If you would like to demonstrate that whites in all of America are underrepresented in law schools, then this is what is needed:


ALL law schools in the countrys demographics totaled against the national population stats.


If you can show me that all law schools totaled show that less than 69% of the law students in the country are white, you have a point.

Other than that, individual school's demographics must be compared to the demographics of the population from which they draw their students. As unregistered and I have shown, when you do this for Texas and California schools (our respective locations) you see that the % of white students in law school is higher than the % of white people in the population from which the students come.

 

Not true. I'm just looking at the schools that I've considered attending (Davis, Cal, Stanford, Hastings, Golden Gate, UT, etc).

Discrimination and the causes must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, meaning one school at a time. What I'd like to know is if applications by qualified candidates are proportional to the local demographic population, or if there is racial or gender discrimination in the acceptance process. Don't you think that's a fair question?

 

Yes, that's a fair question. But you compared the demographics of the law schools to the wrong population. Like you said, you have to compare them to the LOCAL DEMOGRAPHIC POPULATION. So, for the schools you listed, that is CA. Which means if they have > than 46.7% whites they are over representing whites...and they are except for Hastings and Berkeley, which are within the margin of error for the census and their own stats.


So, to answer the fair question, there IS racism in the acceptances of most of the schools you listed...because they let in a higher percentage of whites than exists in the population from which their students come.


Furthermore, as we've seen by the stats, there IS also gender discrimination...against women.

So you (being a white male) have a better chance of getting into law school than an equally qualified non-white or female applicant. The truth is, in fact, the exact opposite of your claim that 'diversity has gone awry'; whites are not underrepresentd in law school (or any other post-college education).

 

In fact, comparing them to the local population in general is also incorrect. The admissions numbers must be compared to the demographics of the applicants for admission in order to be meaningful.

 

AMEN.. AGREED!

 

Is that what the #s say, or is that your assumption? Again, we'd have to see how many QUALIFIED applicants applied.

 

True, but since I can't find any of those stats the local population is the closest approximation the the applicant pool that we have.


Helladumb, of course that's what the numbers say. The numbers are not 50/50...and all human populations are roughly 50/50. Again this doesn't take into account the difference between population at large and applicant pool, but we don't have applicant data...


By the numbers we have access to, Helladumb's claim of racism against whites in upper education is completely eronious.

 

In the Bay Area, Women are slightly over-represented... go figure:

(all law schools per ABA)
Golden Gate: 57% Female
Davis: 56.7% Female
Berkeley: 60.8% Female WINNAR!
Santa Clara: 50.9%
Hastins: 54.2% Female
UCSF: 50.7% Female

So, if I get lonely, I'm going to drop in on Berkeley!
Look out fellas... you're going to loose your shirts in a divorce with all these women running around.... hmmmm anyone else think of Lucy Lu?

 

...good news for me, I'm applying to Berekely for next fall...

 

Law? When are you taking the LSAT? If June, maybe I'll see you there.

FYI: At Berkeley, females significantly outnumber males in every demographic.

There are 110 Asian Females versus only 60 Asian men, and 212 caucasian females versus only 151 cauc men.

This phenomenon is interesting in itself. If I were single... I could do some serious Van-Dammage!!!!

 

The fallacy in this whole argument proposed by our favorite polemic is this: neither higher education nor professional occupations comprise a perfect reflection of the make-up (racial, economic, cultural) of society at large.

If you were to look at graduate programs across the board, ranging from medicine to social work to law to counseling, you would see demographic trends not in sync with all of the different types of classifications mentioned above.

To play Dumb's advocate, I do not think that is right to base admission principles on race alone (but alas, few if any schools actually do this). Admissions should instead take into consideration socio-economic indicators instead IMO.

 

Look at what Teh Politics has inspired. Soon, we will have a fresh crop of politicos entering law school, ready to take over the world with our wicked rhetoric.

bwahaha...bwhahahahahaha

:banana:

 

No, law and politics are purely a past time for me (well...I try to know some law to keep myself out of trouble really...). I'm going to school for neuroscience somewhere in CA...either Berkeley, Davis, UCLA, or Irvine.

 

Oh neuroscience, I almost went into that. Just way to much lab work for me to really enjoy. Good luck with that you have a very bright future if you do well.

 

I agree but thats not what Hella based his argument on. He was going by population stats, in a very biased format, which didn't further his argument. I will say this though, even if we did the demographics by the amount of applicants for admission you would see a higher representation of whites vs other minorities.