Facebook group for pre-med students of color

[CaliforniaDreamer]

Not only was it a classic example of a last-ditch effort, but ALSO a classic case of "playing the race card" manipulatively at the wrong time....and I'm sure that is something you take a very strong stance against.

Well he was responding to a comment saying that he was "holding onto his privilege," which is just a thinly veiled way of calling him "white," which is of course the easiest way to counter his argument.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Axes]

And that's where you and I disagree. You would have politically expedient reverse discrimination to achieve your goals at the cost of the principles of equality themselves. I would have equality based on merits.

Oh yeah, you never did respond to this:

What principle? The only sectors of US business that are internationally competitive are heavily subsidized. Weapons manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies etc. Wall Street publicizes their losses every time they make a mistake. Right wing policy makers support oligopolies in exchange for PAC donations. This is not sticking to a principle, this is a fundamental negligence of certain groups of people in this country.

 

[Caffein3]

Just gonna say..in case anyone wants some perspective on the topic. Go visit the URM forums on this website, or talk to some URM friends. They tell harrowing stories of facing racism, discrimination, and disadvantages throughout their entire lives. You must understand this.

Also, they are not taking your seat in medical school. You are not entitled to a seat.

Finally, admitting URMs into schools is not to screw you over. It is for the patient population. This is not about you getting into medical school, it is much bigger than that; if you fail to see that I feel bad for you.

 

[Axes]

Well he was responding to a comment saying that he was "holding onto his privilege," which is just a thinly veiled way of calling him "white," which is of course the easiest way to counter his argument.

No it's not. He has the privilege, like I do, of not being a URM PoC.

 

[Nietzschelover]

I was only responding to other people beating me over the head with my own supposed "privilege"



And that's where you and I disagree. You would have politically expedient reverse discrimination to achieve your goals at the cost of the principles of equality themselves. I would have equality based on merits.

The road one travels is a legitimate factor to be considered in evaluating merit (not unlike difficulty of undergrad, or grade-inflating vs grade-deflating)....unless you're going to insist on always having a 20 yards head start in every race.

 

[CaliforniaDreamer]

I wish SDN had a live chat so I didn't have to spam F5 in order to read the conversation.

 

[Axes]

Men like MLK fought a war to protect a herd of sacred cows (the rights of equality, the notion that all men are created equal), each of which was slaughtered by men like you to advance your own agendas.

Men like you cursed MLK every time he was on TV. And the men you watch on TV supported putting dogs and fire hoses on the men and women MLK represented.

 

[Spector1]

The road one travels is a legitimate factor to be considered in evaluating merit (not unlike difficulty of undergrad, or grade-inflating vs grade-deflating)....unless you're going to insist on always having a 20 yards head start in every race.

That's not a merit, thats a fact of birth that is determined at random. Equality demands merit, not preference based on birth, skin color, ethnicity, creed, beliefs, or origin.

 

[Axes]

That's not a merit, thats a fact of birth that is determined at random. Equality demands merit, not preference based on birth, skin color, ethnicity, creed, beliefs, or origin.

No he's saying that if, in a race, someone starts from 30 yards before you and finishes alongside you, he must have been faster. Someone who grows up with less opportunity and gets to a similar place has arguably shown more merit.

 

[Spector1]

Men like you cursed MLK every time he was on TV. And the men you watch on TV supported putting dogs and fire hoses on the men and women MLK represented.

Men like me? I never cursed MLK, I stand for his ideals. The ideals of equality, the ideal that men ought to be freed of the shackles of discrimination, the ideal that one's skin color should not determine one's fate. Ideals that are based on principles and morals, not political expediency and entitlement.

Men like MLK fought against real society ills and I stand with him. you guys just complain against privilege, micro aggression, and perceived slights.

 

[Axes]

Men like me? I never cursed MLK, I stand for his ideals. The ideals of equality, the ideal that men ought to be freed of the shackles of discrimination, the ideal that one's skin color should not determine one's fate. Ideals that are based on principles and morals, not political expediency and entitlement.

Men like MLK fought against real society ills and I stand with him. you guys just complain against privilege, micro aggression, and perceived slights.

Your 1960s counterparts.

 

[Spector1]

Your 1960s counterparts.

My 1960 counterparts were starving under comrade Mao and his communist regime.

 

[TexasSurgeon]

Men like you cursed MLK every time he was on TV. And the men you watch on TV supported putting dogs and fire hoses on the men and women MLK represented.

Wow. This is vitriolic.

 

[Axes]

My 1960 counterparts were starving under comrade Mao and his communist regime.

Fantastic, and mine were starving under the colonial rule of the subcontinent, and then slaughtered during the partition that created Pakistan. I obviously meant your ideological counterparts.

