)

Word enough. :)
I'mma stay bumpin' till I bump my head on my tomb.

Ninja1

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3089
  • ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: challenge to urm's
« Reply #77 on: March 29, 2009, 10:32:58 PM »
Interesting read of that post.

What I was saying is, how long do we continue to not get over it (discrimination and such) as a society by continuing aa, and how long until URM culture fixes its own unproductive value system and doesn't need aa anymore? Or, put another way, how much can aa do and how much does URM culture have to do for itself before real gains are made by URMs?

I'm still saying getting over it at some point is not only appropriate, but necessary. Yeah, that point is when enough has been done, but enough is usually done fairly quickly, especially in the case of the examples that got us on this topic way back about 5 pages ago.

Perhaps it's difficult to just get over it when "discrimination and such" still exists today?

Or maybe AA will end when "discrimination and such" does?

Discrimination has always and will always exist. To pretend otherwise is to live in a fairy tale.

So 20 years from now, when you have 2 generations of pissed off whites on your hands and whites are no longer a majority, do the tables flip again?
I'mma stay bumpin' till I bump my head on my tomb.

Jamie Stringer

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 8588
    • View Profile
Re: challenge to urm's
« Reply #78 on: March 29, 2009, 11:10:52 PM »
Look at you with your [sic]. My quick misspelling is like how fucktard's a word. It's a bulletin board, not a court report.

Sorry for thinking most people on here have an education above 6th grade and a reading level to match, I'll try to keep that in mind.

Good to see you don't contest my definition of "limited".

I know there's plenty of discriminatory screwing over of people going on. All I'm saying is it cuts all ways, aa being a big part of it. How you've failed to realize that we're both bitching about people getting discriminated against is beyond me. I suppose if it's against whites, it's alright?

1. You're seriously, disgracefully dumb sometimes.  I mean, if we're going to play the dozens, that's all well and good...but don't tell someone they have a 6th grade reading level and then be an utter spelling/grammar failure yourself. 

2. Who said it was OK to discriminate against anyone?  This is you projecting your (incorrect) opinion about beliefs of URMs. 

3. I fundamentally disagree that AA is about discrimination.  And given your earlier jihad in this thread (and others) about how URMs just need to suck it up and deal with the hard knocks of life, it's surprising that you don't understand that perhaps complainers (like yourself) should just suck it up and deal with AA, at least for now.


Discrimination has always and will always exist. To pretend otherwise is to live in a fairy tale.

So 20 years from now, when you have 2 generations of pissed off whites on your hands and whites are no longer a majority, do the tables flip again?

No.  It's not about who gets more pissed or which population is bigger.  You do understand that the "U" in URM stands for "underrepresented," right?  In fact, I'd argue that, in 20 years, if whites are no longer a majority of the population but continue to comprise the majority of admitted students to college and law school (in addition to having most of the executive decision-making power), this is actually a stronger argument for AA. 
Quote from: Tim Mitchell

F*cking bi+ch drinks a 1 oz bottle of goose and thinks she's French

Ninja1

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3089
  • ☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: challenge to urm's
« Reply #79 on: March 29, 2009, 11:31:16 PM »
Look at you with your [sic]. My quick misspelling is like how fucktard's a word. It's a bulletin board, not a court report.

Sorry for thinking most people on here have an education above 6th grade and a reading level to match, I'll try to keep that in mind.

Good to see you don't contest my definition of "limited".

I know there's plenty of discriminatory screwing over of people going on. All I'm saying is it cuts all ways, aa being a big part of it. How you've failed to realize that we're both bitching about people getting discriminated against is beyond me. I suppose if it's against whites, it's alright?

1. You're seriously, disgracefully dumb sometimes.  I mean, if we're going to play the dozens, that's all well and good...but don't tell someone they have a 6th grade reading level and then be an utter spelling/grammar failure yourself. 

2. Who said it was OK to discriminate against anyone?  This is you projecting your (incorrect) opinion about beliefs of URMs. 

3. I fundamentally disagree that AA is about discrimination.  And given your earlier jihad in this thread (and others) about how URMs just need to suck it up and deal with the hard knocks of life, it's surprising that you don't understand that perhaps complainers (like yourself) should just suck it up and deal with AA, at least for now.


Discrimination has always and will always exist. To pretend otherwise is to live in a fairy tale.

So 20 years from now, when you have 2 generations of pissed off whites on your hands and whites are no longer a majority, do the tables flip again?

No.  It's not about who gets more pissed or which population is bigger.  You do understand that the "U" in URM stands for "underrepresented," right?  In fact, I'd argue that, in 20 years, if whites are no longer a majority of the population but continue to comprise the majority of admitted students to college and law school (in addition to having most of the executive decision-making power), this is actually a stronger argument for AA. 

Utter spelling failure... one word in about, @#!*, let's just guess 5,000 today. Poor flame attempt.

Arguing for aa is arguing for discrimination at some level. It's like how wine people have a "discriminating taste" because they pick some kinds over others. Discrimination can be both positive (we'll take the black kids) and negative (we won't take the black kids).

As to aa being or not being about discrimination, see above. So we should just deal with some level of discrimination? Until...?

I get the U in URM thing, but that just serves to further my point. I agree, the argument can be made for more aa down the line using the above, but that still isn't going to address the problem. Blacks and Latinos aren't held back by white people (anymore) and haven't been in at least a generation. Yet, despite all the aa, they're still not getting ahead and, if anything, are falling further behind. AA isn't the silver bullet to fix this problem, it's the garden hose for the forest fire. A serious internal dialog for the aforementioned cultures, on the other hand, is probably going to be the only viable answer. Only when they stop promoting counter-productive cultural values and start promoting productive ones can they fix the problem for themselves. Asians and (though not a racial group) Jews are both very small segments of the society, both groups have historically been discriminated against very hard, yet both groups surpass everyone else in academic achievement and general productivity because their cultures promote useful, productive values. I used to think NA Indians had a legit claim for aa (given that whole genocide thing), more than anyone else, but now I'm starting to think the same as above applies to them.

I do believe aa had a place once upon a time, but that time is long gone and now, all it's doing is causing us to waste time here.
I'mma stay bumpin' till I bump my head on my tomb.