Entitlement and the Olympiad of Oppression

[terp720]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Maybe I should've phrased my post better. I meant entitlement as in if these rights were taken away, there would be revolts. The government doesn't have a responsibility to give us all that we have; we are given it because the government decided to give it to us. We did not earn our freedom (our ancestors did), so we are benefiting from other people's work. But we call those "rights" because we think they are something we are entitled to (and we are since it's the law). But like I said, the moment those "rights" are taken away, people will revolt (including me and you), because we feel entitled to what we call basic rights. Technically, though, the government isn't required to give us any of the luxuries we consider rights.

I don't think this is really using entitled in the same sense as OP is using it.. because we are legally entitled to our rights and we can revolt if the government were to deny them.
Yes, I think we should feel very fortunate to live in a country like the US, given the conditions in many other countries, but just because other countries give their citizens so few rights and freedoms, doesn't mean American's "entitlement" is unfounded.

 

[sourdoughllama]

I don't think this is really using entitled in the same sense as OP is using it.. because we are legally entitled to our rights and we can revolt if the government were to deny them.
Yes, I think we should feel very fortunate to live in a country like the US, given the conditions in many other countries, but just because other countries give their citizens so few rights and freedoms, doesn't mean American's "entitlement" is unfounded.

No I certainly get that. Complaining about a spot in Med school is not the same as complaining about not having rights. But we do have numerous government services that are not protected by the constitution (nice freeways, for example) that we would complain if they were not given to us. Those aren't really rights, but luxuries we are accustomed to.

 

[baconshrimps]

Lol okay this argument is not going anywhere haha. But please do not say I am talking crap about America, that actually really offends me 🙁. If you've read my posts on this forum, I have vehemently defended America. I'm an immigrant of 12 years and I am very grateful to be here. So please don't say that I talk **** about America, or tell me to leave America

Sorry, it was not meant to offend.
The "leave America" was more for comic relief than anything. Yes, it sucks that other nations do not have as many freedoms as we do, but that doesn't make it something we should be apologetic for. I realize that I am fortunate to be an American, but I will never admit that I am over-privileged or "entitled" by virtue of living in America and being an American.


Bacon.
BBQ.
Football.
The Blue Angels.
Eagles.
Babe Ruth.
Chevrolet.
Route 66.
I love it all.

 

[baconshrimps]

No I certainly get that. Complaining about a spot in Med school is not the same as complaining about not having rights. But we do have numerous government services that are not protected by the constitution (nice freeways, for example) that we would complain if they were not given to us. Those aren't really rights, but luxuries we are accustomed to.

"Pursuit of Happiness" covers that.
Do you pay taxes? Guess what, your money helped build and maintain those roads - you damn sure have a right to use them.

 

[sourdoughllama]

"Pursuit of Happiness" covers that.
Do you pay taxes? Guess what, your money helped build and maintain those roads - you damn sure have a right to use them.

Okay dude you're entitlement free lol happy?

 

[baconshrimps]

Okay dude you're entitlement free lol happy?

Yep.

 

[Reckoner]

So are we done with this frivolous side argument? Please? Anyway here's a pretty decent piece that went up on Medium recently: https://medium.com/matter/94d214257b5

It's long but worth the read. I disagree with some of it, but overall it does a nice job exploring the roots of today's high levels of entitlement and narcissism

 

[knv2u]

This ended well.

 

[hubriz]

So are we done with this frivolous side argument? Please? Anyway here's a pretty decent piece that went up on Medium recently: https://medium.com/matter/94d214257b5

It's long but worth the read. I disagree with some of it, but overall it does a nice job exploring the roots of today's high levels of entitlement and narcissism

Awesome and relevant read - thanks for sharing.

"The problem seemed to be that high self-esteem is a mixed category. Some who have it are presumably healthily and accurately confident in themselves. Their sociometers are functioning well. “If you went up to Einstein and told him he was stupid,” says Baumeister, “he’s not going to get mad.” Narcissism, though, is different: It’s the desire to feel you’re superior. “Narcissists believe they deserve to be treated better than other people,” he says. They also lack the moral values of people with genuine high self-esteem."

With exception, I consider admission into medical school to be earned. Therefore, I cannot find it offensive that aspiring students feel entitled to attend a medical school. I have met many folks along the interview trail and otherwise that I believe deserve to attend medical school, a belief that I hope they would share. Their outlook and attitude towards admission may understandably be different than less competitive applicants, but no less or more significant.

I posted the above quote, because I consider entitlement to similarly be a mixed-bag. Some folks who feel entitled to entering into the fray of medicine are healthily and accurately confident in the strength of their application; i.e. they are superior applicants and know it, and therefore not likely to seek validation (by posting on SDN, for example). The other entitled folks have the desire to feel superior; i.e. they are narcissistic. The OP probably refers to the latter group, who, in my opinion are the ones that seek validation and enjoy marketing themselves as something they are not.

We should be careful about grouping these together.

 

[NontradCA]

Sorry, it was not meant to offend.
The "leave America" was more for comic relief than anything. Yes, it sucks that other nations do not have as many freedoms as we do, but that doesn't make it something we should be apologetic for. I realize that I am fortunate to be an American, but I will never admit that I am over-privileged or "entitled" by virtue of living in America and being an American.


Bacon.
BBQ.
Football.
The Blue Angels.
Eagles.
Babe Ruth.
Chevrolet.
Route 66.
I love it all.

Have you ever driven on Route 66? I did, across country. There's nothing to love about it 🙂.

 

[NuttyEngDude]

Have you ever driven on Route 66? I did, across country. There's nothing to love about it 🙂.

It was probably a cool thing to do in the 60's, but times and towns change.

 

[boomshaketheroom]

Okay, seriously, you're talking $#!T about America. Leave. Not the thread, you may stay here if you like - but leave America, lol.
Have you ever heard of the constitution? THOSE ARE OUR RIGHTS. This country was founded on those rights as basic tenets of living. The fathers of America revolted against the tyrant King George in order to ensure that their children and their childrens children and their childrens childrens children and so on and so forth would enjoy those freedoms. We elect individuals that we trust to maintain those rights for us. The government, in the United States, absolutely does have that responsibility - that is precisely why the American government was established.

Thats debatable.. Luckily the Fathers of America got to write the history books, eh?

 

[qtpai]

Friends, what we have here is a perfect example of people reading in between the lines, what they want to read in between the lines.
Frankly, my post is very transparent and straight forward. You're misconstruing every point I have made, and further you are reacting to it in a very negative way. If you in fact are about to start medical school, maybe its time to think about growing up ;-)
Lets try and keep things civil.
P.S., as I said in my original post, you're not special and noone cares.

I apologize if I took on a tone that you felt was uncivil. It wasn't my goal to be insulting. I showed this thread to my fiancee, because I wanted a reality check on what I posted. She said it was awesome, then she quoted several lines from your post. I informed her that this wasn't the post I was talking about, that I was arguing against it. She said that it looked like something I could have thought.

She received a long beating for that one.

Seriously, though, it's true. Your post resonates with me in some way. It's the kind of thing that I like reading. I posted what I did in response to your post because I thought yours had value. At the same time, I am reacting against the part of the post that I disagree with. And it was said earlier in this thread--who defines "entitled" here? Whose definition of the situation is correct, or privileged?

For my own part, I offered a corrective against a point of view that I, personally, found insulting: feeling like my concerns were being dismissed as some sort of mere personal problem.

My concrete argument: look at history, who were accused of being "whiners" during the 1960s? Look at anyone who has rejected their personal limitations at the moment and looked outside for solutions. That's where progress comes from.

I do not feel that I have misread this aspect of your post--that it is basically conservative in its orientation. If this did not occur to you, this does not therefore mean I am misreading your post.

Also, I am special. I am a beautiful, beautiful snowflake.

 

[touchpause13]

I apologize if I took on a tone that you felt was uncivil. It wasn't my goal to be insulting. I showed this thread to my fiancee, because I wanted a reality check on what I posted. She said it was awesome, then she quoted several lines from your post. I informed her that this wasn't the post I was talking about, that I was arguing against it. She said that it looked like something I could have thought.