 

[Spector1]

Wow. This is vitriolic.

talk about poisoning the well right?

 

[Nietzschelover]

That's not a merit, thats a fact of birth that is determined at random. Equality demands merit, not preference based on birth, skin color, ethnicity, creed, beliefs, or origin.

We could debate that, but in any case, even if I give you the random argument, the obstacles one faces and how one performs relative to those are not random and are a completely legit factors to be considered in a meritorious system. And as an aside, you seem to want credit, merit credit, for your [random] head start.

 

[Axes]

Wow. This is vitriolic.

He said that my argument is antithetical to MLK's message, and in my response I meant that his ideological 1960s counterpart would be antagonistic toward MLK. I can see how my phrasing came across as vitriolic though, and I apologize.

 

[Axes]

talk about poisoning the well right?

My statement was hardly preemptive, so no.

 

[Nietzschelover]

The huge problem with the equality argument is that it is not equal. It is, as played out here, the antithesis of equality (and fairness). And I think that is the point.

 

[Axes]

We could debate that, but in any case, even if I give you the random argument, the obstacles one faces and how one performs relative to those are not random and are a completely legit factors to be considered in a meritorious system. And as an aside, you seem to want credit, merit credit, for your [random] head start.

Fabulous.

 

[Spector1]

So you would have us throw equality out the window, forget about her, and just move on with political expediencies.

The huge problem with the equality argument is that it is not equal. It is, as played out here, the antithesis of equality (and fairness). And I think that is the point.

We could debate that, but in any case, even if I give you the random argument, the obstacles one faces and how one performs relative to those are not random and are a completely legit factors to be considered in a meritorious system. And as an aside, you seem to want credit, merit credit, for your [random] head start.

I never claimed credit for my supposed "head start". Sure I was never born black, I'll concede that. My parents are not rich, influential, or privileged. But they are people of virtue, faith, and values who have been a formative influence in my life. If growing up in a world based on western virtues and formed by western strength is a sin, then I am guilty.

 

[Axes]

So you would have us throw equality out the window, forget about her, and just move on with political expediencies.

If you tend to lean right, then you should know that it is your legislators that defunded the programs (eg head start) that worked toward true educational equality at the early levels, and necessitated this "political expediency."

 

[Spector1]

If you tend to lean right, then you should know that it is your legislators that defunded the programs (eg head start) that worked toward true educational equality at the early levels, and necessitated this "political expediency."

It is also the leftist teachers unions that resist measures to improve classroom quality especially in the inner city where minorities tend to live through merit pay and quantitative evaluation. Might I add out of self interest and political expediency.

Also I reject the notion that preschool and kindergarten is a major variable in eventual student outcomes. I attended neither, and I came out fine.

 

[Axes]

I never claimed credit for my supposed "head start". Sure I was never born black, I'll concede that. My parents are not rich, influential, or privileged. But they are people of virtue, faith, and values who have been a formative influence in my life. If growing up in a world based on western virtues and formed by western strength is a sin, then I am guilty.

 

[Yazo]

No he's saying that if, in a race, someone starts from 30 yards before you and finishes alongside you, he must have been faster. Someone who grows up with less opportunity and gets to a similar place has arguably shown more merit.

I don't understand why people assume that non URM PoC have an abundance of opportunities and privileges. I came here with my family as a poor European immigrant, but will I be able to use the financial grants and admission exceptions American born URMs are given? No.

It's maximum entitlement in my opinion.

 

[Nietzschelover]

So you would have us throw equality out the window, forget about her, and just move on with political expediencies.





I never claimed credit for my supposed "head start". Sure I was never born black, I'll concede that. My parents are not rich, influential, or privileged. But they are people of virtue, faith, and values who have been a formative influence in my life. If growing up in a world based on western virtues and formed by western strength is a sin, then I am guilty.

You are not a sinner....you just are fundamentally confused about the concept of equality. And we see your kind of argument all the time when that confusion happens with the subtext of continuing to protect inequality out of self-interest.

 

[Spector1]

I don't understand why people assume that non URM PoC have an abundance of opportunities and privileges. I came here with my family as a poor European immigrant, but will I be able to use the financial grants and admission exceptions American born URMs are given? No.

It's maximum entitlement in my opinion.

bravo. If there is so much privilege out there for people like us, I would certainly like to know where I can get some of that privilege.

 

[Axes]

It is also the leftist teachers unions that resist measures to improve classroom quality especially in the inner city where minorities tend to live through merit pay and quantitative evaluation. Might I add out of self interest and political expediency.

Also I reject the notion that preschool and kindergarten has anything to do with student outcomes. I attended neither, and I came out fine.

1) Teachers unions aren't good for education, but without them teachers would be exploited, perhaps by largely right wing ideology. I have little education on the union debate.

2) I flipped a coin and it was tails, therefore it will always be tails. n=1. Actual scientifically conducted studies have shown the benefits of head start.

 

[Spector1]

1) Teachers unions aren't good for education, but without them teachers would be exploited, perhaps by largely right wing ideology. I have little education on the union debate.

2) I flipped a coin and it was tails, therefore it will always be tails. n=1. Actual scientifically conducted studies have shown the benefits of head start.

1. reverting to the right wing boogeyman isn't a valid argument against merit based teaching and quantitative evaluation
2. enlighten me on what exactly kids learn in preschool, besides not biting each other. Besides, that should be the role of the parent, not anonymous educational institutions to educate their youth on values and virtue.

 

[Axes]

1. reverting to the right wing boogeyman isn't a valid argument against merit based teaching and quantitative evaluation
2. enlighten me on what exactly kids learn in preschool, besides not biting each other. Besides, that should be the role of the parent, not anonymous educational institutions to educate their youth on values and virtue.

1.) Neither is reverting to the leftist one.

2.) How about you read this and try to refute it? http://nieer.org/resources/research/PreschoolLastingEffects.pdf
Or, if you want an argument that matches the validity of your own, I went to pre school and pre k and I turned out fine. And I guess children of single parents, or families in which both parents must work don't deserve educational benefits.

 

[Nietzschelover]

If only we could live in a world that is context-free or context-absent.......or a world where some love to count context as something they simply couldn't avoid in their fortunate cases but still want that credited while simultaneously not wanting context to count for others.

 

[StudyLater]

Arguing for a position by pointing out inconsistencies in the opposer's position is unsatisfactory if you intend to actually prove your point. With that said, I've got no point to try to "prove" to anyone. But there are some inconsistencies here, which at the very least makes it difficult to follow some of the arguments.

That an empowered group will often rebrand (or conflate) an institutionally disadvantaged group's pursuit of equality as desire for entitlement, whereas the latter simply fights for the same institutional privilege afforded to the former. Similes are hard, I know.

It is all privilege nevertheless.

The huge problem with the equality argument is that it is not equal. It is, as played out here, the antithesis of equality (and fairness). And I think that is the point.

We should define fairness and equality.

If we're talking true equality of one human to the next, that cannot be reached as we aren't currently experimentally capable of doing that - ensuring everything is controlled for, and that each person has the exact same exposure to every bit of stimuli etc. There are quite a few more variables to consider than just race and SES. We also don't know what we don't know about what may affect us in our pursuit of these privileges.

But here is the real point.

You are not entitled to a seat

No one is entitled to a seat, of course. The question is only whether or not the medical college can be coerced into offering seats for certain groups of people (if we're going to operate our society this way - that is, dividing ourselves into "groups" the way we do). This is usually done via threats of losing accreditation from the accrediting bodies that essentially have autonomous control over who exists as a medical college and who doesn't. Lawsuits can also be another way, and I'm sure there are many other forms that "coercion" can take.

Turning this into a moral argument seems to be missing the point entirely. Morals are not the driving mechanical force that gets URMs into medical colleges.

 

[Noomm]

The lower standard compensates for institutional and cultural disadvantage in the form of often poor educational opportunities and de facto racism. You can read my previous posts if you want a somewhat more in depth perspective.

Ok. What about Asians? Why are they suffering from de facto racism when they were historically discriminated against to a great degree? In fact, it could be argued that historically Asians have had a worse time than Mexicans, given that Mexicans were for considered "white" for a considerable part of America's history.

 

[Axes]

Arguing for a position by pointing out inconsistencies in the opposer's position is unsatisfactory if you intend to actually prove your point. With that said, I've got no point to try to "prove" to anyone. But there are some inconsistencies here, which at the very least makes it difficult to follow some of the arguments.

I've already articulated my point in my early comments. That post was an explanation of a joke I made.

 

[Axes]

Ok. What about Asians? Why are they suffering from de facto racism when they were historically discriminated against to a great degree? In fact, it could be argued that historically Asians have had a worse time than Mexicans, given that Mexicans were for considered "white" for a considerable part of America's history.

You're asking me why people are racist towards Asian people?

 

[StudyLater]

I've already articulated my point in my early comments. That post was an explanation of a joke I made.

I respond below each quotation. I am not @Goro

So I wasn't addressing you there. Though it does apply to some of the arguments you've made here. Tearing down each other doesn't help your argument. Also, your arguments are irrelevant to the main point. You will never finish any argument about how society should operate coupled with with shoddy, incomplete data. This should have been gleaned from the numerous political debates you have probably viewed.

 

[Noomm]

You're asking me why people are racist towards Asian people?

You know exactly what I'm asking, but I'll lay it to you straight anyway:

Why is there de facto racism against Asians in the medical school admissions process when they have a history of being victims of just as much racism as any other minority?

 

[StudyLater]

You know exactly what I'm asking, but I'll lay it to you straight anyway:

Why is there de facto racism against Asians in the medical school admissions process when they have a history of being victims of just as much racism as any other minority?

I think @Axes is more focusing on current racism that exists and disadvantages individuals intragenerationally.

From what I got so far, the idea is that earlier in the individual's life, they are not given adequate educational privilege, and are therefore put at a disadvantage when competing for the privilege of attending medical school.

 

[medic86]

What the **** is this thread?

 

[Caffein3]

I think you all are confusing URM with minorities and AA in general. Having a physician that is underrepresented in MEDICINE is more likely to work with their particular underserved populations, and those patient populations often feel more comfortable connecting with URM physicians as well.

Please understand that having URMs admitted to medical school is once again, not about you. It is for the underserved patient populations.

 

[Caffein3]

Not my words here, but he is much more adept to speaking than I.

For the billionth time........

The "URM Advantage" isnt about righting the wrongs of the past, and provide URMs with a boost.

Its about creating a physician population that can better meet the needs of the patient population.

Thus, this is NOT like undergraduate AA policies. So, can we set aside this "It's not fair to ORM applicants" because it isnt about the individial applicants, ORM or URM. Its about the patients, something MUCH greater than the individual. If you cannot see this, I'm not sure how you can sit through an interview and say you are a true advocate for patient care. With this perspective, you are putting your own individual wants/needs before those of the more important patient population.

Even though I realized this thread has derailed greatly to another topic in itself.

 

[Axes]

You know exactly what I'm asking, but I'll lay it to you straight anyway:

Why is there de facto racism against Asians in the medical school admissions process when they have a history of being victims of just as much racism as any other minority?

Yes, I do, and you know what I'm going to say. Because despite their struggle, they are well represented in medicine. Which you are going to use a a springboard to say that black people should be able to do the same. And I'll say that, yes, Asian culture has led to academic and professional success. But that for many reasons, other groups of people have not been able to do the same. For black people, the cycle of 300+ years of discrimination and institutional neglect and resultant cultural apathy, for example.

 

[Spector1]

What the **** is this thread?

Principled men standing up for their beliefs. (I'll let you decide which side that is)

 

[Noomm]

I think @Axes is more focusing on current racism that exists and disadvantages individuals intragenerationally.

All I know is that it makes me very upset that we have different measuring sticks for different ethnic groups. I understand that some of you will never consider that to be racist, but that's what I think.

Also, I know from my experience some of you just don't understand hypotheticals at all. But I will try anyway -

Imagine a new study comes out saying that patients across every racial group are generally more comfortable with receiving treatment from white doctors rather than any other racial group. Because of this, the AAMC shifts its policy so that now the admission standards are lower for whites.

Now, if you were to use one word to describe the AAMC's policy shift in the most specific way possible, what would it be?

 

[cadingcading]

Thank you for keeping this b..u..m..p..e..d....

 

[Axes]

I respond below each quotation. I am not @Goro

So I wasn't addressing you there. Though it does apply to some of the arguments you've made here. Tearing down each other doesn't help your argument. Also, your arguments are irrelevant to the main point. You will never finish any argument about how society should operate coupled with with shoddy, incomplete data. This should have been gleaned from the numerous political debates you have probably viewed.

Oh haha, my bad. Yes, it is granting privilege in order to compensate for a default institutional disadvantage.

 

[Pusheen]

It's telling that one side is making actual logical points and conclusions, while the other looks like they just did a vocab dump from the index of an intro sociology textbook.

 

[ChillDawg]

This is a pretty fabulous reversal. The reality is that certain races are institutionally and culturally second class citizens in America, and affirmative action serves to counteract this inherent disadvantage. Do you see how it would be an issue to hold all URM candidates to a much higher standard than their often poor educational opportunities prepare them to achieve? And yes, AA could be done by income, but race plays into economic geography, and disadvantaged races in America face hardship that is not solely economic, such as being scared of the police, for example.

I agree that people of color and low SES status have it harder, but the boldest text is absolute garbage.
Do you know the meaning of these words?

 

[Axes]

It's telling that one side is making actual logical points and conclusions, while the other looks like they just did a vocab dump from the index of an intro sociology textbook.

Oh no, sociology? You mean the illogical voodoo recognized by every institute of higher learning and also featured on the MCAT? Never tell me.

 

[Pusheen]

Why are we here @StudyLater...we have a test on Saturday...