The Official June 2015 Waiter's Thread (GREY DEY 7/1) Forum

EnderWiggin · Post by **EnderWiggin** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:03 pm

whacka wrote:
buckiguy_sucks wrote:
Breathtaking investigative work. Why are you going to law school. You should be on top-CIA-agents-school.com
speaking of, is there an elitist hellhole for MD students or MBAs?

ETA: should have just googled:
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads ... 41/page-32

that's my fallback if LibertyU doesn't pan out

elitist hellhole is for joint JD/MDs

Generally · Post by **Generally** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:12 pm

Post removed.

179orBust · Post by **179orBust** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:13 pm

This might be a really dumb question but I'll ask it anyway. I've been following this ridiculous story of Rachel Dolezel, ex-NAACP leader. She's trans-racial and insists that she has always identified herself as black since she was 5 years old. This got me thinking: If she applies to law school would she be considered URM? Not being facetious, I really would like to know.

tedofsandimas · Post by **tedofsandimas** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:15 pm

Seamus887 wrote:So I have learned saying anything along the lines of an above average LSAT score is easy pisses lots of people off... Touchy bunch yall are. Lets move on to less heated discussions like how yankees say weird things like pop.

How about season 3 of House of Cards as mentioned originally by Buckiguy? I enjoyed it for the most part.

buckiguy_sucks · Post by **buckiguy_sucks** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:16 pm

Post removed.

question#4reddituser · Post by **question#4reddituser** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:16 pm

Seamus887 wrote:So I have learned saying anything along the lines of an above average LSAT score is easy pisses lots of people off... Touchy bunch yall are. Lets move on to less heated discussions like how yankees say weird things like pop.

I actually agree with you that most people have the capability to score a 160 on a pt. Also i agree people do have a innate ceiling. don't let the ugly soul comment get to you. we are lawyers arent we HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA can't wait to gentrify a neighborhood

EnderWiggin · Post by **EnderWiggin** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:17 pm

179orBust wrote:This might be a really dumb question but I'll ask it anyway. I've been following this ridiculous story of Rachel Dolezel, ex-NAACP leader. She's trans-racial and insists that she has always identified herself as black since she was 5 years old. This got me thinking: If she applies to law school would she be considered URM? Not being facetious, I really would like to know.

WWTCS

(ETA: what would ted cruz say)

buckiguy_sucks · Post by **buckiguy_sucks** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:18 pm

Post removed.

buckiguy_sucks · Post by **buckiguy_sucks** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:22 pm

Post removed.

Whnlifegvsulmns · Post by **Whnlifegvsulmns** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:22 pm

179orBust wrote:This might be a really dumb question but I'll ask it anyway. I've been following this ridiculous story of Rachel Dolezel, ex-NAACP leader. She's trans-racial and insists that she has always identified herself as black since she was 5 years old. This got me thinking: If she applies to law school would she be considered URM? Not being facetious, I really would like to know.

My SO is in a gender/ethnicity course in which it has been discussed how fluid ethnicity is in that it relates to your cultural ties, and can change over time. I was wondering the same thing as you though, if I could claim URM to get a boost and claim as my ethnicity.

question#4reddituser · Post by **question#4reddituser** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:23 pm

buckiguy_sucks wrote:
Seamus887 wrote:So I have learned saying anything along the lines of an above average LSAT score is easy pisses lots of people off... Touchy bunch yall are. Lets move on to less heated discussions like how yankees say weird things like pop.
I wouldn't say it pissed a lot of people off, just that a lot of people disagree with you.

But I also agree there's lots of room for improvement for most people with dedicated studying.

i just disagreed with the semantics. the idea that most people can score 160. the test is designed so 160 is always will be 70%.

question#4reddituser · Post by **question#4reddituser** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:24 pm

Whnlifegvsulmns wrote:
179orBust wrote:This might be a really dumb question but I'll ask it anyway. I've been following this ridiculous story of Rachel Dolezel, ex-NAACP leader. She's trans-racial and insists that she has always identified herself as black since she was 5 years old. This got me thinking: If she applies to law school would she be considered URM? Not being facetious, I really would like to know.
My SO is in a gender/ethnicity course in which it has been discussed how fluid ethnicity is in that it relates to your cultural ties, and can change over time. I was wondering the same thing as you though, if I could claim URM to get a boost and claim as my ethnicity.

i hope this becomes true and see how affirmative action handles it. I wonder how they would qualify you as African american because the qualification itself becomes a little racist b/c you are say my people are like that!!!!

Whnlifegvsulmns · Post by **Whnlifegvsulmns** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:28 pm

question#4reddituser wrote:
i hope this becomes true and see how affirmative action handles it. I wonder how they would qualify you as African american because the qualification itself becomes a little racist b/c you are say my people are like that!!!!