She received a long beating for that one.

Seriously, I posted what I did in response to your post because I thought yours had value. I wouldn't have spent the time I did if I didn't think that. At the same time--and it was said earlier in this thread--who defines "entitled" here? Whose definition of the situation is correct, or privileged?

For my own part, I offered a corrective against a point of view that I, personally, found insulting: feeling like my concerns were being dismissed as some sort of mere personal problem.

My concrete argument: look at history, who were accused of being "whiners" during the 1960s? Look at anyone who has rejected their personal limitations at the moment and looked outside for solutions. That's where progress comes from.

I do not feel that I have misread this aspect of your post--that it is basically conservative in its orientation. If this did not occur to you, this does not therefore mean I am misreading your post.

Also, I am special. I am a beautiful, beautiful snowflake.

Wow. I wasn't going to get into this, but you are a serious douchebag. Your post disgusts me.

 

[qtpai]

Why?

 

[touchpause13]

Are you freaking serious? Domestic violence isn't funny, you turd

 

[repititionition]

Okay, seriously, you're talking $#!T about America. Leave. Not the thread, you may stay here if you like - but leave America, lol.

You're right - change should never happen from within.

Your love it or leave it mindset ends at the lowest common denominator.

Have you ever heard of the constitution? THOSE ARE OUR RIGHTS. This country was founded on those rights as basic tenets of living. The fathers of America revolted against the tyrant King George in order to ensure that their children and their childrens children and their childrens childrens children and so on and so forth would enjoy those freedoms. We elect individuals that we trust to maintain those rights for us. The government, in the United States, absolutely does have that responsibility - that is precisely why the American government was established.

Beyond the need for possessive apostrophes, I'm sure you do see the irony of holding up slave owners as the paragons of equality.

WTF is with all of these gigantic screeds lately? I can let small doses of self-importance slide, but posters these days are just really DEMANDING to let you know how important their avalanches of thoughts are.

People, there are Op-Ed pages just waiting for submissions...

 

[qtpai]

Are you freaking serious? Domestic violence isn't funny, you turd

What about domestic violence between clowns?

 

[sourdoughllama]

.

 

[fuzzytoad]

Entitlement implies that the entitled should not have to work at a goal, as if it were their birthright. There are many people who deserve to go to med school - who are bright, kind-hearted, hard-working; who genuinely want to be doctors and would be damn good at it.

To dismiss them as "entitled" would undermine the whole idea that hard work should (ie. deserves to be) rewarded.

(That said, I do believe that the spirit of your post was targeted toward the former class of entitled pricks - I just wanted to make a clarification).

 

[baconshrimps]

Entitlement implies that the entitled should not have to work at a goal, as if it were their birthright. There are many people who deserve to go to med school - who are bright, kind-hearted, hard-working; who genuinely want to be doctors and would be damn good at it.

To dismiss them as "entitled" would undermine the whole idea that hard work should (ie. deserves to be) rewarded.

(That said, I do believe that the spirit of your post was targeted toward the former class of entitled pricks - I just wanted to make a clarification).

Correct.

 

[touchpause13]

I think he meant verbal beating.

Do you actually think I care?

 

[BamaNicole]

I think he meant verbal beating.

a "verbal beating" is still verbal ABUSE.

It doesn't excuse it.

 

[hubriz]

a "verbal beating" is still verbal ABUSE.

It doesn't excuse it.

I believe it was a joke, albeit one of extremely poor taste, which has effectively derailed the entire topic at hand.

 

[touchpause13]

It wasn't funny, it was inappropriate and offensive and he needed to get called out on it

 

[BamaNicole]

I believe it was a joke, albeit one of extremely poor taste, which has effectively derailed the entire topic at hand.

totally not funny....especially in our horrible rape culture. Making a joke about any sort of violence against women needs to stop.

 

[Syndicate]

i lost track of this thread when it got to the constitution and king george..

 

[qtpai]

What the hell is wrong with you people. I kiss my fiancee's ass enough as it is. Please let me have a pathetic moment of freedom on an Internet messageboard.

 

[touchpause13]

What the hell is wrong with you? You made a domestic violence joke, did you seriously expect no one would pick up on that?

 

[baconshrimps]

So, in an effort to re-rail the thread, a distinction that I had failed to provide was aptly pointed out by @fuzzytoad :

Entitlement implies that the entitled should not have to work at a goal, as if it were their birthright. There are many people who deserve to go to med school - who are bright, kind-hearted, hard-working; who genuinely want to be doctors and would be damn good at it.

To dismiss them as "entitled" would undermine the whole idea that hard work should (ie. deserves to be) rewarded.

(That said, I do believe that the spirit of your post was targeted toward the former class of entitled pricks - I just wanted to make a clarification).

Hard work should pay off. However, there are people out there who put in the time and effort, and EXPECT that it will yield the acceptance. Given the amount of qualified applicants that get turned away in a given app cycle, allowing oneself to fall into this mentality of "okay, I did the work, I put in the time, I made the sacrifices, so I deserve to go to medical school" is toxic.

 

[Patassa]

If I've put myself in a position to be judged by someone else, my emotions about myself would seem to be irrelevant. Who cares if I think I do or don't deserve to be in medical school, that's not my call. When I decided to apply to medical school, I signed up for the process, knowing full well that my fate would be decided by others.

 

[Bulbasaur]

@baconshrimps While I agree with you for the most part, I still think that you can easily distinguish someone who deserves to get into med school vs. someone who doesn't. If you get bad grades and end up with a 3.0, I think it's pretty clear to everyone that you don't deserve an acceptance. But if you worked hard to earn high numbers and etc, then you do deserve an acceptance. I'm sure there are plenty of 3.8+ with great apps and no red flags who end up getting in nowhere, but hey, that is life. In all aspects of life, you will find things that are unfair or unreasonable. Medical school admissions is no different. So I think people who have the numbers and etc going into the process with the "i deserve an acceptance" attitude should not be chided, although they should try not to let this kind of attitude show during interviews and in general. They worked hard to earn those grades, mcat scores, research, volunteering, lors, etc so technically, they do deserve a medical school spot over someone who didn't earn as much as him or her.

 

[Patassa]

@baconshrimps They worked hard to earn those grades, mcat scores, research, volunteering, lors, etc so technically, they do deserve a medical school spot over someone who didn't earn as much as him or her.

What you're describing is what would happen in a meritocracy. We don't live in one of those, so technically you can't say what someone does or doesn't deserve. You're not the one holding the measuring stick, the adcoms are and they are a democracy acting as a dictator.

 

[hubriz]

totally not funny....especially in our horrible rape culture. Making a joke about any sort of violence against women needs to stop.

I wouldn't classify my culture as one of rape. Nor do I believe that a bad-joke deserves this much attention. Violence needs to stop, not just against women.

 

[Bulbasaur]

What you're describing is what would happen in a meritocracy. We don't live in one of those, so technically you can't say what someone does or doesn't deserve. You're not the one holding the measuring stick, the adcoms are and they are a democracy acting as a dictator.

Yes, I know that. But for the most part, adcoms are objective. Why else would med school gpa/mcat averages all be 3.5+/30+, not to mention everyone accepted has done some sort of volunteering or have other experiences?

 

[Patassa]

I wouldn't classify my culture as one of rape. Nor do I believe that a bad-joke deserves this much attention. Violence needs to stop, not just against women.

Maybe she meant "rap" culture.

 

[baconshrimps]

Several things:

@baconshrimps While I agree with you for the most part, I still think that you can easily distinguish someone who deserves to get into med school vs. someone who doesn't. If you get bad grades and end up with a 3.0, I think it's pretty clear to everyone that you don't deserve an acceptance. But if you worked hard to earn high numbers and etc, then you do deserve an acceptance. I'm sure there are plenty of 3.8+ with great apps and no red flags who end up getting in nowhere, but hey, that is life. In all aspects of life, you will find things that are unfair or unreasonable. Medical school admissions is no different. So I think people who have the numbers and etc going into the process with the "i deserve an acceptance" attitude should not be chided, although they should try not to let this kind of attitude show during interviews and in general. They worked hard to earn those grades, mcat scores, research, volunteering, lors, etc so technically, they do deserve a medical school spot over someone who didn't earn as much as him or her.

