.

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Status
Not open for further replies.
freemontie said:
Yes, studylater, that's it. Dragons-out-of-context are inherently more offensive than tigers. That's what you got out of my posts. Congratulations. Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...

And here's what you should have got out of mine: No one's making fun of your mom! I promise!
 
StudyLater said:
It can't be a racist comment, because tiger mothers are not exclusively Asian. Also, I've never seen this term as derogatory: quite the opposite. Your mother cares for your academic success and is willing to do anything to help you achieve your goals. How is this offensive, again?
Click to expand...

StudyLater said:
And here's what you should have got out of mine: No one's making fun of your mom! I promise!
Click to expand...

Just because a stereotype is positive doesn't mean it's a good thing, doggie. It's like saying all black kids are fast and athletic and good at sports, or all asians are good at math. You're still stereotyping a whole group of people, and arguably to their detriment. The subtext of LizzyM's statement is that the moms are so overbearing that the kids turn out to be academic geniuses with no social skills, much like the black people comment has an underlying subtext of the black kids are good at sports but are dumb.

At least, that's what my PC friends would say. I cant follow all this liberal nonsense sometimes.
 
I'm actually shocked that I agree with @freemontie about the racial implications of the term "dragon mother/tiger mom". I mean, usually I find you quite bigoted but I can't be a hypocrite and say that those terms don't connotate a stereotype about East Asian upbringings, no matter how positive.

Still, I don't think LizzyM meant to offend, although it's not your intent that matters but the effect. "Dragon mother" or "tiger mom" is probably not a term that I or any non-Asian person should use so casually jokingly or not

Anyway

OP, your question was answered a long time ago - mind ya business. Go fill out your application. Take a final or something. Be productive.
 
Wordead said:
Just because a stereotype is positive doesn't mean it's a good thing, doggie. It's like saying all black kids are fast and athletic and good at sports, or all asians are good at math. You're still stereotyping a whole group of people, and arguably to their detriment. The subtext of LizzyM's statement is that the moms are so overbearing that the kids turn out to be academic geniuses with no social skills, much like the black people comment has an underlying subtext of the black kids are good at sports but are dumb.

At least, that's what my PC friends would say. I cant follow all this liberal nonsense sometimes.
Click to expand...

Don't you know it's perfectly fine to stereotype a minority group, as long as that group is doing really well for themselves in this country? And they should be happy we're using such positive stereotypes! 🙄
 
Wordead said:
Just because a stereotype is positive doesn't mean it's a good thing, doggie. It's like saying all black kids are fast and athletic and good at sports, or all asians are good at math. You're still stereotyping a whole group of people, and arguably to their detriment. The subtext of LizzyM's statement is that the moms are so overbearing that the kids turn out to be academic geniuses with no social skills, much like the black people comment has an underlying subtext of the black kids are good at sports but are dumb.

At least, that's what my PC friends would say. I cant follow all this liberal nonsense sometimes.
Click to expand...
This. One of my good friends is an Asian medical student and people automatically think he's smart. He is, but he is socially normal. People are surprised at this, and I'm sure it pisses him off. Likewise, I am Black and people are often taken aback when I contribute something intelligent. We all like to put people in boxes. Maybe it's easier to overlook them as human beings when we do that.
 
gapyearguppy said:
I'm actually shocked that I agree with @freemontie about the racial implications of the term "dragon mother/tiger mom". I mean, usually I find you quite bigoted but I can't be a hypocrite and say that those terms don't connotate a stereotype about East Asian upbringings, no matter how positive.

Still, I don't think LizzyM meant to offend, although it's not your intent that matters but the effect. "Dragon mother" or "tiger mom" is probably not a term that I or any non-Asian person should use so casually jokingly or not

Anyway

OP, your question was answered a long time ago - mind ya business. Go fill out your application. Take a final or something. Be productive.
Click to expand...

Same here. I thought Dragon Mother was a fairly offensive term and it was certainly directed towards Asians. @freemontie is wrong about basically everything but he is right to be offended by it in my opinion.

I am actually fairly disappointed at the casual racism Asians face on this forum and elsewhere; it may not be as directed and violent as other forms of racism we see every day but it is wrong nevertheless.

So I've defended URM admission policies in basically every thread they have been discussed in but I can understand the anxiety that exists against it.

1) the policies are completely reactionary and as a result...

2) it is very difficult to come up with an a priori argument as to why they should exist or be correct to begin with but...

3) the licensing body has reason to believe the policies are effective at achieving the goal they were set out for.

4) However, there is a confusion on this forum (and in the profession in general) on how the incentives and motivations of medical schools, medical students, applicants, the medical profession and the AAMC align.

So what do we have? We have a problem where different groups of people are arguing for an against something which depends on the well defined and synergetic relationship between all five of those groups. A good argument for URM policies should first try to explain what this is.

A) SDN members have essentially defined the AAMC incentives perfectly: to better represent and serve patient populations through representation in the profession in forms not limited to and including SES, race, gender, sexuality, etc. The problem here is that I doubt there is a convincing a priori argument as to why this incentive should exist but the a posteriori defense concerning the evidence of the effects of these policies on the profession and on medical student / physician education are fairly convincing. The problem is again tha effective or not, anyone claiming to have a problem with these policies has legitimate claims given that one cannot show these claims are "good" from first principles alone the same way that one can show that racism is "bad". I think the argument that these policies are racist is garbage though but I'm not going to waste any energy explaining why since I have elsewhere. That being said, claims against URM policies are certainly legitimate insofar as they deserve a better counter argument than ones that currently exist.

B) As far as medical schools are concerned the incentives are harder to pin down. Because they are subject to a legislative body it is unlikely that any arguments in defense of URM policies from the standpoint of medical admissions holds up to a critical stance since there is a very high likelihood of misinterpreting or molding the legislative body's incentives described in A in order to fit some other goal. From the point of education the experience of race (which I have previously described as being inherent to the condition of humanity in this and every society thus far) is certainly educational and - in my opinion - necessary. Here, I actually think it is quite clear that a priori URM policies are actually "good" or at the very least "valid" in a consistent way. I provide no argument for this as I have already done so elsewhere. I do not believe it is prudent for anyone to include anything even remotely racial, joking, derogatory, sarcastic, or condescending in an argument about something as sensitive as race. Truth be told, one should not include those things in any argument if one wishes to be convincing. The argument that goes like "my argument is good you just don't get it you idiot" is worthless. Arguments should be clear and precise and the aforementioned list serves to obfuscate rather than clarify your position. I say this with the utmost respect but there should be some due deference to the people who are clearly upset - rightly or wrongly - at the implications these policies have for them and others and every effort should be made to communicate politely and directly in these arguments (a principle I am guilty of frequently violating myself, admittedly).

C) Applicants. This is the hardest group to nail down because everyone is so different and has conflicting views of A and B. Before we can even begin to talk about C every member of C should clearly understand and agree on terms for A and B and that is impossible.

Thus, I conclude that URM arguments on this board are futile until the terms I have delineated here have been convincingly and clearly defined by one or multiple legitimate bodies and everyone agrees to follow those terms. It may be the case that legitimate bodies have a clear picture of these terms but we don't all certainly agree. Perhaps we need a sticky of "here is what these words mean" for every URM thread on this forum. So these can at least be more civil and productive and less circular. I recommend as an alternative to the URM debate: Anime.
 
gapyearguppy said:
I'm actually shocked that I agree with @freemontie about the racial implications of the term "dragon mother/tiger mom". I mean, usually I find you quite bigoted but I can't be a hypocrite and say that those terms don't connotate a stereotype about East Asian upbringings, no matter how positive.

Still, I don't think LizzyM meant to offend, although it's not your intent that matters but the effect. "Dragon mother" or "tiger mom" is probably not a term that I or any non-Asian person should use so casually jokingly or not

Anyway

OP, your question was answered a long time ago - mind ya business. Go fill out your application. Take a final or something. Be productive.
Click to expand...
I have to admit you have a lot more character than me. I actually do realize that I'm extremely self-serving for asian-american issues over other minorities.