I guess it depends on the wording of the question on applications and whatnot. If it asks about race, this is out of the question (based on my understanding of the definition). But if it is ethnicity, I think a solid argument could be made.

Generally · Post by **Generally** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:30 pm

Post removed.

whacka · Post by **whacka** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:30 pm

EnderWiggin · Post by **EnderWiggin** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:32 pm

the qualification itself becomes a little racist? no. conceptions of racial identity exist, both internally and with respect to how we distinguish between different groups. allowing for and acknowledging that fact is fine.

179orBust · Post by **179orBust** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:36 pm

Seamus887 wrote:
buckiguy_sucks wrote:
179orBust wrote:This might be a really dumb question but I'll ask it anyway. I've been following this ridiculous story of Rachel Dolezel, ex-NAACP leader. She's trans-racial and insists that she has always identified herself as black since she was 5 years old. This got me thinking: If she applies to law school would she be considered URM? Not being facetious, I really would like to know.
lol no

Also I consider myself a pretty shitlib-ey kinda guy but lol at trans-racial
God what next. Someone self identifying as Queen Victoria and demanding Buckingham Palace. Harsh truth our generation never learned, you cannot be "anything" you want to be. Sometimes you gotta play with the cards your dealt.

+1

question#4reddituser · Post by **question#4reddituser** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:38 pm

EnderWiggin wrote:the qualification itself becomes a little racist? no. conceptions of racial identity exist, both internally and with respect to how we distinguish between different groups. allowing for and acknowledging that fact is fine.

i think societal wise we could accept it, but how claiming benefit from the goverment. if racial identity is internal process its harder to qualify it. And when you mean distinguish you inherently assign characteristics which can been see as sterotypes.

More black people like rap which distinguished it from other groups which i internally believe...

EnderWiggin · Post by **EnderWiggin** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:43 pm

1) the construction of racial identity is not merely an "internal process." if it was, why would anyone be interested in Rachel Dolezal?
2) what characteristics are applications inherently assigning that can be seen as stereotypes when they provide an opportunity for an applicant to identify a race/ethnic group?

question#4reddituser · Post by **question#4reddituser** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:45 pm

EnderWiggin wrote:1) the construction of racial identity is not merely an "internal process." if it was, why would anyone be interested in Rachel Dolezal?
2) what characteristics are applications inherently assigning that can be seen as stereotypes when they provide an opportunity for an applicant to identify a race/ethnic group?

1. i never said that im just quoting ur criteria..... which results into the absurd....

2. i'm not touching that.... you set the criteria give me an example... im not saying it can't be done i just think its a mine field

EnderWiggin · Post by **EnderWiggin** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:46 pm

question#4reddituser wrote:
EnderWiggin wrote:1) the construction of racial identity is not merely an "internal process." if it was, why would anyone be interested in Rachel Dolezal?
2) what characteristics are applications inherently assigning that can be seen as stereotypes when they provide an opportunity for an applicant to identify a race/ethnic group?
1. i never said that im just quoting ur criteria..... which results into the absurd....

2. i'm not touching that.... you set the criteria give me an example... im not saying it can't be done i just think its a mine field

serious question: do you believe that we should work to become a colorblind society?

Generally · Post by **Generally** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:48 pm

Post removed.

question#4reddituser · Post by **question#4reddituser** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:49 pm

EnderWiggin wrote:
question#4reddituser wrote:
EnderWiggin wrote:1) the construction of racial identity is not merely an "internal process." if it was, why would anyone be interested in Rachel Dolezal?
2) what characteristics are applications inherently assigning that can be seen as stereotypes when they provide an opportunity for an applicant to identify a race/ethnic group?
1. i never said that im just quoting ur criteria..... which results into the absurd....

2. i'm not touching that.... you set the criteria give me an example... im not saying it can't be done i just think its a mine field
serious question: do you believe that we should work to become a colorblind society?

VERY serious question: what is your definition of colorblind society?

whacka · Post by **whacka** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:52 pm

Legendary · Post by **Legendary** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:52 pm

Whnlifegvsulmns wrote: You guys would be disappointed in this TLSer if I divulged my goals/retake standards. I am very LSAT-averse and don't want to have to take it again. All I know for sure is anything sub-167 is going to be the cry zone, requiring a retake. Anything above 170 is a miracle and would be considered a gift from God. Also a cry zone because it means I wouldn't have to retake. Anything between is grey area that would make me cry due to the fact that I would have to decide whether or not to retake. Essentially, by the time July 7th comes around, my tear ducts are going to be empty. I'd consider retake if not up to 171/172, but I'd have to invest in more practice materials as I ran out over my last round of studying.

This is pretty much exactly how I feel. Fingers crossed!