You do realize that this (bolded) is a central argument that gets tossed out in the URM debate, right? There are alot of intangibles that go into this process, and its not up to anyone as an individual to say "I deserve to go to medical school", either on their application, out loud, or in thought.

See the following:

If I've put myself in a position to be judged by someone else, my emotions about myself would seem to be irrelevant. Who cares if I think I do or don't deserve to be in medical school, that's not my call. When I decided to apply to medical school, I signed up for the process, knowing full well that my fate would be decided by others.

Spot on. It's too bad more people do not have this kind of humility, whether they are an accomplished applicant or a hopeless applicant.

 

[hubriz]

So, in an effort to re-rail the thread, a distinction that I had failed to provide was aptly pointed out by @fuzzytoad :



Hard work should pay off. However, there are people out there who put in the time and effort, and EXPECT that it will yield the acceptance. Given the amount of qualified applicants that get turned away in a given app cycle, allowing oneself to fall into this mentality of "okay, I did the work, I put in the time, I made the sacrifices, so I deserve to go to medical school" is toxic.

I disagree. As I indicated before, I believe people can be healthily and accurately confident in the strength of their application, and therefore expect to be accepted or not. A reasonable person knows that anomalies do occur and that nothing is guaranteed, but expectations are not about being 100% certain.

Heck, if I didn't expect to get accepted, I wouldn't have applied.

 

[Bulbasaur]

Several things:



You do realize that this (bolded) is a central argument that gets tossed out in the URM debate, right? There are alot of intangibles that go into this process, and its not up to anyone as an individual to say "I deserve to go to medical school", either on their application, out loud, or in thought.

regarding URMs, please read what I wrote on a similar thread about URM-advantage:

==========
Why are natives and blacks so underrepresented in medicine in the first place? It's because they did not "start" in this country at the same time as whites did. Whites "lived" in this country since 1776. Blacks "lived" in this country since 1965, and Natives basically never "lived" in this country. When I say lived, I mean having equal rights, opportunities, etc. White Americans have had all the opportunities this country can offer ever since the Declaration was signed in 1776. Blacks have been subjugated as slaves till 1865, and then discriminated against till 1965, so they did not enjoy the same rights, freedom, and opportunities until 1965. Natives have occupied North America for the longest time but they technically have never "lived" in the USA because white america has constantly been driving Native Americans off their lands ever since Columbus arrived until the 20th century.

THE ABOVE REASONS ARE WHY NATIVES AND BLACKS ARE SO UNDERREPRESENTED IN MEDICINE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

You cannot simply make the argument that "all slave owners + their grandchildren have died" because that doesn't rid the hundreds of years of guilt that white americans are rightfully tainted with. I am a white american, and even though I am not racist, I admit that I am guilty of what has happened in the past. My ancestors probably have enslaved blacks, forced natives off their lands, etc. Those crimes do not stop just because the perpetrators died. Those crimes created a rippling effect on future generations of blacks and native americans and that is why they are so underrepresented in the elite positions of society. Affirmative action for natives and blacks are just a small way of paying back our debt.
==========

Also, I agree that all applicants are putting their dreams in the hands of adcoms. But we have to trust that the adcoms will act in the best interests of the medical school and accept, for the most part, the high numbers + etc applicants. There are obviously plenty of exceptions where people with a 3.8/35 may end up getting into nowhere but if you look at the AAMC table, this is a very small minority.

 

[Patassa]

Yes, I know that. But for the most part, adcoms are objective. Why else would med school gpa/mcat averages all be 3.5+/30+, not to mention everyone accepted has done some sort of volunteering or have other experiences?

I think your confusing the objective parts of the application with people being objective in their assessments. The fact that we are even having this discussion about the admissions process means that the adcoms are not objective.

 

[Patassa]

regarding URMs, please read what I wrote on a similar thread about URM-advantage:

==========
Why are natives and blacks so underrepresented in medicine in the first place? It's because they did not "start" in this country at the same time as whites did. Whites "lived" in this country since 1776. Blacks "lived" in this country since 1965, and Natives basically never "lived" in this country. When I say lived, I mean having equal rights, opportunities, etc. White Americans have had all the opportunities this country can offer ever since the Declaration was signed in 1776. Blacks have been subjugated as slaves till 1865, and then discriminated against till 1965, so they did not enjoy the same rights, freedom, and opportunities until 1965. Natives have occupied North America for the longest time but they technically have never "lived" in the USA because white america has constantly been driving Native Americans off their lands ever since Columbus arrived until the 20th century.

THE ABOVE REASONS ARE WHY NATIVES AND BLACKS ARE SO UNDERREPRESENTED IN MEDICINE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

You cannot simply make the argument that "all slave owners + their grandchildren have died" because that doesn't rid the hundreds of years of guilt that white americans are rightfully tainted with. I am a white american, and even though I am not racist, I admit that I am guilty of what has happened in the past. My ancestors probably have enslaved blacks, forced natives off their lands, etc. Those crimes do not stop just because the perpetrators died. Those crimes created a rippling effect on future generations of blacks and native americans and that is why they are so underrepresented in the elite positions of society. Affirmative action for natives and blacks are just a small way of paying back our debt.
==========

Also, I agree that all applicants are putting their dreams in the hands of adcoms. But we have to trust that the adcoms will act in the best interests of the medical school and accept, for the most part, the high numbers + etc applicants. There are obviously plenty of exceptions where people with a 3.8/35 may end up getting into nowhere but if you look at the AAMC table, this is a very small minority.

Crap, not this again. Someone call a mod, shut it down, it's imminent.

 

[qtpai]

What the hell is wrong with you? You made a domestic violence joke, did you seriously expect no one would pick up on that?

No, I'm glad you responded. I just didn't expect such an absolute and strong response, much less a derail. Nothing I have said here reflects my true opinions on this issue. I want to be clear. E.g. I do not believe that real-world domestic abuse is funny, much less violence between clowns. I do think that the idea of me beating my fiancee is funny, but only as an idea. I was wrong for expecting total strangers to understand this--I still don't expect for you to understand it. Because I did not take into account the opinions of strangers, and behaved much like I do among my friends in real life (wrongly), my posting on the topic has been a complete failure.

I do have another opinion I would like to put forth, one that is more complicated than an outright ban on discussion or jokes, but that will have to wait for another thread. I appreciate your outspokenness on the things that matter to you.

 

[touchpause13]

No, I'm glad you responded. I just didn't expect such an absolute and strong response, much less a derail. Nothing I have said here reflects my true opinions on this issue. I want to be clear. E.g. I do not believe that real-world domestic abuse is funny, much less violence between clowns. I do think that the idea of me beating my fiancee is funny, but only as an idea. I was wrong for expecting total strangers to understand this--I still don't expect for you to understand it. Because I did not take into account the opinions of strangers, and behaved much like I do among my friends in real life (wrongly), my posting on the topic has been a complete failure.

I do have another opinion I would like to put forth, one that is more complicated than an outright ban on discussion or jokes, but that will have to wait for another thread. I appreciate your outspokenness on the things that matter to you.

I'm not going to pretend to understand, but I see where you are coming from. I'm no saint, and I'd be lying if I said I've never said anything inappropriate behind closed doors. But that's where it stayed. Jokes between my husband and I stay between the two of us.

I never thought that you are actually an abuser, but using that type of language in public can make a survivor of abuse feel like absolute shet.

So we'll move on from this, I won't hold a grudge against you or anything. However I hope you in the future are more cognizant of your audience. You don't know who we are behind our keyboards and a comment like that could ruin someone's day.

 

[touchpause13]

So jokes about violence against men are no problem for you?

Jokes about domestic violence or rape (with a few exceptions) are unacceptable IMO. Regardless of the gender of the victim or abuser.

 

[touchpause13]

Let me be more clear. Jokes where the victim of sexual or domestic violence (or any violence really) are horrible and unacceptable.

Jokes about rape in which the abuser or the general culture is the butt of the joke, can be very funny. Sarah Silverman, Wanda Sykes, and Louis CK all have great bits like this.

 

[baconshrimps]

I disagree. As I indicated before, I believe people can be healthily and accurately confident in the strength of their application, and therefore expect to be accepted or not. A reasonable person knows that anomalies do occur and that nothing is guaranteed, but expectations are not about being 100% certain.

Heck, if I didn't expect to get accepted, I wouldn't have applied.

Somehow, I have not made myself clear.

We are not discussing reasonable people. The types of people in question here, are those who in the end, point a finger at the subjectivity of the admissions process, URM advantage/ORM disadvantage, among other things, as the reason why they did not get into medical school, as opposed to more "There were probabably 15 other applicants at each medical school I applied to just like me, and the school could only take one such applicant out of our group."

I didn't think I would get accepted this year - I still applied anyway. There are no guarantees in life sir. You put your best foot-forward and hope that your merits will be recognized. Why did I feel a need for my OP? Because SDN is littered with such applicants who believe they DESERVE to go to medical school, whether or not such a consensus exists among ADCOMS.

Further, consider one of the other points I made in my OP. Imagine an applicant with a 4.0 and a 39 MCAT, and assume they have some of the cookie cutter EC's. Come May 15th, this applicant has only been accepted to one medical school, lets say a middle-tier program like Loyola or SUNY Buffalo. They received waitlists at 7 of the top 25 schools they interviewed at, and no other acceptances. Now, given the fiercely competitive nature of admissions, this could be seen as an anomaly - the applicant has obviously proven themselves academically and their application made a big enough splash at a number of schools to warrant several interviews. This person is now ANNOYED that they have only been accepted to Loyola, as opposed to say Columbia University or Baylor College of Medicine. I would say this person has a rather inflated ego - they have the opportunity to become a physician - the opportunity to earn an MD in the United States. Just because this person was able to put together a strong application, does that mean they absolutely DESERVE to go to one of these top 25 schools? Their merits have been recognized at a school they chose to apply to. There was some other thread here on SDN where someone had been accepted to Boston University, but didn't think it was "prestigious enough" or highly ranked enough to matriculate this year, and were contemplating withdrawing their application and re-applying to medical school in a subsequent cycle. Really?!?! Accepted to Boston University, and you're going to come out and say "I deserve better than this."? This is the kind of mentality among applicants that I am talking about.

I'm not talking about the "Man, I'm really, REALLY dissapointed I didn't get accepted this year. I put in the work and I really thought this was the year it would happen for me, getting into medical school." but instead the "I CANT BELIEVE I DIDN'T GET IN. I HAVE THE SOLID GRADES AND THE MCAT AND I'VE SACRIFICED WAY MORE THAN MOST APPLICANTS PROBABLY HAVE SACRIFICED." In reality, in the grand scheme of things, when it comes to these kinds of intangibles, you can't know how you stack up against to the others. Certainly if you are a single mother who worked part time and went to college full time while raising a child and pulled off a 3.7 and a 36 MCAT, chances are there are few others in a given application cycle who can provide that same story. But what about the Bosnian immigrant who escaped genocide in his rural village and made it to the U.S. in search of a more promising life, and in doing so earned a 3.9 GPA in a hard major at some no-name university but still rocked their MCAT, all the while being financially self-sustaining? Could you rank one of these people over the other? Probably not, but you can say that these individuals have overcome odds that few other applicants in a given year probably did. Yet those other applicants might not know about these kinds of individuals applying to medical school in the same year as them, so who are these other generic applicants to say that they've sacrificed more than anyone else? Who are they to say that other people haven't overcome the same kinds of adversity? This is what I am talking about, and these are the kinds of applicants I am talking about when I speak of this sense of self-acclaim and entitlement.

 

[hubriz]

Somehow, I have not made myself clear.

We are not discussing reasonable people. The types of people in question here, are those who in the end, point a finger at the subjectivity of the admissions process, URM advantage/ORM disadvantage, among other things, as the reason why they did not get into medical school, as opposed to more "There were probabably 15 other applicants at each medical school I applied to just like me, and the school could only take one such applicant out of our group."

I didn't think I would get accepted this year - I still applied anyway. There are no guarantees in life sir. You put your best foot-forward and hope that your merits will be recognized. Why did I feel a need for my OP? Because SDN is littered with such applicants who believe they DESERVE to go to medical school, whether or not such a consensus exists among ADCOMS.

Further, consider one of the other points I made in my OP. Imagine an applicant with a 4.0 and a 39 MCAT, and assume they have some of the cookie cutter EC's. Come May 15th, this applicant has only been accepted to one medical school, lets say a middle-tier program like Loyola or SUNY Buffalo. They received waitlists at 7 of the top 25 schools they interviewed at, and no other acceptances. Now, given the fiercely competitive nature of admissions, this could be seen as an anomaly - the applicant has obviously proven themselves academically and their application made a big enough splash at a number of schools to warrant several interviews. This person is now ANNOYED that they have only been accepted to Loyola, as opposed to say Columbia University or Baylor College of Medicine. I would say this person has a rather inflated ego - they have the opportunity to become a physician - the opportunity to earn an MD in the United States. Just because this person was able to put together a strong application, does that mean they absolutely DESERVE to go to one of these top 25 schools? Their merits have been recognized at a school they chose to apply to. There was some other thread here on SDN where someone had been accepted to Boston University, but didn't think it was "prestigious enough" or highly ranked enough to matriculate this year, and were contemplating withdrawing their application and re-applying to medical school in a subsequent cycle. Really?!?! Accepted to Boston University, and you're going to come out and say "I deserve better than this."? This is the kind of mentality among applicants that I am talking about.

I'm not talking about the "Man, I'm really, REALLY dissapointed I didn't get accepted this year. I put in the work and I really thought this was the year it would happen for me, getting into medical school." but instead the "I CANT BELIEVE I DIDN'T GET IN. I HAVE THE SOLID GRADES AND THE MCAT AND I'VE SACRIFICED WAY MORE THAN MOST APPLICANTS PROBABLY HAVE SACRIFICED." In reality, in the grand scheme of things, when it comes to these kinds of intangibles, you can't know how you stack up against to the others. Certainly if you are a single mother who worked part time and went to college full time while raising a child and pulled off a 3.7 and a 36 MCAT, chances are there are few others in a given application cycle who can provide that same story. But what about the Bosnian immigrant who escaped genocide in his rural village and made it to the U.S. in search of a more promising life, and in doing so earned a 3.9 GPA in a hard major at some no-name university but still rocked their MCAT, all the while being financially self-sustaining? Could you rank one of these people over the other? Probably not, but you can say that these individuals have overcome odds that few other applicants in a given year probably did. Yet those other applicants might not know about these kinds of individuals applying to medical school in the same year as them, so who are these other generic applicants to say that they've sacrificed more than anyone else? Who are they to say that other people haven't overcome the same kinds of adversity? This is what I am talking about, and these are the kinds of applicants I am talking about when I speak of this sense of self-acclaim and entitlement.

This is in large a debate of semantics. But, I would not have applied if I didn't expect to get in. I think you have a confidence issue 🙂

 

[hubriz]

Let me be more clear. Jokes where the victim of sexual or domestic violence (or any violence really) are horrible and unacceptable.

Jokes about rape in which the abuser or the general culture is the butt of the joke, can be very funny. Sarah Silverman, Wanda Sykes, and Louis CK all have great bits like this.

*blah

 

[hubriz]

I'm not going to pretend to understand, but I see where you are coming from. I'm no saint, and I'd be lying if I said I've never said anything inappropriate behind closed doors. But that's where it stayed. Jokes between my husband and I stay between the two of us.

I never thought that you are actually an abuser, but using that type of language in public can make a survivor of abuse feel like absolute shet.

So we'll move on from this, I won't hold a grudge against you or anything. However I hope you in the future are more cognizant of your audience. You don't know who we are behind our keyboards and a comment like that could ruin someone's day.

*blah

 

[touchpause13]

Lol okay n00b