URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

(BLS, URM status, non-traditional, GLBT)
User avatar
brinicolec

Gold
Posts: 4480
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 7:09 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby brinicolec » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:01 pm

Mr_Chukes wrote:Love the pixel, it is super fast and smooth, camera is amazing, I take it out take a quick picture and I know the picture will be good. The screen is excellent, viewable outside as well. Google assistant is very useful. I have a Google home as well. Also the battery life is excellent. I never worry about it dying on me through a day.

PS. Brinicolec is the homie :)


AYYYYYE lol.

Also, I feel like I'd probably switch to something like the Pixel (it looks really nice) if I wasn't so attached to iTunes/iMessage/the cloud.

User avatar
Mr_Chukes

Silver
Posts: 1160
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 5:01 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby Mr_Chukes » Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:53 pm

brinicolec wrote:
Mr_Chukes wrote:Love the pixel, it is super fast and smooth, camera is amazing, I take it out take a quick picture and I know the picture will be good. The screen is excellent, viewable outside as well. Google assistant is very useful. I have a Google home as well. Also the battery life is excellent. I never worry about it dying on me through a day.

PS. Brinicolec is the homie :)


AYYYYYE lol.

Also, I feel like I'd probably switch to something like the Pixel (it looks really nice) if I wasn't so attached to iTunes/iMessage/the cloud.

I found you on Law school numbers lol. Shouted you out. Yeah Apple is good at getting people locked into their ecosystem lol.

User avatar
S.Picquery

Silver
Posts: 598
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 9:39 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby S.Picquery » Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:03 pm

Lol, I think the stickers described are pretty innocuous. I'm getting a different laptop cover because my stickers have big letters saying "DON'T BE A DICK" and a bunch of radical slogans from LGBT and BLM marches. Also bands. Basically I didn't give a damn what the profs in UG thought, but I ended up making friends with two of them because of the stickers, so who knows?

User avatar
RParadela

Silver
Posts: 858
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 1:04 am

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby RParadela » Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:05 pm

mm2368 wrote:
RParadela wrote:
mm2368 wrote:
RParadela wrote:Checking in here I guess. Did some searching and it seems like Cubans get a really small boost. Just hoping it overcomes my weaker softs to be honest.

I'm sitting at 170/3.6 so I have the numbers for most of the T14s, hopefully being Cuban can add a little bit of a bonus on top of things


S/o to the Cubans here!!! I thought I was alone!

Ps there is a boost.


Another thing that I'm wondering... For Duke, the Hispanic box doesn't ask to specify what Hispanic subset you are. Wonder if that means Cubans count as URMs


I posted about this elsewhere though I can't recall the thread. Rarely if ever do schools report Latino/Hispanic breakdown beyond just "Latino/Hispanic". You never hear "we have a 1% Colombian population here on campus!" I'll leave it at that.


Yeah but it seems like the general consensus that only PR and Mexican-American count as URM.

User avatar
brinicolec

Gold
Posts: 4480
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 7:09 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby brinicolec » Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:09 pm

Mr_Chukes wrote:
brinicolec wrote:
Mr_Chukes wrote:Love the pixel, it is super fast and smooth, camera is amazing, I take it out take a quick picture and I know the picture will be good. The screen is excellent, viewable outside as well. Google assistant is very useful. I have a Google home as well. Also the battery life is excellent. I never worry about it dying on me through a day.

PS. Brinicolec is the homie :)


AYYYYYE lol.

Also, I feel like I'd probably switch to something like the Pixel (it looks really nice) if I wasn't so attached to iTunes/iMessage/the cloud.

I found you on Law school numbers lol. Shouted you out. Yeah Apple is good at getting people locked into their ecosystem lol.


Lol, I just saw that earlier today! & smh, they really are. The bastards :lol:

User avatar
Torres1893

Bronze
Posts: 447
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 11:21 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby Torres1893 » Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:10 pm

I'm not sure if I want a mac book or a windows laptop. I'm going to use a part of my tax return to buy a new laptop, but I know I don't need a powerful machine :lol:

I have a gaming computer that I built so I don't need an i7 or a laptop with a graphics card, but I also don't want to buy a cheap laptop since the ones I bought before all sucked. It seems like all the new laptops are 2 in 1s and I have no interest in using my laptop as a tablet. I just want one with a nice screen with a thin bezel, an i5, and an SSD.

illini2016

New
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 7:17 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby illini2016 » Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:16 pm

hammy393 wrote:How are everyone's cycles going so far compared to your initial expectations? Based on the drop in high LSAT scores this cycle, I'm hoping most people's are going better than expected


Honestly, I'm totally shocked by how well this has gone (and, when I've been sloppy, how poorly it can go).