I gave @LizzyM a chance to explain via PM privately but all she did was say that she has asian colleagues and thus can't possibly be biased in any way. I publicly wonder what medical school she represents. I assume she will attempt to hide it given her anti-asian posts.

Edit: I'm serious Lizzy: Please tell us so we know not to waste $ and time applying. tell us unless you are trying to hide it
 
Last edited:
freemontie said:
I have to admit you have a lot more character than me. I actually do realize that I'm extremely self-serving for asian-american issues over other minorities.

I gave @LizzyM a chance to explain via PM privately but all she did was say that she has asian colleagues and thus can't possibly be biased in any way. I publicly wonder what medical school she represents. I assume she will attempt to hide it given her anti-asian posts.

Edit: I'm serious Lizzy: Please tell us so we know not to waste $ and time applying. tell us unless you are trying to hide it
Click to expand...
I think you need to slow your roll. None of the adcoms reveal what school they represent and for very good reasons.
 
freemontie said:
I have to admit you have a lot more character than me. I actually do realize that I'm extremely self-serving for asian-american issues over other minorities.

I gave @LizzyM a chance to explain via PM privately but all she did was say that she has asian colleagues and thus can't possibly be biased in any way. I publicly wonder what medical school she represents. I assume she will attempt to hide it given her anti-asian posts.

Edit: I'm serious Lizzy: Please tell us so we know not to waste $ and time applying. tell us unless you are trying to hide it
Click to expand...
I think you need to lay off Lizzy considering all she has done for the SDN community. She's tried to be professional and respectful, but something she said stroke a nerve...........AND now you are attempting to blackmail and threaten her. Oh boy.
 
Everyone's already said it, but just let this go. I doubt anything would happen if you snitched anyway.
 
Some of the comparisons made me think of the plot to Tarzan.
In 1491 my ancestors were in Wales am I URM? (My family has been in America for 4 generations) My skin color is very pale in the winter and very tan in the summer.

Btw what a roller coaster ride. This thread is fire.
 
anxiouslyanxious said:
THE VAST MAJORITY OF Egyptians DEFINE THEMSELVES AS ARABS and ARABS AREN'T BLACK FOR AMCAS and ARE NOT UNDERREPRESENTED IN MEDICINE. This is directly from adcom members I know. I asked bc I am North African.

Your seeing "tons of black people who look white" has NOTHING to do with the question.
Click to expand...
I am north African too and I am not an Arab. She could be a Coptic who is still keeping her true identity or a black Egyptian who also does not consider herself an Arab. She could also be an Amazigh from Siwa like I am. Or, she could be an Arab who is black. She could also just consider herself African American. How are we gonna tell which one is which, who decides?

I look white so I put white even if I am African American. My cousin looks black in the U.S. and considers herself a black amazigh (African) as the Tuareg people. Each person is different and has the right to decided what to consider themselves.

🙂
 
aminovitch said:
Each person is different and has the right to decided what to consider themselves.
🙂
Click to expand...

But obviously there has to be limits. Nearly everyone would "identify" as a URM if they could, given that it would make them more competitive. The lines are too blurry, here. And someone that falls in that blurry, gray zone seems to have a high likelihood of getting screwed out of "what race they really are" by an admissions committee.

That said, this whole thing is highly arbitrary anyway. Individuals are lucky to gain a competitive advantage as a result of being from a "different" (not already highly represented) culture in the first place, all else being equal. With no significant SES differences, a URM can have lower stats than would be acceptable for a non-URM and get in, because of the family they happened to be born into. The same goes for a lot of other arbitrary decisions made in life about people -- their family/where they were born/their SES often comes into play. It seems to me that it is what is - URMs should take what is offered to them and run with it, if they intend to be as competitive as possible.
 
