0L Ladies - Female C/O 2019 Applicants Forum

slippin_jimmy · Post by **slippin_jimmy** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 1:49 pm

Post removed.

Scalvert · Post by **Scalvert** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 1:50 pm

maracuya wrote:
Hildegard15 wrote: What does MRM mean?
Could it be similar to an MRA (men's rights activist)?

Yeah, Men's Rights Movement (sorry! I forget acronyms don't always translate from one place to another!). When you piss them off, you know you've done something right.

Hildegard15 · Post by **Hildegard15** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 2:02 pm

Post removed.

bamb00zled · Post by **bamb00zled** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 2:17 pm

Hildegard15 wrote:
slippin_jimmy wrote:
bamb00zled wrote:
Hildegard15 wrote:
The point of this thread was to create a safe space for women to talk about issues we face in the law school process and being in a male dominated profession. I DO take issue with men participating in this thread because the reason we had to make this space was because men would attack us for voicing our concerns about gender equality. I don't know if you were around at the beginning when we had no ladies thread, but any time we tried to talk about women's issues in the school specific threads the men were unable to handle it.

I appreciate Lil Sebastian's apology and feel no need to attack him. But this thread is ONLY for female identifying applicants. And I make no apology for that.
It does not seem very kind to declare ONLY female identifying applicants welcome... I know there is an LGBTQ thread but trans ppl should really feel welcome here if female bodied but not female identified. Also my personal opinion is that pretending to be a woman is lame and sexism done with good intentions is still sexism but men shouldn't feel as if they can't pop in to share something or ask a question or some such business. In the end every space is a male space, so carving out our own female space is super important, but it doesn't need to be at the expense and full exclusion of others.
Agreed - if men want to participate in a discussion about the challenges facing female applicants in law school and law, I welcome it, so long as it doesn't ruin the 'safe space' environment that we wanted in the first place, because gender concerns in other threads were met with... hot debate.

But if men want to participate in discussions of how to be better allies or anything like that (I'm just blanking on ways they'd want to participate), I personally wouldn't have any issue with that.
I still think it should not be a "men are welcome" kind of thing. Why do they need to be involved in everything here? Don't they have ENOUGH spaces where they can participate freely? They can ask us any of these kinds of questions in the compendium or anywhere else. I'm not going to chase them off with pitchforks if they ask an innocent question here, but I think it's a very slippery slope from "Feel free to join in on discussion of being an ally" to having all sorts of gents poking their nose and offering their opinions where they aren't wanted. This is my one space where I don't have to deal with men telling me how to be a feminist. I DO NOT need another space where I have to deal with men's opinions of my actions.

And yes, if you in ANY WAY AT ALL identify with the female experience, I am in agreement that you can participate here. I thought I was being inclusive of trans women by saying female identifying, but if trans men want to participate that's fine too. Sorry for inadvertently excluding them

I think we are very much in agreement

barley · Post by **barley** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 2:21 pm

bamb00zled wrote:
Hildegard15 wrote:
slippin_jimmy wrote:
bamb00zled wrote:
Hildegard15 wrote:
The point of this thread was to create a safe space for women to talk about issues we face in the law school process and being in a male dominated profession. I DO take issue with men participating in this thread because the reason we had to make this space was because men would attack us for voicing our concerns about gender equality. I don't know if you were around at the beginning when we had no ladies thread, but any time we tried to talk about women's issues in the school specific threads the men were unable to handle it.

I appreciate Lil Sebastian's apology and feel no need to attack him. But this thread is ONLY for female identifying applicants. And I make no apology for that.
It does not seem very kind to declare ONLY female identifying applicants welcome... I know there is an LGBTQ thread but trans ppl should really feel welcome here if female bodied but not female identified. Also my personal opinion is that pretending to be a woman is lame and sexism done with good intentions is still sexism but men shouldn't feel as if they can't pop in to share something or ask a question or some such business. In the end every space is a male space, so carving out our own female space is super important, but it doesn't need to be at the expense and full exclusion of others.
Agreed - if men want to participate in a discussion about the challenges facing female applicants in law school and law, I welcome it, so long as it doesn't ruin the 'safe space' environment that we wanted in the first place, because gender concerns in other threads were met with... hot debate.

But if men want to participate in discussions of how to be better allies or anything like that (I'm just blanking on ways they'd want to participate), I personally wouldn't have any issue with that.
I still think it should not be a "men are welcome" kind of thing. Why do they need to be involved in everything here? Don't they have ENOUGH spaces where they can participate freely? They can ask us any of these kinds of questions in the compendium or anywhere else. I'm not going to chase them off with pitchforks if they ask an innocent question here, but I think it's a very slippery slope from "Feel free to join in on discussion of being an ally" to having all sorts of gents poking their nose and offering their opinions where they aren't wanted. This is my one space where I don't have to deal with men telling me how to be a feminist. I DO NOT need another space where I have to deal with men's opinions of my actions.

