Minority Status?

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
scammedhard
Posts: 642
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:17 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby scammedhard » Sun May 01, 2011 5:04 pm

My mom is 100% Arab, and my father is half Arab, half African American (black)

Actually, I think it is rather a mistake that she is been identifying herself as "white."

User avatar
NikaneOkie
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 12:39 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby NikaneOkie » Sun May 01, 2011 5:07 pm

JamMasterJ wrote:You were born in the USA, correct? If so, I would check African American and then write a diversity statement with basically what you said. I am fairly certain that 1/4 black is black by admissions standards.


TITCR

User avatar
yngblkgifted
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:57 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby yngblkgifted » Sun May 01, 2011 5:11 pm

scammedhard wrote:
yngblkgifted wrote:OP seems to have found a race to identify with, and that is white. I can understand if op said that she/he never felt like he/she fit neatly into a racial category, but from the original post, that doesn't seem to be the case. I was operating under the assumption that when OP says that he/she had always "identified as being white" or that he/she has always "claimed" white, they were talking about which racial group they identify with on a daily basis - not just what they identify with when they take a standardized test.


Wrong! OP wrote:
I have always identified myself as "White," given that most applications include the White-North African/Middle Eastern designation.


Notice the "given." She knows she does not fit in "white" category neatly, and she seems rather confused as to what ethic group she belongs too. Maybe she doesn't really care, and that would be wonderful.


Yeah I saw the given, so my inference may have been wrong, but only the OP can say for sure. Even if the OP has personally always identified as an Arab American, I still think applying as an African American is not right.

And what a wonderful privilege it must be to never have to care about what racial category you belong into.

rose711
Posts: 287
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2011 11:57 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby rose711 » Sun May 01, 2011 5:29 pm

I am really surprised at how judgmental people are about OP. The only thing OP needs to do is to the best for herself to get into the best law school possible.

She doesn't owe anyone here any explanations of how and why she has identified herself as white. I know that people get judged for "passing" and maybe that is what people here think OP has been doing, but the fact is that for purposes of law school she qualifies as AA.

People criticize her - but there is no rule that you have to consider yourself AA since birth to qualify as AA. I assume OP identified herself as white because it was simpler (as she said white includes Arab in her mind) - don't you see that is a problem for her to have to deal with? The real problem is that in our culture you are identified as the race of the minority parent - but that isn't OP's problem. And it isn't OP's problem that she was born with light skin.

If you think OP's life experience in America, middle class or not, with an Arab mother and a half-AA and half Arab father has just been your typical white kid upbringing, I doubt that is the case. Even if I'm wrong, and she adds no diversity to her class, the most important issue for URM is getting more minority representation in the legal profession. OP qualifies to do that.

I don't know why people are judging OP because of her skin color. I think it is wrong to judge her or any one else for using URM status if they qualify for it under the rules. She is entitled to this benefit and she is doing herself a disservice if she doesn't use it.

I think too, that OP should be given a break for figuring out her identity now.
Last edited by rose711 on Sun May 01, 2011 5:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

scammedhard
Posts: 642
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:17 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby scammedhard » Sun May 01, 2011 5:30 pm

yngblkgifted wrote:And what a wonderful privilege it must be to never have to care about what racial category you belong into.

Yes. But you have to remember that Affirmative Action and the URM "boost" is all about bringing diversity to the classroom, and not so much about compensation, at least according to the Supreme Court. Here, the OP is very diverse, part Arab, part African American, and it seems that her ethnic/racial background was not a big factor in her upbringing. That's rare and that would bring diversity.

Earlier you wrote that "one needs to identify as such in order to truly know what an identity means." Here, you are making an assumption that one is able "identify" oneself, and I think one can only do that if one is aware of differences between oneself and others in its environment. So, I don't agree with that statement.

EDIT: I fully agree with "rose711."

User avatar
powerlawyer06
Posts: 233
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 3:20 am

Re: Minority Status?

Postby powerlawyer06 » Sun May 01, 2011 5:40 pm

scammedhard wrote:
yngblkgifted wrote:And what a wonderful privilege it must be to never have to care about what racial category you belong into.

Yes. But you have to remember that Affirmative Action and the URM "boost" is all about bringing diversity to the classroom, and not so much about compensation, at least according to the Supreme Court. Here, the OP is very diverse, part Arab, part African American, and it seems that her ethnic/racial background was not a big factor in her upbringing. That's rare and that would bring diversity.