In at Chicago, NYU, UVA, Berkeley, Duke, Michigan (with $120K), Georgetown, WUSTL (full ride), Vandy, and ND.

Rejected at Texas (forgot to write the Why Texas they'd so politely requested, and I'll assume there's an element of YP to this, as well) and Cornell (forgot to finish the video interview).

User avatar
brinicolec

Gold
Posts: 4480
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 7:09 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby brinicolec » Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:23 pm

illini2016 wrote:
hammy393 wrote:How are everyone's cycles going so far compared to your initial expectations? Based on the drop in high LSAT scores this cycle, I'm hoping most people's are going better than expected


Honestly, I'm totally shocked by how well this has gone (and, when I've been sloppy, how poorly it can go).

In at Chicago, NYU, UVA, Berkeley, Duke, Michigan (with $120K), Georgetown, WUSTL (full ride), Vandy, and ND.

Rejected at Texas (forgot to write the Why Texas they'd so politely requested, and I'll assume there's an element of YP to this, as well) and Cornell (forgot to finish the video interview).



What are your stats, if you don't mind sharing?

illini2016

New
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 7:17 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby illini2016 » Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:21 pm

brinicolec wrote:
illini2016 wrote:
hammy393 wrote:How are everyone's cycles going so far compared to your initial expectations? Based on the drop in high LSAT scores this cycle, I'm hoping most people's are going better than expected


Honestly, I'm totally shocked by how well this has gone (and, when I've been sloppy, how poorly it can go).

In at Chicago, NYU, UVA, Berkeley, Duke, Michigan (with $120K), Georgetown, WUSTL (full ride), Vandy, and ND.

Rejected at Texas (forgot to write the Why Texas they'd so politely requested, and I'll assume there's an element of YP to this, as well) and Cornell (forgot to finish the video interview).



What are your stats, if you don't mind sharing?


No problem! 3.8 (with a big upward trend)/170/PR.

User avatar
brinicolec

Gold
Posts: 4480
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 7:09 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby brinicolec » Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:40 pm

illini2016 wrote:
brinicolec wrote:
illini2016 wrote:
hammy393 wrote:How are everyone's cycles going so far compared to your initial expectations? Based on the drop in high LSAT scores this cycle, I'm hoping most people's are going better than expected


Honestly, I'm totally shocked by how well this has gone (and, when I've been sloppy, how poorly it can go).

In at Chicago, NYU, UVA, Berkeley, Duke, Michigan (with $120K), Georgetown, WUSTL (full ride), Vandy, and ND.

Rejected at Texas (forgot to write the Why Texas they'd so politely requested, and I'll assume there's an element of YP to this, as well) and Cornell (forgot to finish the video interview).



What are your stats, if you don't mind sharing?


No problem! 3.8 (with a big upward trend)/170/PR.


Well in that case I am NOT surprised by your cycle. Great numbers. Congrats!

Cbear2017

New
Posts: 97
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 11:05 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby Cbear2017 » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:44 am

illini2016 wrote:
brinicolec wrote:
illini2016 wrote:
hammy393 wrote:How are everyone's cycles going so far compared to your initial expectations? Based on the drop in high LSAT scores this cycle, I'm hoping most people's are going better than expected


Honestly, I'm totally shocked by how well this has gone (and, when I've been sloppy, how poorly it can go).

In at Chicago, NYU, UVA, Berkeley, Duke, Michigan (with $120K), Georgetown, WUSTL (full ride), Vandy, and ND.

Rejected at Texas (forgot to write the Why Texas they'd so politely requested, and I'll assume there's an element of YP to this, as well) and Cornell (forgot to finish the video interview).



What are your stats, if you don't mind sharing?


No problem! 3.8 (with a big upward trend)/170/PR.


You have no idea how excited I am to see another Puerto Rican on here--I thought I was alone! :shock:

User avatar
brinicolec

Gold
Posts: 4480
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 7:09 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby brinicolec » Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:58 pm

Michigan summer start vs SEO internship: WWYD?

Originally, I was thinking SEO -- no brainer, but there are some definite advantages to summer start....

User avatar
PrezRand

Gold
Posts: 1608
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:31 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby PrezRand » Tue Jan 24, 2017 3:52 pm

SEO or more vacation time. I don't think I could do summer start

User avatar
S.Picquery

Silver
Posts: 598
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 9:39 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby S.Picquery » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:11 pm

brinicolec wrote:Michigan summer start vs SEO internship: WWYD?

Originally, I was thinking SEO -- no brainer, but there are some definite advantages to summer start....


I'm doing summer start. It's been a few years since I've studied for anything, or been to school. Easing in, especially when 1L grades are so imperative, is what I'm going to do if I don't absolutely hate the FinAid package from UMich. Plus the INTENSE anxiety it would be relieving would be such a bonus.

dc_diva

New
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 4:08 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby dc_diva » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:20 pm

RParadela wrote:
mm2368 wrote:
RParadela wrote:
mm2368 wrote:
RParadela wrote:Checking in here I guess. Did some searching and it seems like Cubans get a really small boost. Just hoping it overcomes my weaker softs to be honest.

I'm sitting at 170/3.6 so I have the numbers for most of the T14s, hopefully being Cuban can add a little bit of a bonus on top of things


S/o to the Cubans here!!! I thought I was alone!

Ps there is a boost.


Another thing that I'm wondering... For Duke, the Hispanic box doesn't ask to specify what Hispanic subset you are. Wonder if that means Cubans count as URMs


I posted about this elsewhere though I can't recall the thread. Rarely if ever do schools report Latino/Hispanic breakdown beyond just "Latino/Hispanic". You never hear "we have a 1% Colombian population here on campus!" I'll leave it at that.


Yeah but it seems like the general consensus that only PR and Mexican-American count as URM.


Don't believe that TLS standard. I'm neither PR nor MA (also not Cuban) but clicked Latino/Hispanic because I am and I can safely assure you based on my cycle that every school has counted me as a URM. Seriously, we need to stop the PR/MA talk and make sure Latin@s of future cycles know that they definitely will get a boost and should apply everywhere!! I almost didn't apply to my dream school because I thought I wasn't a URM, but I got in with below 25th percentile stats for both GPA and LSAT so definitely got a boost. : )

User avatar
RParadela

Silver
Posts: 858
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 1:04 am

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby RParadela » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:27 pm

dc_diva wrote:
RParadela wrote:
mm2368 wrote:
RParadela wrote:
mm2368 wrote:
RParadela wrote:Checking in here I guess. Did some searching and it seems like Cubans get a really small boost. Just hoping it overcomes my weaker softs to be honest.

I'm sitting at 170/3.6 so I have the numbers for most of the T14s, hopefully being Cuban can add a little bit of a bonus on top of things


S/o to the Cubans here!!! I thought I was alone!

Ps there is a boost.


Another thing that I'm wondering... For Duke, the Hispanic box doesn't ask to specify what Hispanic subset you are. Wonder if that means Cubans count as URMs


I posted about this elsewhere though I can't recall the thread. Rarely if ever do schools report Latino/Hispanic breakdown beyond just "Latino/Hispanic". You never hear "we have a 1% Colombian population here on campus!" I'll leave it at that.


Yeah but it seems like the general consensus that only PR and Mexican-American count as URM.


Don't believe that TLS standard. I'm neither PR nor MA (also not Cuban) but clicked Latino/Hispanic because I am and I can safely assure you based on my cycle that every school has counted me as a URM. Seriously, we need to stop the PR/MA talk and make sure Latin@s of future cycles know that they definitely will get a boost and should apply everywhere!! I almost didn't apply to my dream school because I thought I wasn't a URM, but I got in with below 25th percentile stats for both GPA and LSAT so definitely got a boost. : )


That would seriously be amazing! If I can get in with 25-50% range, I'll get in everywhere other than HYS

User avatar
SybillAnnDorsett

Gold
Posts: 1719
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 12:59 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby SybillAnnDorsett » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:45 pm

dc_diva wrote:


RParadela wrote:


Agreed with all that dc_diva said. It's also important to remember that many of these schools especially in the T14 care about how you self-identify and are sensitive to such things, especially because they're educating students in the year 2017. That isn't to say you can pull a Rachel Dolezal and call yourself something you aren't.

Not to mention everyone on here thinks that he or she is an expert. and then when someone turns around and gets into a T7 with a 156 and isn't a "URM" per the LSAC definition NOR a Rhodes/Fulbright NOR the person who cured malaria on two separate continents, they scramble for ways to make sense of the acceptance. It's the same thing when people with incredible numbers get rejected. The assumption is "YP" - but uh, what if the readers just didn't like your application? Yeah, I guess the latter is more difficult to swallow.

Point is, this isn't purely the numbers game it is made out to be. I've learned that first-hand this cycle.

20171lhopeful

Bronze
Posts: 239
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:12 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby 20171lhopeful » Tue Jan 24, 2017 4:53 pm

mm2368 wrote:
dc_diva wrote:


RParadela wrote:


Agreed with all that dc_diva said. It's also important to remember that many of these schools especially in the T14 care about how you self-identify and are sensitive to such things, especially because they're educating students in the year 2017. That isn't to say you can pull a Rachel Dolezal and call yourself something you aren't.

Not to mention everyone on here thinks that he or she is an expert. and then when someone turns around and gets into a T7 with a 156 and isn't a "URM" per the LSAC definition NOR a Rhodes/Fulbright NOR the person who cured malaria on two separate continents, they scramble for ways to make sense of the acceptance. It's the same thing when people with incredible numbers get rejected. The assumption is "YP" - but uh, what if the readers just didn't like your application? Yeah, I guess the latter is more difficult to swallow.

Point is, this isn't purely the numbers game it is made out to be. I've learned that first-hand this cycle.



I think that's the number 1 advice any URM can take in future cycles. As much as TLS loves to predict outcomes, it just doesn't always ring true for URMs. I broke t5 today and my numbers are below 25th in LSAT and GPA. Granted I think I have good softs and put forth a good application, but if I followed TLS prediction, even t14 would have been a reach. so to anyone reading this now and in the future, APPLY BROADLY (if you can afford to)! Do not let your numbers, especially LSAT stop you from at least applying.

User avatar
brinicolec

Gold
Posts: 4480
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 7:09 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby brinicolec » Tue Jan 24, 2017 5:36 pm

mm2368 wrote:
dc_diva wrote:


RParadela wrote:


Agreed with all that dc_diva said. It's also important to remember that many of these schools especially in the T14 care about how you self-identify and are sensitive to such things, especially because they're educating students in the year 2017. That isn't to say you can pull a Rachel Dolezal and call yourself something you aren't.

Not to mention everyone on here thinks that he or she is an expert. and then when someone turns around and gets into a T7 with a 156 and isn't a "URM" per the LSAC definition NOR a Rhodes/Fulbright NOR the person who cured malaria on two separate continents, they scramble for ways to make sense of the acceptance. It's the same thing when people with incredible numbers get rejected. The assumption is "YP" - but uh, what if the readers just didn't like your application? Yeah, I guess the latter is more difficult to swallow.

Point is, this isn't purely the numbers game it is made out to be. I've learned that first-hand this cycle.


I don't think the self-identify thing is so much relevant to race as it is other things. Because yes, there are Tacehl Dolezal's (& also white ppl who have a far removed minority relative somewhere & are suddenly black or Native American or whatever they wanna claim with hopes of using it to their benefit for admissions).

texcellence

Bronze
Posts: 170
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 2:05 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby texcellence » Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:50 pm

brinicolec wrote:
mm2368 wrote:
dc_diva wrote:


RParadela wrote:


Agreed with all that dc_diva said. It's also important to remember that many of these schools especially in the T14 care about how you self-identify and are sensitive to such things, especially because they're educating students in the year 2017. That isn't to say you can pull a Rachel Dolezal and call yourself something you aren't.

Not to mention everyone on here thinks that he or she is an expert. and then when someone turns around and gets into a T7 with a 156 and isn't a "URM" per the LSAC definition NOR a Rhodes/Fulbright NOR the person who cured malaria on two separate continents, they scramble for ways to make sense of the acceptance. It's the same thing when people with incredible numbers get rejected. The assumption is "YP" - but uh, what if the readers just didn't like your application? Yeah, I guess the latter is more difficult to swallow.

