Arabs/Persians etc. as URMs?

(BLS, URM status, non-traditional, GLBT)
09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Arabs/Persians etc. as URMs?

Postby 09042014 » Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:07 pm

CadburysForever wrote:Any knowledge on official or unofficial justification for inclusion of recent African immigrants? I'm just curious about what's common speculation/commentary on this out there, if any. Not interested in debating. :)


Because black people are underrepresented. It's not about reparations.

User avatar
Canarsie
Posts: 137
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: Arabs/Persians etc. as URMs?

Postby Canarsie » Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:11 pm

jaminben wrote:i don't get it.

it says, African American OR black. So you don't have to be black to be African American.

so what does it mean to be African american? can anyone help with that?


I would not call white South Africans or people from Morocco black, but they are certainly African. So perhaps they are the people included in that category? I have no facts to back this up, just my thought...

User avatar
merichard87
Posts: 751
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:31 pm

Re: Arabs/Persians etc. as URMs?

Postby merichard87 » Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:13 pm

Just because someone's parents or grandparents immigrated from Africa does not make them any less African-American or black American. Discrimination does not ask your nationality and that is, to my understanding, what URM is all about, combating the history of discrimination that has led certain minority groups to be less represented than others. Ya'll are splitting hairs.

CadburysForever
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:03 am

Re: Arabs/Persians etc. as URMs?

Postby CadburysForever » Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:18 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
CadburysForever wrote:Any knowledge on official or unofficial justification for inclusion of recent African immigrants? I'm just curious about what's common speculation/commentary on this out there, if any. Not interested in debating. :)


Because black people are underrepresented. It's not about reparations.


Ok, are you just ignoring half of the content of my posts on purpose? Indigenous (for lack of a better term) African Americans are mad underrepresented, but African immigrants are mad overrepresented. You keep lumping the two groups together -- why? If Mexicans and Puerto Ricans can be distinguished from other Hispanics, why should there be one catch-all category called "Blacks"?

merichard87 wrote:Just because someone's parents or grandparents immigrated from Africa does not make them any less African-American or black American. Discrimination does not ask your nationality and that is, to my understanding, what URM is all about, combating the history of discrimination that has led certain minority groups to be less represented than others. Ya'll are splitting hairs.


As was made very clear to me, haha, earlier in this thread, URM is not about discrimination, it's about actual numbers.

Again, for reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_im ... Attainment

User avatar
merichard87
Posts: 751
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:31 pm

Re: Arabs/Persians etc. as URMs?

Postby merichard87 » Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:19 pm

CadburysForever wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
CadburysForever wrote:Any knowledge on official or unofficial justification for inclusion of recent African immigrants? I'm just curious about what's common speculation/commentary on this out there, if any. Not interested in debating. :)


Because black people are underrepresented. It's not about reparations.


Ok, are you just ignoring half of the content of my posts on purpose? Indigenous (for lack of a better term) African Americans are mad underrepresented, but African immigrants are mad overrepresented. You keep lumping the two groups together -- why? If Mexicans and Puerto Ricans can be distinguished from other Hispanics, why should there be one catch-all category called "Blacks"?

merichard87 wrote:Just because someone's parents or grandparents immigrated from Africa does not make them any less African-American or black American. Discrimination does not ask your nationality and that is, to my understanding, what URM is all about, combating the history of discrimination that has led certain minority groups to be less represented than others. Ya'll are splitting hairs.


As was made very clear to me, haha, earlier in this thread, URM is not about discrimination, it's about actual numbers.

Again, for reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_im ... Attainment



I think you are missing the actions that led certain groups to be under-represented = discrimination.

CadburysForever
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:03 am

Re: Arabs/Persians etc. as URMs?

Postby CadburysForever » Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:24 pm

merichard87 wrote:
CadburysForever wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
CadburysForever wrote:Any knowledge on official or unofficial justification for inclusion of recent African immigrants? I'm just curious about what's common speculation/commentary on this out there, if any. Not interested in debating. :)


Because black people are underrepresented. It's not about reparations.


Ok, are you just ignoring half of the content of my posts on purpose? Indigenous (for lack of a better term) African Americans are mad underrepresented, but African immigrants are mad overrepresented. You keep lumping the two groups together -- why? If Mexicans and Puerto Ricans can be distinguished from other Hispanics, why should there be one catch-all category called "Blacks"?

merichard87 wrote:Just because someone's parents or grandparents immigrated from Africa does not make them any less African-American or black American. Discrimination does not ask your nationality and that is, to my understanding, what URM is all about, combating the history of discrimination that has led certain minority groups to be less represented than others. Ya'll are splitting hairs.


As was made very clear to me, haha, earlier in this thread, URM is not about discrimination, it's about actual numbers.

Again, for reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_im ... Attainment



I think you are missing the actions that led certain groups to be under-represented = discrimination.


Again, my own personal views would agree with you, but the law doesn't care apparently. All that matters it seems are whether the numbers show if your group is over or under-represented. Are non-Mexican or non-Puerto Rican Hispanics not discriminated against? Of course they are. But they aren't underrepresented, so the courts don't recognize them as URM. So then why are African immigrants, a distinct group from indigenous African Americans, not held to this same standard?

06132010
Posts: 597
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:02 pm

Re: Arabs/Persians etc. as URMs?

Postby 06132010 » Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:26 pm

NO.

User avatar
drdolittle
Posts: 628
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:15 am

Re: Arabs/Persians etc. as URMs?

Postby drdolittle » Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:47 pm

jaminben wrote:i don't get it.

it says, African American OR black. So you don't have to be black to be African American.

so what does it mean to be African american? can anyone help with that?


There's nothing to "get" in the sense of trying to find total logic in these categorizations. Of course there's some logic, but there's also a lot of room for interpretation, like how under-represented status is defined in the first place. For example, it makes no sense to my why Puerto Ricans get a boost, and Dominicans don't. Or why native Americans do, and native Hawaiians/Pacific islanders don't (provided these groups don't actually get an URM boost as others have posted). Because I am certain that Dominicans (and many other Latino/Hispanic groups) and native Hawaiians/Pac Islanders are also actually under-represented in the legal profession...

User avatar
YCrevolution
Posts: 4714
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 1:25 am

Re: Arabs/Persians etc. as URMs?

Postby YCrevolution » Tue Jun 08, 2010 5:03 pm

..




Return to “Under Represented Law Student Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest