Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: [The Few] White Law Students [Who Don't Quite Get It] Discussion Board  (Read 30444 times)

rsieg10

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 73
    • View Profile
Re: White Law Student Discussion Board
« Reply #100 on: April 25, 2007, 02:03:22 PM »
An interesting segment from the ultra-liberal University of Illinois campus newspaper on discussing how the vast majority of University scholarships go to minorities:

"According to the University's 2006 Performance report, in 2004 the graduation rate for black students who obtained their degree in six years or less was 57.9 percent, meaning almost half of the black freshmen who entered the University did not leave with a degree. For the entire campus, graduation rate was 80.7 percent."

Julie Fern

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 27223
  • hillary clinton say "boo!"
    • View Profile
Re: White Law Student Discussion Board
« Reply #101 on: April 25, 2007, 02:18:26 PM »
said like true canadian.

Louis55

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: White Law Student Discussion Board
« Reply #102 on: April 25, 2007, 02:28:54 PM »
An interesting segment from the ultra-liberal University of Illinois campus newspaper on discussing how the vast majority of University scholarships go to minorities:

"According to the University's 2006 Performance report, in 2004 the graduation rate for black students who obtained their degree in six years or less was 57.9 percent, meaning almost half of the black freshmen who entered the University did not leave with a degree. For the entire campus, graduation rate was 80.7 percent."

Why is this posted on the white law student discussion board? Between me and you i think this should go on the black law student discussion board.

"
But then this assumes that there is a singular white culture, which in itself is flawed.


Instead, I think we should discuss the quotation above.

7S

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2647
  • Self-determination.
    • View Profile
Re: White Law Student Discussion Board
« Reply #103 on: April 25, 2007, 03:46:09 PM »
I'll charge for their side here.

1) Yes.  The NAACP was founded on solid principals that bound together ppl of any race to help advance the fight for justice for the black community.

WRONG! The orginal mission of the NAACP was:

"To promote equality of rights and to eradicate caste or race prejudice among the citizens of the United States; to advance the interest of colored citizens; to secure for them impartial suffrage; and to increase their opportunities for securing justice in the courts, education for the children, employment according to their ability and complete equality before law." (http://www.naacphouston.org/history.htm)

Colored people meaning all minority groups including Jews.

2) No...This argument always suprises me.  I just don't buy that because whites are a majority that they automatically pander solely to whites like BET, UPN, or Telemundo caters to those demographic groups. 


Until the 1980's and 1990's, American television had only allowed black minority actors to sustain stereotypical roles. Anything outside of that mainstream, was critisized as unrealistic. Additionally, it wasn't until 1997 that Nielsen, to which major networks base their programming, decided to accurately sample African-American TV viewing. (http://www.nielsenmedia.com/newsreleases/1997/aa-cover.html) Even Fox got it wrong initally when it cancelled "Living Single," which was HUGE in the black community. It took black folk writing letters to get it back on the air.

But then this assumes that there is a singular white culture, which in itself is flawed.

Actually, it assumes the opposite. Since White America makes up the majority, it is reasonable to believe that the media would reflect its diversity. On the otherhand, minorities are marginalized by supposed stereotypes held by society.

3) That's wrong.  The Nation of Islam did for decades.  They don't anymore.  But Blacks haven't been pickey about who they'll let support them.  They're smart  ;D.


Ok, one. lol.  Yeah, Elijah Muhammad really did hate you guys. ;D

4)How do you figure?  It was founded by a black man for black people.  And really, besides music, comedy, and t.v. shows, what else do you think would be appropriate for entertainment?

Initially, BET wasn't exclusively an "entertainment channel." There was substantive programming. Then came big bad Viacom. Tavis Smiley was fired. Teen Summit cancelled. News disappeared. (And I could be wrong about the date) Then came BET uncut.

In fact, according to BET, "Black Entertainment Television (BET), a subsidiary of Viacom, is the nation's leading 24-hour television network providing quality entertainment, news and public affairs programming for the African-American audience."

5) I love puppies.

yeah.
It is easy to change the language of oppression without changing the sociopolitical situation of its victims.

OCLawGirl

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 558
    • View Profile
Re: White Law Student Discussion Board
« Reply #104 on: April 25, 2007, 07:18:28 PM »
I'm AFRICAN.  A Nigerian to be exact. 

Whenever I see posts like these, I wonder what the TRUE motive is. And if you say you are just trying to communicate or understand or make a point, you are wasting your time.  You are not saying anything that hasn't been said before.  URM, AA, BET exists and the bottom line is that IT IS NOT CAUSING ANY PHYISCAL HARM or ILLEGAL.  A law may pass tomorrow forbidding schools to encourage diversity - I don't know.  But for now, stop trying to understand or make points cause it won't make a difference.  So for now - IT IS WHAT IT IS.  At the end of the day, any human being (even you) will take an offer that will help you advance (as long as it is legal).

Therefore, we must AGREE TO DISAGREE.  And if these rules are making you loose sleep, then take it to the people that can make the change - your governor, your senator, your congress man - heck write to all law schools and protest.
"Yes, I'm URM!  And if you think for a min that I'm going to turn down any law school acceptance 'cause you feel I don't deserve it, you must be high on something.  I'm not giving up my seat at the front of the bus! Deal with it!" - LSN Unknown

Tony Montana

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 517
  • Strength and honor
    • View Profile
Re: White Law Student Discussion Board
« Reply #105 on: April 25, 2007, 07:29:44 PM »


Do Not Feed Trolls
Consuetudo pro lege servatur...Corruptisima re publica plurimae leges.

IF

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 422
    • View Profile
    • LSN
Re: White Law Student Discussion Board
« Reply #106 on: April 25, 2007, 10:22:13 PM »
I'll charge for their side here.

1) Yes.  The NAACP was founded on solid principals that bound together ppl of any race to help advance the fight for justice for the black community.

WRONG! The orginal mission of the NAACP was:

"To promote equality of rights and to eradicate caste or race prejudice among the citizens of the United States; to advance the interest of colored citizens; to secure for them impartial suffrage; and to increase their opportunities for securing justice in the courts, education for the children, employment according to their ability and complete equality before law." (http://www.naacphouston.org/history.htm)

Colored people meaning all minority groups including Jews.

2) No...This argument always suprises me.  I just don't buy that because whites are a majority that they automatically pander solely to whites like BET, UPN, or Telemundo caters to those demographic groups. 


Until the 1980's and 1990's, American television had only allowed black minority actors to sustain stereotypical roles. Anything outside of that mainstream, was critisized as unrealistic. Additionally, it wasn't until 1997 that Nielsen, to which major networks base their programming, decided to accurately sample African-American TV viewing. (http://www.nielsenmedia.com/newsreleases/1997/aa-cover.html) Even Fox got it wrong initally when it cancelled "Living Single," which was HUGE in the black community. It took black folk writing letters to get it back on the air.

But then this assumes that there is a singular white culture, which in itself is flawed.

Actually, it assumes the opposite. Since White America makes up the majority, it is reasonable to believe that the media would reflect its diversity. On the otherhand, minorities are marginalized by supposed stereotypes held by society.

3) That's wrong.  The Nation of Islam did for decades.  They don't anymore.  But Blacks haven't been pickey about who they'll let support them.  They're smart  ;D.


Ok, one. lol.  Yeah, Elijah Muhammad really did hate you guys. ;D

4)How do you figure?  It was founded by a black man for black people.  And really, besides music, comedy, and t.v. shows, what else do you think would be appropriate for entertainment?

Initially, BET wasn't exclusively an "entertainment channel." There was substantive programming. Then came big bad Viacom. Tavis Smiley was fired. Teen Summit cancelled. News disappeared. (And I could be wrong about the date) Then came BET uncut.

In fact, according to BET, "Black Entertainment Television (BET), a subsidiary of Viacom, is the nation's leading 24-hour television network providing quality entertainment, news and public affairs programming for the African-American audience."

5) I love puppies.

yeah.


OCLaw, you're right, this is the way it is.  But this forum is very interesting.  So back to seventhson...

1) You're right about the intent of organization, but that doesn't really hold up. Like any other organization, it is subject to the whims of its members.  And it's members have, over time, promoted the interest of the black community almost exclusively.  Other efforts have been overshadowed by these actions.  So while its mission statement may say one thing, its actions show the pursuit of a singular aim.

2) Not too sure how this counters my point.  Please explain a little further.

4) ??? I've watched news on BET. I don't remember it being headline news or anything, but it is there.  Though to say that news is entertainment can be a stretch (I hope!).

UVA, 2010

It's the place.

Miss P

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 21337
    • View Profile
Re: White Law Student Discussion Board
« Reply #107 on: April 25, 2007, 11:02:13 PM »
Surprise, surprise, this has turned into another hackneyed AA thread about those damned checkboxes.

Sands, it's time to move it to the AA board.
That's cool how you referenced a case.

Quote from: archival
I'm so far from the end of my tether right now that I reckon I could knit myself some socks with the slack.

Julie Fern

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 27223
  • hillary clinton say "boo!"
    • View Profile
Re: White Law Student Discussion Board
« Reply #108 on: April 26, 2007, 08:34:51 AM »
julie confident you mean say canadian board.

7S

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2647
  • Self-determination.
    • View Profile
Re: White Law Student Discussion Board
« Reply #109 on: April 26, 2007, 10:42:33 AM »
OCLaw, you're right, this is the way it is.  But this forum is very interesting.  So back to seventhson...

1) You're right about the intent of organization, but that doesn't really hold up. Like any other organization, it is subject to the whims of its members.  And it's members have, over time, promoted the interest of the black community almost exclusively.  Other efforts have been overshadowed by these actions.  So while its mission statement may say one thing, its actions show the pursuit of a singular aim.

2) Not too sure how this counters my point.  Please explain a little further.

4) ??? I've watched news on BET. I don't remember it being headline news or anything, but it is there.  Though to say that news is entertainment can be a stretch (I hope!).

Sorry everyone, I just had to reply one last time...

1) The issues of poverty, racism, and diversity in jobs and education are not soley "black" issues. Those issues do disproportionately affect black people, but a fight against injustice aimed at black people has equal effects toward the fight against injustice aimed at all groups of people.

2) My point is that American media does specifically cater to the needs of the white community, while other ethnic groups are either marginalized or excluded. If all American media did was cater to the needs of the white community, I'd have no problem. I love Friends. My problem lies with: (1) Being monolithically portayed and (2) People getting upset when black people watch television that accurately reflects our culuture. (Side Note: BET doesn't count)

4) BET is just now re-introducing news into its programming, so you must be talking about 1993. News at BET didn't exist during Hurricane Katrina.

Black people are more than a color. We are a culture. We have traditions, experiences, and history that distinguish us from other groups of Americans. With all that said, I think to continue this discussion on the premise that black people shouldn't represent their own interests is fruitless. It is culturally insensitive, but also, no one is taking anything from the conversation.

It is easy to change the language of oppression without changing the sociopolitical situation of its victims.