And yes, if you in ANY WAY AT ALL identify with the female experience, I am in agreement that you can participate here. I thought I was being inclusive of trans women by saying female identifying, but if trans men want to participate that's fine too. Sorry for inadvertently excluding them
I think we are very much in agreement

In theory it would be nice if men could participate in constructive discussions, but I think in practice it wouldn't work out. If we welcome men in for this, I can almost guarantee (knowing the regular posters) that others will end up chiming in the second they disagree with something someone says in this thread. And those of us who have been through these conversations before know how quickly things would devolve from there.

But yeah, trans men are totally welcome too! Definitely did not mean to exclude them.

cannonballer · Post by **cannonballer** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 3:05 pm

cannonballer · Post by **cannonballer** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 6:16 pm

jettison63 · Post by **jettison63** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 6:25 pm

Post removed.

Hildegard15 · Post by **Hildegard15** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 6:31 pm

Post removed.

cannonballer · Post by **cannonballer** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 6:53 pm

slippin_jimmy · Post by **slippin_jimmy** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 6:53 pm

Post removed.

jettison63 · Post by **jettison63** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:02 pm

Post removed.

barley · Post by **barley** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:11 pm

cannonballer · Post by **cannonballer** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:32 pm

Another question: Are you having your recommenders submit customized letters for each school, or a general letter for all of them? I've noticed that Stanford specifically states, "Please be aware of the high value Stanford places on school-specific letters of recommendation" (maybe that's why I don't like Stanford?), but I haven't seen that on any other school website. As a non-traditional applicant (6 years out of undergrad), I'm grateful enough to have professors enthusiastic about writing me letters, but I don't really want to burden them further. Do law schools judge applicants who submit 'general' letters?

Hildegard15 · Post by **Hildegard15** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:38 pm

Post removed.

slippin_jimmy · Post by **slippin_jimmy** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:43 pm

Post removed.

jettison63 · Post by **jettison63** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:43 pm

Post removed.

slippin_jimmy · Post by **slippin_jimmy** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:45 pm

Post removed.

cannonballer · Post by **cannonballer** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:47 pm

slippin_jimmy wrote:
jettison63 wrote:
cannonballer wrote:Another question: Are you having your recommenders submit customized letters for each school, or a general letter for all of them? I've noticed that Stanford specifically states, "Please be aware of the high value Stanford places on school-specific letters of recommendation" (maybe that's why I don't like Stanford?), but I haven't seen that on any other school website. As a non-traditional applicant (6 years out of undergrad), I'm grateful enough to have professors enthusiastic about writing me letters, but I don't really want to burden them further. Do law schools judge applicants who submit 'general' letters?
I don't think law schools judge that at all (except for Stanford apparently). And I actually also really dislike that statement from Stanford. It assumes that your recommender has time and interest or else enough general knowledge about the school to write a school-specific rec. Even Yale doesn't ask for that.

Yeah. not at all a fan of that request.
I have always read it as if you can get a letter from someone who knows Stanford (alum, etc), it will be viewed favorably since they can speak about your fit for the school.

That makes sense...in my opinion if Yale doesn't care about school-specific recs, no other school has business asking for one! I'm glad I asked, though, since it was starting to stress me out.

jettison63 · Post by **jettison63** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:48 pm

Post removed.

Hildegard15 · Post by **Hildegard15** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:56 pm

Post removed.

zozo1717 · Post by **zozo1717** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:59 pm

Hildegard15 wrote:
cannonballer wrote:On another note, anyone have any schools they are particularly excited about or specifically turned off from? For some reason Stanford has a bad image in my mind, but I can't pinpoint why, and don't really want to reject a school outright based on a feeling.
Biggest hype levels: Harvard, Cornell, Michigan. Reasons: Harvard because I miss Boston (and duh it's Harvard), Cornell because both my parents went there for undergrad and I've always wanted to go, and Michigan because their emails and viewbook were super friendly and personalized so I love them. Plus big time sports.

Lowest hype levels: Berkeley, Penn, Georgetown, Chicago. Most of these are just due to a lack of compelling factors pulling me their way. These are schools I don't have any emotional connection to.

Though I will say, my levels of hype do not correspond to how likely I think I will attend a school. I think I am gonna end up at Columbia, but I have pretty medium hype levels for them. Mostly due to a general lack of knowledge.

I like this...

For me - HUGE hype for Northwestern - love the city and the school itself is beautiful. Also, hype for Chicago and Penn, but they are big reaches for me, so trying not to get TOO hyped. Also, liking the idea of GULC and living in DC more and more. Major hype for Texas as well - yay Austin
Less hype - Duke, Michigan, UVA - really looking to live in a city for a variety of reasons

texasellewoods · Post by **texasellewoods** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 11:21 pm

maracuya · Post by **maracuya** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 11:28 pm

Scalvert · Post by **Scalvert** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 12:22 am

texasellewoods wrote:http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 7&t=255794

sorry to break up the hype fest, but have y'all seen this? A girl says she was 'molested' (her words, not belittling/doubting her) by a GTown alumni interviewer and then denied. What are your thoughts on the post/the responses?

I saw that earlier and the whole thing seemed odd to me. Not that it couldn't happen, but I don't know that my response to such a situation would be to make a post (my first post) about it on TLS.