Point is, this isn't purely the numbers game it is made out to be. I've learned that first-hand this cycle.


I don't think the self-identify thing is so much relevant to race as it is other things. Because yes, there are Tacehl Dolezal's (& also white ppl who have a far removed minority relative somewhere & are suddenly black or Native American or whatever they wanna claim with hopes of using it to their benefit for admissions).


Agreed. I've seen many people on TLS ask if they get boosts if, for example, they find out their parent or grandparent they have no relationship with is Mexican/Native/Black, and the answer is "technically...yes" but I'd also add "but if you don't actually culturally self-identify then I think you are an a-hole."

User avatar
S.Picquery

Silver
Posts: 598
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 9:39 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby S.Picquery » Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:56 pm

texcellence wrote:
brinicolec wrote:
mm2368 wrote:
dc_diva wrote:


RParadela wrote:


Agreed with all that dc_diva said. It's also important to remember that many of these schools especially in the T14 care about how you self-identify and are sensitive to such things, especially because they're educating students in the year 2017. That isn't to say you can pull a Rachel Dolezal and call yourself something you aren't.

Not to mention everyone on here thinks that he or she is an expert. and then when someone turns around and gets into a T7 with a 156 and isn't a "URM" per the LSAC definition NOR a Rhodes/Fulbright NOR the person who cured malaria on two separate continents, they scramble for ways to make sense of the acceptance. It's the same thing when people with incredible numbers get rejected. The assumption is "YP" - but uh, what if the readers just didn't like your application? Yeah, I guess the latter is more difficult to swallow.

Point is, this isn't purely the numbers game it is made out to be. I've learned that first-hand this cycle.


I don't think the self-identify thing is so much relevant to race as it is other things. Because yes, there are Tacehl Dolezal's (& also white ppl who have a far removed minority relative somewhere & are suddenly black or Native American or whatever they wanna claim with hopes of using it to their benefit for admissions).


Agreed. I've seen many people on TLS ask if they get boosts if, for example, they find out their parent or grandparent they have no relationship with is Mexican/Native/Black, and the answer is "technically...yes" but I'd also add "but if you don't actually culturally self-identify then I think you are an a-hole."


^This. I am on the flip side of the URM coin, where I *look* very pale (even though my features give a hint to the fact that I was raised in a Latinx household with a Latinx family). I spent tons of time with my family in Argentina, my family all looks (and is) Latinx. Except for me. Because of my "look" I was told I shouldn't apply as URM for UG, and I thought I was gonna flip a shit. Anyway... that was an unnecessary little rant, but there you go.

User avatar
brinicolec

Gold
Posts: 4480
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 7:09 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby brinicolec » Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:59 pm

texcellence wrote:
brinicolec wrote:
mm2368 wrote:
dc_diva wrote:


RParadela wrote:


Agreed with all that dc_diva said. It's also important to remember that many of these schools especially in the T14 care about how you self-identify and are sensitive to such things, especially because they're educating students in the year 2017. That isn't to say you can pull a Rachel Dolezal and call yourself something you aren't.

Not to mention everyone on here thinks that he or she is an expert. and then when someone turns around and gets into a T7 with a 156 and isn't a "URM" per the LSAC definition NOR a Rhodes/Fulbright NOR the person who cured malaria on two separate continents, they scramble for ways to make sense of the acceptance. It's the same thing when people with incredible numbers get rejected. The assumption is "YP" - but uh, what if the readers just didn't like your application? Yeah, I guess the latter is more difficult to swallow.

Point is, this isn't purely the numbers game it is made out to be. I've learned that first-hand this cycle.


I don't think the self-identify thing is so much relevant to race as it is other things. Because yes, there are Tacehl Dolezal's (& also white ppl who have a far removed minority relative somewhere & are suddenly black or Native American or whatever they wanna claim with hopes of using it to their benefit for admissions).


Agreed. I've seen many people on TLS ask if they get boosts if, for example, they find out their parent or grandparent they have no relationship with is Mexican/Native/Black, and the answer is "technically...yes" but I'd also add "but if you don't actually culturally self-identify then I think you are an a-hole."