Last edited:
Iamkool said:
I really don't know what to do. This girl I know has been lying about being African American for all of undergrad (I found this out because her name just got announced for the african american scholarships) and has been getting scholarships for it. Now for medical school, she is applying as African American when she is really Egyptian. The thing is, i'm afraid she might actually get away with it since she kind of looks dark skinned and has been getting away with it for all of college and been getting all these scholarships that should be going to actual African Americans. She brags about how white she is and how she only has white friends, and says very racially insensitive things. She only gets mediocre grades and a mediocre mcat (a 27) even though she comes from a privileged family so she doesn't have actual disadvantages like actual minorities but doesn't work hard because she knows she can still get in.

Should I snitch on her? idk what is the right thing to do. I feel like she is taking away a spot from someone who will actually contribute to their community.
Click to expand...
You could snitch on her, but it won't stop her from being an A**hole. She will have to live with that for the rest of her life!

MrLogan13 said:
Mind your own business.
Click to expand...
Actually this contributor is spot on in addressing this problem - abuse of affirmative action. By ignoring it, it doesn't make the race problem America has go away, it perpetuates it. People start to believe what they want to avoid thinking about race differences and 'privileges' be it 'white privilege' or abuse of affirmative action 'privilege'. By ignoring it and MYOB you will probably believe stereotypes. By pushing aside the problem you are making a choice by saying its not important to you, and your probably have never been in a difficult situation with race. You most likely are white and went to school/grew up in a neighborhood that was predominantly white. Therefore when you myob you go back into your white-hole bubble world and everything is la-de-da.

Seriously, read up on this topic before you want people to myob about something you clearly aren't aware of yourself.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
nope1955 said:
Are you serious? Last time I checked Egypt is on the continent of Africa, it is an African country, and, therefore, she is African American. She is not cheating or lying about her ethnicity because that is how she may identify herself and rightfully so. I also hope you know that being racially insensitive and being priveleged is not exclusive to non - minorities. I don't know what was the purpose of stating that. Also, even if it was a situation where she was lying, mind your own business and worry about yourself.
Click to expand...
See I always thought afirmative action was to combat the jim crow laws that perpetuated until arguably mlk jr days, not to give immigrants the upperhand. Jeesh was I wrong. I know a family that struggles who were in the Eastern bloc and struggles to find work today, why not give that family an upperhand? I mean, if their son wanted to go to medical school where are the benefits and scholarships for being oppressed socioeconomically and socially due to a language barrier? these are the reasons AA sucks. yes, I just said that.
 
LizzyM said:
American Indian and Alaska Native. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America) and who maintains tribal affiliation or community attachment.
Click to expand...
This, and then asking ...
LizzyM said:
where were your people in 1491? what are the racial and ethnic origins with which you identify? "
Click to expand...
Shows obvious lack of knowledge about how tribes work. Canada has had a recurrent issues with tribal lineages, please read up on them. They are way better reported on and understood by Canadia than the US that doesn't care. Tribal law is confusing, unethical at times, and discriminatory. Mine for instance is a matriarchy. My father was of the tribe, but my mother was not. Hence, I am unable to register as a tribal member. Thus, you saying your origins in 1491 is completely idiotic. I don't exactly look European, I don't look NA, I don't look nothing, but I'm supposed to be "white" when I am subjected to racism by my own mother's side of the family because I can't claim a matriarchal lineage? Please check yourself. These definitions are unfair and hurtful to weirdos like me who dread the "race" side of any application.
 
People never learn. Why do threads centering about the benefits certain people get regarding affirmative action and their merits still exist.
 
Bookworm36 said:
This, and then asking ...

Shows obvious lack of knowledge about how tribes work. Canada has had a recurrent issues with tribal lineages, please read up on them. They are way better reported on and understood by Canadia than the US that doesn't care. Tribal law is confusing, unethical at times, and discriminatory. Mine for instance is a matriarchy. My father was of the tribe, but my mother was not. Hence, I am unable to register as a tribal member. Thus, you saying your origins in 1491 is completely idiotic. I don't exactly look European, I don't look NA, I don't look nothing, but I'm supposed to be "white" when I am subjected to racism by my own mother's side of the family because I can't claim a matriarchal lineage? Please check yourself. These definitions are unfair and hurtful to weirdos like me who dread the "race" side of any application.
Click to expand...

Be careful, you're actively belittling an adcom who could be the one person to give you useful advice down the road.
 
Bookworm36 said:
This, and then asking ...

Shows obvious lack of knowledge about how tribes work. Canada has had a recurrent issues with tribal lineages, please read up on them. They are way better reported on and understood by Canadia than the US that doesn't care. Tribal law is confusing, unethical at times, and discriminatory. Mine for instance is a matriarchy. My father was of the tribe, but my mother was not. Hence, I am unable to register as a tribal member. Thus, you saying your origins in 1491 is completely idiotic. I don't exactly look European, I don't look NA, I don't look nothing, but I'm supposed to be "white" when I am subjected to racism by my own mother's side of the family because I can't claim a matriarchal lineage? Please check yourself. These definitions are unfair and hurtful to weirdos like me who dread the "race" side of any application.
Click to expand...


Hey, your beef is with the US Census, and maybe the US Department of the Interior, not with me. I didn't write these definitions of the racial categories. Because the definitions speak to "origins" and because some people not "native" to North America have their origins in Africa and others have their origins in Asia or Europe despite being in the US for hundreds of years in some cases, I think it makes sense to think about origins before the migration to North America that began in the early sixteenth century. In any case, the AMCAS let's you self-identify or you can "prefer not to answer". Some schools will let you write a bit about how you bring diversity to the class.
 
Bookworm36 said:
This, and then asking ...

Shows obvious lack of knowledge about how tribes work. Canada has had a recurrent issues with tribal lineages, please read up on them. They are way better reported on and understood by Canadia than the US that doesn't care. Tribal law is confusing, unethical at times, and discriminatory. Mine for instance is a matriarchy. My father was of the tribe, but my mother was not. Hence, I am unable to register as a tribal member. Thus, you saying your origins in 1491 is completely idiotic. I don't exactly look European, I don't look NA, I don't look nothing, but I'm supposed to be "white" when I am subjected to racism by my own mother's side of the family because I can't claim a matriarchal lineage? Please check yourself. These definitions are unfair and hurtful to weirdos like me who dread the "race" side of any application.
Click to expand...

Ah the good old Dunning-Kruger effect suffered by entitled premeds. From pretending to know everything about medicine to insulting adcoms.

f4reignbeauty said:
The level of disrespect in this thread is crazy high.
Click to expand...

URM threads, DO threads etc. are incredibly volatile so people throw professionalism and courtesy out the window and engage in mudslinging. Emotions soar in desperate attempts to crush any sense of reason and facts. Not fun.
 
I honestly was way more frustrated with the URM situation until I saw the raw data for practicing in poverty etc. broken down by race. People can change their mind about issues even if it is emotionally intense. Does anyone know if there is data for people of lower SES returning to practice in underserved areas?
 
Iamkool said:
I really don't know what to do. This girl I know has been lying about being African American for all of undergrad (I found this out because her name just got announced for the african american scholarships) and has been getting scholarships for it. Now for medical school, she is applying as African American when she is really Egyptian. The thing is, i'm afraid she might actually get away with it since she kind of looks dark skinned and has been getting away with it for all of college and been getting all these scholarships that should be going to actual African Americans. She brags about how white she is and how she only has white friends, and says very racially insensitive things. She only gets mediocre grades and a mediocre mcat (a 27) even though she comes from a privileged family so she doesn't have actual disadvantages like actual minorities but doesn't work hard because she knows she can still get in.

Should I snitch on her? idk what is the right thing to do. I feel like she is taking away a spot from someone who will actually contribute to their community.
Click to expand...

It's frustrating but you gain nothing. It seems like this girl's nature bothers you to the very core. She'd probably do the same to me. Just avoid her from know on. That's it.
 
Bookworm36 said:
You could snitch on her, but it won't stop her from being an A**hole. She will have to live with that for the rest of her life!


Actually this contributor is spot on in addressing this problem - abuse of affirmative action. By ignoring it, it doesn't make the race problem America has go away, it perpetuates it. People start to believe what they want to avoid thinking about race differences and 'privileges' be it 'white privilege' or abuse of affirmative action 'privilege'. By ignoring it and MYOB you will probably believe stereotypes. By pushing aside the problem you are making a choice by saying its not important to you, and your probably have never been in a difficult situation with race. You most likely are white and went to school/grew up in a neighborhood that was predominantly white. Therefore when you myob you go back into your white-hole bubble world and everything is la-de-da.

Seriously, read up on this topic before you want people to myob about something you clearly aren't aware of yourself.
Click to expand...

I'm not white, I did not grow up in a predominantly white neighborhood, and I grew up poor. I have experienced prejudice and have been on the receiving end of all types of stereotypes about my ethnicity.

What does my race, ethnicity, or SES have to do with advising someone to mind their own business? That's sound advice most of the time.
 
EthylMethylMan said:
Wow. I sure hope my future med school classmates aren't as thin-skinned and devoid of humor as some of the people posting in this thread.
Click to expand...

Um...

Hate to tell you this, but they are absolutely going to be more thin-skinned and devoid of humor than anything you see on SDN.

Have fun.
 
Hmmm...one less loose cannon. What did montie do to get herself nailed by the banhammer??

freemontie said:
Yes, studylater, that's it. Dragons-out-of-context are inherently more offensive than tigers. That's what you got out of my posts. Congratulations. Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...


Gawd, so true! Some of my students are so thin-skinned that light passes right through them.

Tired said:
Um...

Hate to tell you this, but they are absolutely going to be more thin-skinned and devoid of humor than anything you see on SDN.

Have fun.
Click to expand...
 
Goro said:
Hmmm...one less loose cannon. What did montie do to get herself nailed by the banhammer??




Gawd, so true! Some of my students are so thin-skinned that light passes right through them.
Click to expand...

And I had the poster on ignore and missed today's posts.
 
Wordead said:
Just because a stereotype is positive doesn't mean it's a good thing, doggie. It's like saying all black kids are fast and athletic and good at sports, or all asians are good at math. You're still stereotyping a whole group of people, and arguably to their detriment. The subtext of LizzyM's statement is that the moms are so overbearing that the kids turn out to be academic geniuses with no social skills, much like the black people comment has an underlying subtext of the black kids are good at sports but are dumb.

At least, that's what my PC friends would say. I cant follow all this liberal nonsense sometimes.
Click to expand...

Not at all!

I was more thinking about a frantic race to the top with bigger, better, higher, stronger. It is an arms race that no one will call a truce on and so there is escalation with every greater effort and sacrifice beyond what is really necessary to succeed in medical school but everyone is outdoing each other in the race into medical school. Of course, we aren't ever going to get everyone to slow down and work hard but with moderation until something makes medical school so unattractive and a career in medicine so undesirable that the number of applicants is only slightly above the number of openings.
 
MrLogan13 said:
I'm Asian and am not offended by the terms Dragon Mother or Tiger Mother. I don't consider it racist and, as a child of immigrant parents, think of it as a positive. My mother could be described as a tiger mother when she was still here, and it would be an accurate description. I don't see any ill intent in LizzyM's posting. Sometimes a figure of speech is just a figure of speech. There's no need to be so sensitive about everything.
Click to expand...

There are definitely Asian-Americans who would be offended by that, much like there are groups of people who are offended by phrases and terms associated with controversial connotations.

There are Native Americans who are supporitve of the "Redskin" team name, but that doesn't mean take away from the word's original meaning and implications.

EthylMethylMan said:
Wow. I sure hope my future med school classmates aren't as thin-skinned and devoid of humor as some of the people posting in this thread.
Click to expand...

don't tell me that saying someone having "Dragon parents" serves as satire to you.
 
I love this topic. I could discuss this all day. Seriously, its fun.

LizzyM said:
MCAS let's you self-identify or you can "prefer not to answer". So
Click to expand...
On another thread, someone said this actually makes one look worse to adcoms, so I'm not sure I would do this but it would make me feel better. Yes, I concur about it being the US census. That is the reason why I suggested learning about Canada. The US is uncomfortable and/or doesn't have the resources to understand tribal law and/or simply doesn't care and/or is horrified by the notion of a matriarchy (that was a joke, most of those jokes).

It is a touchy subject with people who don't feel like they belong to one census category or not for those who aren't understanding why pre-meds may have 'thin-skin' to this type of stuff. I just want to be treated equal and fair. But, hey, as the saying goes: Life ain't fair!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MrLogan13 said:
That's sound advice most of the time.
Click to expand...
if everyone myob all the time, there would never be any change (referring to social change and civil action Not Hipaa mmm K?). Didn't you learn to question anything as an UG?
 
Nothing is meant as an insult. This is who I am and how I have struggled to understand how I'm supposed to report my ethnicity. Walk in my shoes and show no frustration and I will show you a robot.

Adding Edit: I refute your labeling me as displaying a Dunning-Kruger effect. #1 since when did wikipedia have the best definition of anything #2 I'm talking about my personal situation not making generalizations, so where are you getting this assumption?
Lawper said:
Ah the good old Dunning-Kruger effect suffered by entitled premeds. From pretending to know everything about medicine to insulting adcoms.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lucca said:
Same here. I thought Dragon Mother was a fairly offensive term and it was certainly directed towards Asians. @freemontie is wrong about basically everything but he is right to be offended by it in my opinion.

I am actually fairly disappointed at the casual racism Asians face on this forum and elsewhere; it may not be as directed and violent as other forms of racism we see every day but it is wrong nevertheless.

So I've defended URM admission policies in basically every thread they have been discussed in but I can understand the anxiety that exists against it.

1) the policies are completely reactionary and as a result...

2) it is very difficult to come up with an a priori argument as to why they should exist or be correct to begin with but...

3) the licensing body has reason to believe the policies are effective at achieving the goal they were set out for.

4) However, there is a confusion on this forum (and in the profession in general) on how the incentives and motivations of medical schools, medical students, applicants, the medical profession and the AAMC align.

So what do we have? We have a problem where different groups of people are arguing for an against something which depends on the well defined and synergetic relationship between all five of those groups. A good argument for URM policies should first try to explain what this is.

A) SDN members have essentially defined the AAMC incentives perfectly: to better represent and serve patient populations through representation in the profession in forms not limited to and including SES, race, gender, sexuality, etc. The problem here is that I doubt there is a convincing a priori argument as to why this incentive should exist but the a posteriori defense concerning the evidence of the effects of these policies on the profession and on medical student / physician education are fairly convincing. The problem is again tha effective or not, anyone claiming to have a problem with these policies has legitimate claims given that one cannot show these claims are "good" from first principles alone the same way that one can show that racism is "bad". I think the argument that these policies are racist is garbage though but I'm not going to waste any energy explaining why since I have elsewhere. That being said, claims against URM policies are certainly legitimate insofar as they deserve a better counter argument than ones that currently exist.

B) As far as medical schools are concerned the incentives are harder to pin down. Because they are subject to a legislative body it is unlikely that any arguments in defense of URM policies from the standpoint of medical admissions holds up to a critical stance since there is a very high likelihood of misinterpreting or molding the legislative body's incentives described in A in order to fit some other goal. From the point of education the experience of race (which I have previously described as being inherent to the condition of humanity in this and every society thus far) is certainly educational and - in my opinion - necessary. Here, I actually think it is quite clear that a priori URM policies are actually "good" or at the very least "valid" in a consistent way. I provide no argument for this as I have already done so elsewhere. I do not believe it is prudent for anyone to include anything even remotely racial, joking, derogatory, sarcastic, or condescending in an argument about something as sensitive as race. Truth be told, one should not include those things in any argument if one wishes to be convincing. The argument that goes like "my argument is good you just don't get it you idiot" is worthless. Arguments should be clear and precise and the aforementioned list serves to obfuscate rather than clarify your position. I say this with the utmost respect but there should be some due deference to the people who are clearly upset - rightly or wrongly - at the implications these policies have for them and others and every effort should be made to communicate politely and directly in these arguments (a principle I am guilty of frequently violating myself, admittedly).

C) Applicants. This is the hardest group to nail down because everyone is so different and has conflicting views of A and B. Before we can even begin to talk about C every member of C should clearly understand and agree on terms for A and B and that is impossible.

Thus, I conclude that URM arguments on this board are futile until the terms I have delineated here have been convincingly and clearly defined by one or multiple legitimate bodies and everyone agrees to follow those terms. It may be the case that legitimate bodies have a clear picture of these terms but we don't all certainly agree. Perhaps we need a sticky of "here is what these words mean" for every URM thread on this forum. So these can at least be more civil and productive and less circular. I recommend as an alternative to the URM debate: Anime.
Click to expand...
😍
 
Bookworm36 said:
That is the reason why I suggested learning about Canada. The US is uncomfortable and/or doesn't have the resources to understand tribal law and/or simply doesn't care and/or is horrified by the notion of a matriarchy (that was a joke, most of those jokes).
Click to expand...

"Let's all learn about Canada!"

... said no American ever. 😎
 
*facepalm*
Egypt is in Africa...


Just let it be. From what I understand adcoms are pretty good at seeing through the lies.
 
resiroth said:
I honestly was way more frustrated with the URM situation until I saw the raw data for practicing in poverty etc. broken down by race. People can change their mind about issues even if it is emotionally intense. Does anyone know if there is data for people of lower SES returning to practice in underserved areas?
Click to expand...

I think these kinds of threads can be productive and lead to meaningful discussions. There are a lot of generalizations thrown out from both sides of the debate but, if you dig through the rubbish, you can often learn something.

Do you have a link to these studies you've seen. Did they break down the outcomes by African American, African, or Carribean? Also did they factor in the HBCU's and Puerto Rican medical school graduates which, due to the importance of their missions, may skew the outcome data. Did the studies also track step 1 scores? It could be possible that, given the lower standard of admission, many benefactors of affirmative action could be relegated to primary care in underserved areas due to low test scores but may have otherwise made a different choice.
 
Cavs5284 said:
I think these kinds of threads can be productive and lead to meaningful discussions. There are a lot of generalizations thrown out from both sides of the debate but, if you dig through the rubbish, you can often learn something.

Do you have a link to these studies you've seen. Did they break down the outcomes by African American, African, or Carribean? Also did they factor in the HBCU's and Puerto Rican medical school graduates which, due to the importance of their missions, may skew the outcome data. Did the studies also track step 1 scores? It could be possible that, given the lower standard of admission, many benefactors of affirmative action could be relegated to primary care in underserved areas due to low test scores but may have otherwise made a different choice.
Click to expand...
resiroth said:
https://www.aamc.org/download/401814/data/aug2014aibpart2.pdf 30% more likely to practice in poverty. 20% more likely to practice in primary care. ~40

Asians seem to be the reverse, much less likely to practice in primary care. Interesting.

Also: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/22708247/
Click to expand...


based on this: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11739053 it seems URM get lower step 1 scores (again lower standards for MCAT translate to lower standards on step 1).

That being said it seems like medical school are accepting lower stat URM applicants, and these applicants end up serving in underserved areas. The net effect is that there are more african american doctors/people that people in those communities are more likely to trust. I don't see this as a particularly bad thing.
 
gapyearguppy said:
@Bookworm36 what are you even talking about?

Anyway, freemontie is banned?
Ding dong the witch is dead!
Click to expand...
I'm not even sure anymore....yours & @Tired's comments got me up in stitches. :laugh:


Getting back to the topic, apologize about the self-absorbed rant ...
Even if one did snitch it doesn't change the fact that that person is a **** and will always be that way, and you might look like a **** for being a tattletale. Best to just do a 180 and walk forward. Noone needs that negativity in your life.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top