Earlier you wrote that "one needs to identify as such in order to truly know what an identity means." Here, you are making an assumption that one is able "identify" oneself, and I think one can only do that if one is aware of differences between oneself and others in its environment. So, I don't agree with that statement.

EDIT: I fully agree with "rose711."


You can still be diverse but not qualify to mark AA on the box. Why doesn't OP mark white and still write a DS about her background and why she identified herself as white (as she has done in the past) then let the law school decide whether or not she is diverse.

User avatar
yngblkgifted
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:57 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby yngblkgifted » Sun May 01, 2011 5:46 pm

scammedhard wrote:
yngblkgifted wrote:And what a wonderful privilege it must be to never have to care about what racial category you belong into.

Yes. But you have to remember that Affirmative Action and the URM "boost" is all about bringing diversity to the classroom, and not so much about compensation, at least according to the Supreme Court. Here, the OP is very diverse, part Arab, part African American, and it seems that her ethnic/racial background was not a big factor in her upbringing. That's rare and that would bring diversity.

Earlier you wrote that "one needs to identify as such in order to truly know what an identity means." Here, you are making an assumption that one is able "identify" oneself, and I think one can only do that if one is aware of differences between oneself and others in its environment. So, I don't agree with that statement.

EDIT: I fully agree with "rose711."


Never said that OP wouldn't add diversity and I never spoke on her upbringing. I am not sure whether or not Arab Americans are URMs , but if they are underrepresented in the classroom, I certainly would support a boost for adding necessary diversity into law schools and eventually into the legal field.

All I was saying earlier was that, if OP has considered herself white her whole life, then she shouldn't apply as a black applicant. Apparently, no one else thinks that this seems to be the case.I am still curious to know what OP considered herself while growing up. If she considered herself as someone who couldn't be easily defined by the social constructions of race, then the more power to her and I would advise her to explain that in her DS. Not only that, I would advise the OP to check 2 boxes as other have suggested ITT. Really wasn't trying to be confrontational or controversial. Best of luck to the OP!

User avatar
tooswolle
Posts: 491
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 4:48 am

Re: Minority Status?

Postby tooswolle » Sun May 01, 2011 5:47 pm

Every so often these kind of threads pop up, an op with an "ethical dilema" about marking race on their law school application. Most of the time it seems like the individual is looking for a way to justify marking a race that will benefit them in admissions. So I will pose this question to the op, if there was no tangible benefit to marking the AA box would you still do it? If not, it seems to me that your using a technicality to game a system that was intended to help minorities who face a myriad of obstacles in education, the work force and life in general.

My personal opinion on this matter is that it is unscrupulous for people to use a system that was made to help the disadvantaged when their lives do not reflect the lives of those the system was made to help. I'm also sure that many urms feel the same way about that. Ultimately it is your decision and if you do choose to mark the AA box I hope you will try to help disadvantaged people from your "community" since in essence you will be competing with other people who the system was intended to help.

User avatar
yngblkgifted
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:57 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby yngblkgifted » Sun May 01, 2011 5:48 pm

powerlawyer06 wrote:
scammedhard wrote:
yngblkgifted wrote:And what a wonderful privilege it must be to never have to care about what racial category you belong into.

Yes. But you have to remember that Affirmative Action and the URM "boost" is all about bringing diversity to the classroom, and not so much about compensation, at least according to the Supreme Court. Here, the OP is very diverse, part Arab, part African American, and it seems that her ethnic/racial background was not a big factor in her upbringing. That's rare and that would bring diversity.

Earlier you wrote that "one needs to identify as such in order to truly know what an identity means." Here, you are making an assumption that one is able "identify" oneself, and I think one can only do that if one is aware of differences between oneself and others in its environment. So, I don't agree with that statement.

EDIT: I fully agree with "rose711."


You can still be diverse but not qualify to mark AA on the box. Why doesn't OP mark white and still write a DS about her background and why she identified herself as white (as she has done in the past) then let the law school decide whether or not she is diverse.


I like your thinking Lincoln!

User avatar
mez06
Posts: 349
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 4:11 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby mez06 » Sun May 01, 2011 6:03 pm

tooswolle wrote:Every so often these kind of threads pop up, an op with an "ethical dilema" about marking race on their law school application. Most of the time it seems like the individual is looking for a way to justify marking a race that will benefit them in admissions. So I will pose this question to the op, if there was no tangible benefit to marking the AA box would you still do it? If not, it seems to me that your using a technicality to game a system that was intended to help minorities who face a myriad of obstacles in education, the work force and life in general.

My personal opinion on this matter is that it is unscrupulous for people to use a system that was made to help the disadvantaged when their lives do not reflect the lives of those the system was made to help. I'm also sure that many urms feel the same way about that. Ultimately it is your decision and if you do choose to mark the AA box I hope you will try to help disadvantaged people from your "community" since in essence you will be competing with other people who the system was intended to help.


+1. Your classification as AA is dishonest and partly immoral. Yet, you'd be perfectly fine in checking the AA box on your application; free of future trouble and/or complications. As we live in America, I'll assume you most likely will. We've all stretched the truth before so I won't go irate. What I said however, are the facts. Good luck in law school.

rose711
Posts: 287
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2011 11:57 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby rose711 » Sun May 01, 2011 6:07 pm

I differ on the idea that it is unscrupulous for someone to take a benefit that they are entitled to have. Why does this come up with race? Would you have told Caroline Kennedy to pretend to be someone else so she couldn't take advantage of family connections when she applied to Columbia Law School? Why isn't it unscrupulous to take advantage of the connections your family has simply because of the luck of your birth? There is nothing unethical or unscrupulous at all in OP being AA.

I'm not sure where the strong opposition to her using AA is coming from, I'm sure there is something happening here that I simply don't understand. Maybe people think OP hasn't been discriminated against enough to qualify? Or maybe people think that she has too much money to qualify? I really don't understand all the vitriol against OP...but my best guess so back to the underlying idea that OP has been "passing" and now shouldn't claim she is AA. I just, wow, thought that idea disappeared a long time ago.

I think it is very unfair to be so harsh on OP when she is just following the rules. Also, I think people are making false assumptions if they believe that OP has not been treated different in anyway from a kid with two white parents.

OP is one of the people the rules were designed to benefit, if you disagree with the rules that is one thing, but the rules aren't OP's problem.

Why is this turning into a question of OP's integrity?

Anyway, I'm not posting any more in this thread because I am repeating myself. OP you have my full support. If you need any backing, just PM me.

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby DoubleChecks » Sun May 01, 2011 6:14 pm

powerlawyer06 wrote:
scammedhard wrote:
yngblkgifted wrote:And what a wonderful privilege it must be to never have to care about what racial category you belong into.

Yes. But you have to remember that Affirmative Action and the URM "boost" is all about bringing diversity to the classroom, and not so much about compensation, at least according to the Supreme Court. Here, the OP is very diverse, part Arab, part African American, and it seems that her ethnic/racial background was not a big factor in her upbringing. That's rare and that would bring diversity.

Earlier you wrote that "one needs to identify as such in order to truly know what an identity means." Here, you are making an assumption that one is able "identify" oneself, and I think one can only do that if one is aware of differences between oneself and others in its environment. So, I don't agree with that statement.

EDIT: I fully agree with "rose711."


You can still be diverse but not qualify to mark AA on the box. Why doesn't OP mark white and still write a DS about her background and why she identified herself as white (as she has done in the past) then let the law school decide whether or not she is diverse.


why doesnt everyone just do that then...?

dont hate the playa, hate the game

User avatar
Patriot1208
Posts: 7044
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: Minority Status?

Postby Patriot1208 » Sun May 01, 2011 6:14 pm

mez06 wrote:
tooswolle wrote:Every so often these kind of threads pop up, an op with an "ethical dilema" about marking race on their law school application. Most of the time it seems like the individual is looking for a way to justify marking a race that will benefit them in admissions. So I will pose this question to the op, if there was no tangible benefit to marking the AA box would you still do it? If not, it seems to me that your using a technicality to game a system that was intended to help minorities who face a myriad of obstacles in education, the work force and life in general.
My personal opinion on this matter is that it is unscrupulous for people to use a system that was made to help the disadvantaged when their lives do not reflect the lives of those the system was made to help. I'm also sure that many urms feel the same way about that. Ultimately it is your decision and if you do choose to mark the AA box I hope you will try to help disadvantaged people from your "community" since in essence you will be competing with other people who the system was intended to help.
+1. Your classification as AA is dishonest and partly immoral. Yet, you'd be perfectly fine in checking the AA box on your application; free of future trouble and/or complications. As we live in America, I'll assume you most likely will. We've all stretched the truth before so I won't go irate. What I said however, are the facts. Good luck in law school.


Lol this is stupid. OP isn't stretching the truth. In no way is OP suggesting she act dishonestly. It is not dishonest to be honest about your race. Seriously, it's crazy to think you could argue otherwise. It is also in no way immoral to be completely honest on an application, that is an amoral act.

Seriously just stfo with your stupidity.

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby DoubleChecks » Sun May 01, 2011 6:15 pm

Patriot1208 wrote:
mez06 wrote:
tooswolle wrote:Every so often these kind of threads pop up, an op with an "ethical dilema" about marking race on their law school application. Most of the time it seems like the individual is looking for a way to justify marking a race that will benefit them in admissions. So I will pose this question to the op, if there was no tangible benefit to marking the AA box would you still do it? If not, it seems to me that your using a technicality to game a system that was intended to help minorities who face a myriad of obstacles in education, the work force and life in general.
My personal opinion on this matter is that it is unscrupulous for people to use a system that was made to help the disadvantaged when their lives do not reflect the lives of those the system was made to help. I'm also sure that many urms feel the same way about that. Ultimately it is your decision and if you do choose to mark the AA box I hope you will try to help disadvantaged people from your "community" since in essence you will be competing with other people who the system was intended to help.
+1. Your classification as AA is dishonest and partly immoral. Yet, you'd be perfectly fine in checking the AA box on your application; free of future trouble and/or complications. As we live in America, I'll assume you most likely will. We've all stretched the truth before so I won't go irate. What I said however, are the facts. Good luck in law school.


Lol this is stupid. OP isn't stretching the truth. In no way is OP suggesting she act dishonestly. It is not dishonest to be honest about your race. Seriously, it's crazy to think you could argue otherwise. It is also in no way immoral to be completely honest on an application, that is an amoral act.

Seriously just stfo with your stupidity.


shhh you're ruining mez06's moment of feeling superior on both a moral and rational level -- that horse be high!

User avatar
tooswolle
Posts: 491
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 4:48 am

Re: Minority Status?

Postby tooswolle » Sun May 01, 2011 6:37 pm

I think the backlash stems from the op's sudden deviation from her old classification to one that gives her enormous advantages in her applications. It seems disingenuous to say the least. Some will argue that affirmative action is about an individuals race and although that is partially true it ignores the intent behind the policy. Afirmative action was created to right societal wrongs that always created disadvantages for certain people. In essence it was created as a way for upward mobility for people who wouldn't have been given the opportunity in the first place. This is categorically different from legacy status which is based off peoples connections and power and does not serve any societal benefit.

I'm the end if the op had marked AA from the start this conversation would be moot, but since she hasn't it seems to be done only to benefit from a system that was created to benefit the disadvantaged. Lastly, race maybe necessary but it is not sufficient to fall under the true intentions of affirmative action.
Last edited by tooswolle on Sun May 01, 2011 6:42 pm, edited 2 times in total.

mallen
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun May 01, 2011 12:15 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby mallen » Sun May 01, 2011 6:37 pm

mez06 wrote:
tooswolle wrote:Every so often these kind of threads pop up, an op with an "ethical dilema" about marking race on their law school application. Most of the time it seems like the individual is looking for a way to justify marking a race that will benefit them in admissions. So I will pose this question to the op, if there was no tangible benefit to marking the AA box would you still do it? If not, it seems to me that your using a technicality to game a system that was intended to help minorities who face a myriad of obstacles in education, the work force and life in general.

My personal opinion on this matter is that it is unscrupulous for people to use a system that was made to help the disadvantaged when their lives do not reflect the lives of those the system was made to help. I'm also sure that many urms feel the same way about that. Ultimately it is your decision and if you do choose to mark the AA box I hope you will try to help disadvantaged people from your "community" since in essence you will be competing with other people who the system was intended to help.


+1. Your classification as AA is dishonest and partly immoral. Yet, you'd be perfectly fine in checking the AA box on your application; free of future trouble and/or complications. As we live in America, I'll assume you most likely will. We've all stretched the truth before so I won't go irate. What I said however, are the facts. Good luck in law school.


Mez--where is this anger coming from?

Her checking the AA box would actually be honest, failing to check it would be the dishonest route. You seem to be forgetting that if she didn't attest to her complete racial makeup, she'd be denying 1/4 of her heritage.

I think --more broadly--you're also forgetting that the minority experience is much more than simply being lower-class and experiencing day-to-day racism. I'm assuming you're someone who has experienced this type of racism, and by virtue of the fact that the OP hasn't you're agitated that she may benefit from AA policies. But, I guess think about it this way: if you had children, who were of mixed race--children that you were able to raise upper-middle class, which shielded them from some of the more obvious forms of oppression, would you not want them to check the box--even though they didn't identify with it directly? If they didn't wouldn't that be disowning the strife YOU went through?

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby DoubleChecks » Sun May 01, 2011 6:48 pm

tooswolle wrote:I think the backlash stems from the op's sudden deviation from her old classification to one that gives her enormous advantages in her applications. It seems disingenuous to say the least. Some will argue that affirmative action is about an individuals race and although that is partially true it ignores the intent behind the policy. Afirmative action was created to right societal wrongs that always created disadvantages for certain people. In essence it was created as a way for upward mobility for people who wouldn't have been given the opportunity in the first place. This is categorically different from legacy status which is based off peoples connections and power and does not serve any societal benefit.

I'm the end if the op had marked AA from the start this conversation would be moot, but since she hasn't it seems to be done only to benefit from a system that was created to benefit the disadvantaged. Lastly, race maybe necessary but it is not sufficient to fall under the true intentions of affirmative action.


okay well, being a textualist, i would challenge you by saying you dont really know the legislation's true intent. a lot of compromise goes around, a lot of negotiations. either way, if the system is built this way, why not take advantage of it? why not take advantage of a connection you have to a partner and get a SA position that another person going through the OCI position possibly deserved more for whatever reasons outside of private connections? i dont blame GE for paying $0 taxes, i blame the tax infrastructure that allows them to do that lol.

^btw, thats me playing devil's advocate.

User avatar
powerlawyer06
Posts: 233
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 3:20 am

Re: Minority Status?

Postby powerlawyer06 » Sun May 01, 2011 6:51 pm

DoubleChecks wrote:
powerlawyer06 wrote:You can still be diverse but not qualify to mark AA on the box. Why doesn't OP mark white and still write a DS about her background and why she identified herself as white (as she has done in the past) then let the law school decide whether or not she is diverse.


why doesnt everyone just do that then...?

dont hate the playa, hate the game


Uhh because some people legitimately qualify as URMs and have identified as that race their entire life (not just to get an admissions boost to get into law school).

User avatar
Patriot1208
Posts: 7044
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:28 am

Re: Minority Status?

Postby Patriot1208 » Sun May 01, 2011 6:59 pm

DoubleChecks wrote:
tooswolle wrote:I think the backlash stems from the op's sudden deviation from her old classification to one that gives her enormous advantages in her applications. It seems disingenuous to say the least. Some will argue that affirmative action is about an individuals race and although that is partially true it ignores the intent behind the policy. Afirmative action was created to right societal wrongs that always created disadvantages for certain people. In essence it was created as a way for upward mobility for people who wouldn't have been given the opportunity in the first place. This is categorically different from legacy status which is based off peoples connections and power and does not serve any societal benefit.

I'm the end if the op had marked AA from the start this conversation would be moot, but since she hasn't it seems to be done only to benefit from a system that was created to benefit the disadvantaged. Lastly, race maybe necessary but it is not sufficient to fall under the true intentions of affirmative action.

okay well, being a textualist, i would challenge you by saying you dont really know the legislation's true intent. a lot of compromise goes around, a lot of negotiations. either way, if the system is built this way, why not take advantage of it? why not take advantage of a connection you have to a partner and get a SA position that another person going through the OCI position possibly deserved more for whatever reasons outside of private connections? i dont blame GE for paying $0 taxes, i blame the tax infrastructure that allows them to do that lol.
^btw, thats me playing devil's advocate.


Of course he doesn't know the intent and it's stupid to suggest otherwise. All this talk about AA means this or that is just bullshit. OP is honestly a URM and has as much right to identify with her race as anyone else.

In fact, the most realistic explanation for AA is economic, but people want to feel like it stands for some higher and noble ideal.

User avatar
tooswolle
Posts: 491
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 4:48 am

Re: Minority Status?

Postby tooswolle » Sun May 01, 2011 7:10 pm

I believe that an individuals interpretation of public policies fall under their field of study. Personally I don't look at it through the eyes of economic reasons, given the social unrest during the time the policy was instituted. More importantly it's easy to forget the discrimination that minorities were subjected to during a majority of this country's existence. For example separate but equal was only over ruled 60+ years ago and Jim crow laws lasted well in to the 1960's.

I suppose this matter falls along peoples perception on what is right and what is wrong. Many urms have always identified themselves a certain way. The issue here is the op claiming to be AA when she stands to reap huge benefits. Some view it as she has the right to do, others view it as taking advantage of a system which was intended to help certain people. I am of the latter opinion.

User avatar
JamMasterJ
Posts: 6688
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby JamMasterJ » Sun May 01, 2011 7:15 pm

Anyone else find it funny that OP hasn't weighed in since halfway down page two yet doublechecks, tooswole et al have been posting up a storm?

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby DoubleChecks » Sun May 01, 2011 7:17 pm

powerlawyer06 wrote:
DoubleChecks wrote:
powerlawyer06 wrote:You can still be diverse but not qualify to mark AA on the box. Why doesn't OP mark white and still write a DS about her background and why she identified herself as white (as she has done in the past) then let the law school decide whether or not she is diverse.


why doesnt everyone just do that then...?

dont hate the playa, hate the game


Uhh because some people legitimately qualify as URMs and have identified as that race their entire life (not just to get an admissions boost to get into law school).


i dont understand your "legitimately qualify" argument...what if one were half AA, but looked totally white. i mean lived whole life without anyone (besides family) thinking otherwise...no qualifications? and the argument about "identification"...cant one also start identifying with a diff part of themselves when they enter law school? OP can identify as both, too...especially if you read her "given" statement on why she checked the White box in the past. OP mentioned how her father being half black has affected him, and thus the OP, throughout life.

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby DoubleChecks » Sun May 01, 2011 7:19 pm

JamMasterJ wrote:Anyone else find it funny that OP hasn't weighed in since halfway down page two yet doublechecks, tooswole et al have been posting up a storm?


i dont find it particularly funny, but if thats your cup of tea lol. OP either quit the thread, or you know, got off TLS for a few hours (shock). at least it is still on topic, a rare feat for a TLS thread!

User avatar
powerlawyer06
Posts: 233
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 3:20 am

Re: Minority Status?

Postby powerlawyer06 » Sun May 01, 2011 8:26 pm

DoubleChecks wrote:
powerlawyer06 wrote:Uhh because some people legitimately qualify as URMs and have identified as that race their entire life (not just to get an admissions boost to get into law school).


i dont understand your "legitimately qualify" argument...what if one were half AA, but looked totally white. i mean lived whole life without anyone (besides family) thinking otherwise...no qualifications? and the argument about "identification"...cant one also start identifying with a diff part of themselves when they enter law school? OP can identify as both, too...especially if you read her "given" statement on why she checked the White box in the past. OP mentioned how her father being half black has affected him, and thus the OP, throughout life.


Again,

If you don't identify with the culture and you haven't had to deal with cultural stigma because you don't appear to be of this minority group then you should not put it down.

OP, did not ask this question by saying "I have recently begun to identify with my AA heritage becasue of X,Y, and Z experiences." She said an admissions advisor told her to do this in order to help her get into law school. She admitted she has not identified herself as this before and felt uncomfortable about putting this down (hence the question in the original post).

Identifying with a race only for the purposes of getting into law school is unethical. Maybe this is a gray area technically and you could get away with doing it but it is still wrong.

dkt4
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 6:33 pm

Re: Minority Status?

Postby dkt4 » Sun May 01, 2011 9:16 pm

i wouldn't go so far as to call this immoral, but its pretty lame to suddenly want to claim your URM status when you stand to benefit from it. without question, OP has the right to claim AA -- but having the right to do something doesn't mean you necessarily should.

also, there's a somewhat ridiculous notion surfacing in some of these posts that there is some definitive, common URM experience...which is pretty much bullshit.

OP - do whatever you want, its your decision.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: airwrecka, azaleafire, hiltopp01, SolRs and 9 guests