First off, wow. I typed that last post on my phone and completely butchered "Rachel" :lol: Secondly, yeah. I've seen those posts. Like, in my opinion, finding out your grandpa was half black or something just in time to apply for law schools and use it as an excuse to mark the "black" box is rude at best and completely dishonest/immoral at worst. If you don't relate to the experience of a minority group, don't intend to check that minority group off for the census and whatever, then wtf? Don't even think about claiming it now! Also, to me it's like... If you have to ask......... lol. Like asking if __ is counted as a URM is different than saying can I claim to be this URM because my great-grandfather was a quarter ___ so technically I have some __ in me.

I really hope most people aren't shitty enough to do that but, it wouldn't surprise me.

However, I do wonder if that would be something the bar would notice if someone were to claim a minority group on their application (for a boost) then never claim it again (census, job apps, whatever) and possibly make it hard for them to get approved.

User avatar
sfn91

Bronze
Posts: 193
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 2:43 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby sfn91 » Tue Jan 24, 2017 7:00 pm

brinicolec wrote:
texcellence wrote:
brinicolec wrote:
mm2368 wrote:
dc_diva wrote:


RParadela wrote:


Agreed with all that dc_diva said. It's also important to remember that many of these schools especially in the T14 care about how you self-identify and are sensitive to such things, especially because they're educating students in the year 2017. That isn't to say you can pull a Rachel Dolezal and call yourself something you aren't.

Not to mention everyone on here thinks that he or she is an expert. and then when someone turns around and gets into a T7 with a 156 and isn't a "URM" per the LSAC definition NOR a Rhodes/Fulbright NOR the person who cured malaria on two separate continents, they scramble for ways to make sense of the acceptance. It's the same thing when people with incredible numbers get rejected. The assumption is "YP" - but uh, what if the readers just didn't like your application? Yeah, I guess the latter is more difficult to swallow.

Point is, this isn't purely the numbers game it is made out to be. I've learned that first-hand this cycle.


I don't think the self-identify thing is so much relevant to race as it is other things. Because yes, there are Tacehl Dolezal's (& also white ppl who have a far removed minority relative somewhere & are suddenly black or Native American or whatever they wanna claim with hopes of using it to their benefit for admissions).


Agreed. I've seen many people on TLS ask if they get boosts if, for example, they find out their parent or grandparent they have no relationship with is Mexican/Native/Black, and the answer is "technically...yes" but I'd also add "but if you don't actually culturally self-identify then I think you are an a-hole."


First off, wow. I typed that last post on my phone and completely butchered "Rachel" :lol: Secondly, yeah. I've seen those posts. Like, in my opinion, finding out your grandpa was half black or something just in time to apply for law schools and use it as an excuse to mark the "black" box is rude at best and completely dishonest/immoral at worst. If you don't relate to the experience of a minority group, don't intend to check that minority group off for the census and whatever, then wtf? Don't even think about claiming it now! Also, to me it's like... If you have to ask......... lol. Like asking if __ is counted as a URM is different than saying can I claim to be this URM because my great-grandfather was a quarter ___ so technically I have some __ in me.

I really hope most people aren't shitty enough to do that but, it wouldn't surprise me.

However, I do wonder if that would be something the bar would notice if someone were to claim a minority group on their application (for a boost) then never claim it again (census, job apps, whatever) and possibly make it hard for them to get approved.


Lol. I thought Tacehl was your way of making up an Aztec-sounding name.

User avatar
brinicolec

Gold
Posts: 4480
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 7:09 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby brinicolec » Tue Jan 24, 2017 7:01 pm

S.Picquery wrote:
texcellence wrote:
brinicolec wrote:
mm2368 wrote:
dc_diva wrote:


RParadela wrote:


Agreed with all that dc_diva said. It's also important to remember that many of these schools especially in the T14 care about how you self-identify and are sensitive to such things, especially because they're educating students in the year 2017. That isn't to say you can pull a Rachel Dolezal and call yourself something you aren't.

Not to mention everyone on here thinks that he or she is an expert. and then when someone turns around and gets into a T7 with a 156 and isn't a "URM" per the LSAC definition NOR a Rhodes/Fulbright NOR the person who cured malaria on two separate continents, they scramble for ways to make sense of the acceptance. It's the same thing when people with incredible numbers get rejected. The assumption is "YP" - but uh, what if the readers just didn't like your application? Yeah, I guess the latter is more difficult to swallow.

