Reply to JD and Usha

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "JD and Usha"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]No decent woman would have married vance or trump. 
 Usha definitely profited from DEI so why is she still around?[/quote]

How exactly did she benefit from DEI?[/quote]

She's female 
[/quote]

Females are overrepresented in college and law school. [/quote]

Now they are, but she's 40. Not true 20 years ago [/quote]

Categorically false. That is when I worked in law school admissions. Exactly when she and JD were applying. Women were overrepresented even then. It was NOT a bump in admissions. Being a poor hick was though. [/quote]

Not sure how 48% would be overrepresented

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/resources/business-law-today/2023-november/see-her-hear-her-historical-evolution-women-in-law/
[/quote]

You need to know the applicant pool to determine that. Men score on average slightly higher than women on the LSAT, but men are much more likely to score in 175+ range for the LSAT

Yale probably scooped up a disproportionate share of 175+ women so the issue is probably more nuanced.

Simple Google search shows 56% of YLS class of 2013 was female which does suggest over representation but need more info on the applicant pool and who accepted the admissions offer.

20% were veterans for class of 2013. [/quote]

Feels like any employer/school with a pulse was aware that there was great emphasis on hiring/admitting veterans at that time. Folks who do not think this was the case are simply uninformed.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics