Pretending to be lgbt? Forum

[suralin]

Sounds like a lie to me. Did you also have to lie your way into your UG Ivy League school? Wait, probably not, you probably didn't go to an Ivy League school

Ok, now we're getting into the definition of lie. I think it would be a lie for me to say that I'm lgbt, from my own internal perspective.. I also think that nobody could objectively show that I'm not lgbt, so from an outside perspective, it's not necessarily a lie. Me knowing that its a lie /= anyone else knowing it a lie.

I don't really care if anyone thinks I didn't go to an Ivy League school. This is the Internet. Employers and adcoms see my actual transcript and they are the only ones who I need to convince. I don't stand to gain anything by lying about my background on tls. Tlsisnot admitting or employing me.

Edit: there is a big difference between these two things. People in the real world can see where I went to school. They cannot see what my sexuality *really* is.

Okay, this is bullshit naive philosophizing. Are you really trying to say that a lie (somebody saying something they know is untrue) is not a lie from an "outside perspective" if they can't show it? Just no. I, the outsider, might not in fact be able to show that you told a lie, but that doesn't change the fact that you lied. The state of affairs that a lie consists in--you knowingly saying something untrue that you present as true--does not turn on whether somebody else can somehow demonstrate your deceit.

If you want to use the letters "lie" differently than everybody else, then use a different word, e.g., "zie"; but don't use a word and mean something other than what everybody else takes it to mean.

[Shmoopy]

Law schools don't care what porn you watch, or who you sleep with. They care about how your experiences affected you and made you a better person, what diversity you can bring to a school, or activists fighting for a good cause. It's not simply being gay that would provide a boost, but how that can improve the environment of a law school or you as a lawyer.

This makes sense. I'm wondering, though, do you need some explanation about why being AA matters to get a boost for being AA? As a straight white boy, I guess I've been under the impression that sexual diversity diversity matters just as much to schools and employers as racial diversity. Apparently I could be wrong.

Maybe I should change my name to something exotic (joke) ...

[gguuueessttt]

As a straight white boy, I guess I've been under the impression that sexual diversity diversity matters just as much to schools and employers as racial diversity. Apparently I could be wrong.

You are wrong.

[atcushman]

It would be more helpful for everyone involved if you drafted a diversity statement and allowed us to review it

[howlery]

Law schools don't care what porn you watch, or who you sleep with. They care about how your experiences affected you and made you a better person, what diversity you can bring to a school, or activists fighting for a good cause. It's not simply being gay that would provide a boost, but how that can improve the environment of a law school or you as a lawyer.

This makes sense. I'm wondering, though, do you need some explanation about why being AA matters to get a boost for being AA? As a straight white boy, I guess I've been under the impression that sexual diversity diversity matters just as much to schools and employers as racial diversity. Apparently I could be wrong.

Maybe I should change my name to something exotic (joke) ...

This is dangerous territory. AA debates aren't allowed on these forums, though you're (technically) free to discuss them in the lounge. The LGBT boost and AA/URM boost are quite different. Implying that having an "exotic" name suggests or supports URM status is also a bit offensive.

[WhiteyCakes]

This is the most disappointing thread I have found on TLS...not a single LOL was had

[Shmoopy]

Okay, this is bullshit naive philosophizing. Are you really trying to say that a lie (somebody saying something they know is untrue) is not a lie from an "outside perspective" if they can't show it? Just no. I, the outsider, might not in fact be able to show that you told a lie, but that doesn't change the fact that you lied. The state of affairs that a lie consists in--you knowingly saying something untrue that you present as true--does not turn on whether somebody else can somehow demonstrate your deceit.

If you want to use the letters "lie" differently than everybody else, then use a different word, e.g., "zie"; but don't use a word and mean something other than what everybody else takes it to mean.

I admit that it's a stretch. It probably is BS. My original question was: is there enough reward for stretching the truth in this manner to be worth the effort (and minor risk of being revealed as a fraud)? It seems like the answer is no. That's ok, I get it, I don't really know what I'm talking about and I'm being borderline offensive. Still, this is something I've wondered about...

Anyway, a logical positivist would would say that your knowledge of the "facts" is entirely limited to what you can empirically demonstrate. So if you can't show that I'm lying, then no, you can't know that I'm lying. Obviously I've admitted that I'm lying here on TLS -- but I have not admitted that I'm lying to any adcomms or HR offices. You personally can show that I'm lying. People who know me by my real name, not this screenname, cannot. I don't really buy logical positivism overall, but surely you can appreciate the fact that some C&F board, adcomm, employer, etc. will need positive proof that I'm lying in order to dismiss a claim that I'm lgbt. They won't say to me, "*** and prove that you are gay" -- they will need proof that I'm not lgbt, not proof that I am lgbt.

[howlery]

This is the most disappointing thread I have found on TLS...not a single LOL was had

I was going to post an "I volunteer!!" gif when someone suggested the OP have sex with a dude, but thought it would be in bad taste.

[suralin]

Okay, this is bullshit naive philosophizing. Are you really trying to say that a lie (somebody saying something they know is untrue) is not a lie from an "outside perspective" if they can't show it? Just no. I, the outsider, might not in fact be able to show that you told a lie, but that doesn't change the fact that you lied. The state of affairs that a lie consists in--you knowingly saying something untrue that you present as true--does not turn on whether somebody else can somehow demonstrate your deceit.

If you want to use the letters "lie" differently than everybody else, then use a different word, e.g., "zie"; but don't use a word and mean something other than what everybody else takes it to mean.

I admit that it's a stretch. It probably is BS. My original question was: is there enough reward for stretching the truth in this manner to be worth the effort (and minor risk of being revealed as a fraud)? It seems like the answer is no. That's ok, I get it, I don't really know what I'm talking about and I'm being borderline offensive. Still, this is something I've wondered about...

Anyway, a logical positivist would would say that your knowledge of the "facts" is entirely limited to what you can empirically demonstrate. So if you can't show that I'm lying, then no, you can't know that I'm lying. Obviously I've admitted that I'm lying here on TLS -- but I have not admitted that I'm lying to any adcomms or HR offices. You personally can show that I'm lying. People who know me by my real name, not this screenname, cannot. I don't really buy logical positivism overall, but surely you can appreciate the fact that some C&F board, adcomm, employer, etc. will need positive proof that I'm lying in order to dismiss a claim that I'm lgbt. They won't say to me, "*** and prove that you are gay" -- they will need proof that I'm not lgbt, not proof that I am lgbt.

True, but the issue of whether others will know that you lied is separate from the issue of whether you did indeed lie (or whether the former affects the latter). And yes, logical positivism is questionable.

Also, this is really quite offensive, as you surely know by now.

[Steve2207]

One question, though. How is race visually falsifiable?

I mean that if someone looked at me, they would probably say, or at least think, no way this white guy is AA. His skin looks pasty white.

I do know a girl who is 1/16 Native American and played it up big time on her apps. She died her hair from blond to black, tanned, and started her ps with the words "as a Native American woman,..." She goes to sls now. She is a rich white girl from the suburbs with a millionaire daddy, and she is a total psycho, but it seems like she gained from it.

I look white and my great-grandfather was black. (I never claimed to be a URM though, I am doubtful I would have gotten away with it if I had.)

[moonman157]

This is the most disappointing thread I have found on TLS...not a single LOL was had

I was going to post an "I volunteer!!" gif when someone suggested the OP have sex with a dude, but thought it would be in bad taste.

I'd need to see his Grindr profile before I offered myself up

[atcushman]

This is the most disappointing thread I have found on TLS...not a single LOL was had

I was going to post an "I volunteer!!" gif when someone suggested the OP have sex with a dude, but thought it would be in bad taste.

OP does this do anything for you

--ImageRemoved--

[soj]

That's enough.