Point is, this isn't purely the numbers game it is made out to be. I've learned that first-hand this cycle.


I don't think the self-identify thing is so much relevant to race as it is other things. Because yes, there are Tacehl Dolezal's (& also white ppl who have a far removed minority relative somewhere & are suddenly black or Native American or whatever they wanna claim with hopes of using it to their benefit for admissions).


Agreed. I've seen many people on TLS ask if they get boosts if, for example, they find out their parent or grandparent they have no relationship with is Mexican/Native/Black, and the answer is "technically...yes" but I'd also add "but if you don't actually culturally self-identify then I think you are an a-hole."


^This. I am on the flip side of the URM coin, where I *look* very pale (even though my features give a hint to the fact that I was raised in a Latinx household with a Latinx family). I spent tons of time with my family in Argentina, my family all looks (and is) Latinx. Except for me. Because of my "look" I was told I shouldn't apply as URM for UG, and I thought I was gonna flip a shit. Anyway... that was an unnecessary little rant, but there you go.


Yeah, that's complete bullshit. There's a lot of "white-passing" minorities. Ironically enough, I was just looking at an article talking about the fact that Paris Jackson (who is pretty "white-passing" if you haven't seen her) said she identifies as a black woman and people on Twitter were flipping out like she's not black :roll: It annoys me that a lot of THOSE types of conversations are ones you have with other minorities. Like, how do minorities think it's okay to tell other minorities they're not [insert race] ENOUGH because they don't exhibit all of the common physical features or whatever?

User avatar
brinicolec

Gold
Posts: 4480
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 7:09 pm

Re: URM 2016-2017 Cycle Thread

Postby brinicolec » Tue Jan 24, 2017 7:02 pm

sfn91 wrote:
brinicolec wrote:
texcellence wrote:
brinicolec wrote:
mm2368 wrote:
dc_diva wrote:


RParadela wrote:


Agreed with all that dc_diva said. It's also important to remember that many of these schools especially in the T14 care about how you self-identify and are sensitive to such things, especially because they're educating students in the year 2017. That isn't to say you can pull a Rachel Dolezal and call yourself something you aren't.

Not to mention everyone on here thinks that he or she is an expert. and then when someone turns around and gets into a T7 with a 156 and isn't a "URM" per the LSAC definition NOR a Rhodes/Fulbright NOR the person who cured malaria on two separate continents, they scramble for ways to make sense of the acceptance. It's the same thing when people with incredible numbers get rejected. The assumption is "YP" - but uh, what if the readers just didn't like your application? Yeah, I guess the latter is more difficult to swallow.

Point is, this isn't purely the numbers game it is made out to be. I've learned that first-hand this cycle.


I don't think the self-identify thing is so much relevant to race as it is other things. Because yes, there are Tacehl Dolezal's (& also white ppl who have a far removed minority relative somewhere & are suddenly black or Native American or whatever they wanna claim with hopes of using it to their benefit for admissions).


Agreed. I've seen many people on TLS ask if they get boosts if, for example, they find out their parent or grandparent they have no relationship with is Mexican/Native/Black, and the answer is "technically...yes" but I'd also add "but if you don't actually culturally self-identify then I think you are an a-hole."


First off, wow. I typed that last post on my phone and completely butchered "Rachel" :lol: Secondly, yeah. I've seen those posts. Like, in my opinion, finding out your grandpa was half black or something just in time to apply for law schools and use it as an excuse to mark the "black" box is rude at best and completely dishonest/immoral at worst. If you don't relate to the experience of a minority group, don't intend to check that minority group off for the census and whatever, then wtf? Don't even think about claiming it now! Also, to me it's like... If you have to ask......... lol. Like asking if __ is counted as a URM is different than saying can I claim to be this URM because my great-grandfather was a quarter ___ so technically I have some __ in me.

I really hope most people aren't shitty enough to do that but, it wouldn't surprise me.

However, I do wonder if that would be something the bar would notice if someone were to claim a minority group on their application (for a boost) then never claim it again (census, job apps, whatever) and possibly make it hard for them to get approved.


Lol. I thought Tacehl was your way of making up an Aztec-sounding name.


Lol, nope. Just a case of not reading over my post before I hit submit :lol:



Return to “Under Represented Law Student Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests