I was looking back over my law school admissions essay (personal statement). I'll spare you the details, but it got me to thinking about what I should have said to impress law school officials (now having two years of experience under my belt.) I present to you...the law school admissions essay I should have written:
I am most certainly the type of person who belongs in law school. I find nothing more enjoyable than reading material of absolutely no interest to me all day every day. I am incredibly fascinated by legal cases. I never tire of reading pages and pages of facts I will never need again just to discover a miniscule rule of law. I am at my best when mercilessly bombarded with complex questions in front of large groups of people with no notice.
I love to write exactly what you tell me to write in the exact order you tell me to write it in the exact format and language you desire. Research is my true passion. I could literally shred tears of joy at the prospect of rummaging through caselaw in an attempt to find a rule or precedent that in all likelihood does not exist.
I enjoy conforming to stereotyped ideas of what individuals in a certain profession should be. I only wear black suits with blue or white shirts and sensible shoes. I have no interests outside of the law. My best attributes are that I am hard-working, detail-oriented and a quick learner. I desire nothing more to recite this mantra over an over.
Most of all, above all the items listed above, I love to network. I dream about networking at night and wake up in the morning ready to network. My mouth has the permanent taste of someone else's ass. I am the true definition of a real go-getter.
So you see law school, you have no choice but to admit me. I am the perfect law student specimen. Thank you for your consideration I look forward to hearing from you.
Best regards.
Showing posts with label Suggestion Box. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Suggestion Box. Show all posts
Friday, April 06, 2007
Thursday, March 29, 2007
That's right I flipped that shit...
So I don't watch America's Next Top Model, but long story short I did see some of the ANTM from about two weeks ago where they painted all their "models" up like murder victims. Specifically I saw the 'during the commercials of another show' parts. Let me just tell you that I got the jist of it. I saw some photos, heard Tyra say "fierce", and ignored a whole lotta whining.
Now even though I don't watch new episodes of ANTM, I am pretty familar with the show having stumbled upon a few to many VH1 marathons of the aforementioned and wasting many hours of my life that I will never get back. So let me say that these "violent" photos were some of the best and most interesting I've seen on the show. Enter controversy. As if you couldn't have predicted that people of the world might have objected to a bunch of women being portrayed as beautiful victims of violence. Not surprisingly, the backlash landed firmly in Miss I'm Tyra Banks and I Empower Women's back yard. Apparently telling women they look sexy all dead and bloody is not empowering (who knew, I like being told I'm sexy no matter what the circumstances).
I think I'm an anti-feminist Feminist. The easiest way that I can describe what I mean by that is to say that I don't like being treated differently then men in any circumstance. Including the special treatment b/c I am a woman and therefore a minority circumstance. I like to apply a rule I call "Flip that shit." In any situation which you think might be derogatory or damaging to women...flip it and apply it to men. If you would feel the same way about the situation applied to men then it's a bad situation. If you would not then you are being the kind of "feminist" (read: whiner) that I don't really appreciate.
So lets flip this shit. A bunch of male models posing as murder victims. Are we pissed about this? I think not. To me this is pure art and the people of the world need to shut the heck up about it already. Theory that these pictures were derogatory to women...busted. The end.
Now even though I don't watch new episodes of ANTM, I am pretty familar with the show having stumbled upon a few to many VH1 marathons of the aforementioned and wasting many hours of my life that I will never get back. So let me say that these "violent" photos were some of the best and most interesting I've seen on the show. Enter controversy. As if you couldn't have predicted that people of the world might have objected to a bunch of women being portrayed as beautiful victims of violence. Not surprisingly, the backlash landed firmly in Miss I'm Tyra Banks and I Empower Women's back yard. Apparently telling women they look sexy all dead and bloody is not empowering (who knew, I like being told I'm sexy no matter what the circumstances).
I think I'm an anti-feminist Feminist. The easiest way that I can describe what I mean by that is to say that I don't like being treated differently then men in any circumstance. Including the special treatment b/c I am a woman and therefore a minority circumstance. I like to apply a rule I call "Flip that shit." In any situation which you think might be derogatory or damaging to women...flip it and apply it to men. If you would feel the same way about the situation applied to men then it's a bad situation. If you would not then you are being the kind of "feminist" (read: whiner) that I don't really appreciate.
So lets flip this shit. A bunch of male models posing as murder victims. Are we pissed about this? I think not. To me this is pure art and the people of the world need to shut the heck up about it already. Theory that these pictures were derogatory to women...busted. The end.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
This might be a long one folks...
Over the years I've learned the way to get along in life without pulling out all of your own hair and trying to fashion a rope to hang yourself is to master the art of shrugging off stupidity. This allows you ignore all the parts of life that try to annoy you into submission. I'm highly annoyable, but I've also learned to pick my battles. One battle I have trouble turning away from occurs when a group that I'm a part of begins to misrepresent me. It's been a banner week for this on a small and large scale. It's only Wednesday you say? I hadn't noticed.
Today I attended a presentation by a female professional in my field. The topic, the challanges that face the modern female attorney. The conclusion, that law firms must face changing times and quit holding women to the same standards and career paths as men. The rationale, it is inadvisable (perhaps impossible) for a woman to balance family and a man's career. The message as I see it: employers are responsible for giving woman an alternative career path by virtue of their wombs. The basic idea is that women should be able to be available to their family and thier children in the traditional homemaker role and be as successful in their careers as if they had not done so.
Am I the only woman who doesn't want special treatment because I'm handicapped by a uterus? Here's how I would break it down. The only ACTUAL difference between the parenting roles of men and women is that women have to physically carry a child for 9 months. Usually a woman can carry on her normal activities for most of this period and employers do a pretty decent job of accomidating her for the part of that time when she cannot. After the baby is born it is equally the responsiblity of both parties, mother and father. The fact that mothers tend to take on the role as primary caregiver is not the fault of employers. If men and woman share in family responsiblities equally then why is the mother the only party who requires a specialized "mommy path." Why do we expect employers to accept and accomidate professional mothers when families are unwilling to change the balance of caregiving responsibilities?
The truth is that most women choose to take on the role as primary caregiver and most men do not. Employers should not be held responsible for they way in which individual's choose to prioritize thier lives. If we were having a conversation regarding the career challanges of parents versus non-parents it would be different. In my opinion, however, you can't have a conversation about the mommy path without eventually coming around to the conclusion that women are different than men in that they are more emotionally connected to their role as a mother than their career and that they should not be penalized for this. I find that ludacris and therefore I cannot entertain a discussion regarding the mommy path. Choices are choices and they usually have consequences.
The second group that I have a beef with this week: Christian leaders. Here we go again with the religious world taking the hard line on a issue that hasn't even been fully articulated yet. So we have the Tomb of Jesus movie and we have the filmakers engaging in discourse regarding the existence of compelling evidence and the need for further investigation regarding the validity of this possiblity. These guys come off looking intelligent, responsible and accomidating. On the other side we have religious leaders getting all worked up and dismissing years of work on the part of those involved in this project with distain and without a second look. They end up looking like asses.
I have no problem with the Christian world refusing to accept that Jesus was not ressurected. I personally refuse to accept this, but why do they have to be such jerks about it. Why for once can't religious leaders realize that thier superiority complex does little more than isolate the general population. Real believers aren't likely to be swayed in their religious convictions by one day of headlines and non-believers might appreciate a little consideration on the part of Christians. After all, if we have so much faith why should we be afraid of investigating the facts of this discovery?
Today I attended a presentation by a female professional in my field. The topic, the challanges that face the modern female attorney. The conclusion, that law firms must face changing times and quit holding women to the same standards and career paths as men. The rationale, it is inadvisable (perhaps impossible) for a woman to balance family and a man's career. The message as I see it: employers are responsible for giving woman an alternative career path by virtue of their wombs. The basic idea is that women should be able to be available to their family and thier children in the traditional homemaker role and be as successful in their careers as if they had not done so.
Am I the only woman who doesn't want special treatment because I'm handicapped by a uterus? Here's how I would break it down. The only ACTUAL difference between the parenting roles of men and women is that women have to physically carry a child for 9 months. Usually a woman can carry on her normal activities for most of this period and employers do a pretty decent job of accomidating her for the part of that time when she cannot. After the baby is born it is equally the responsiblity of both parties, mother and father. The fact that mothers tend to take on the role as primary caregiver is not the fault of employers. If men and woman share in family responsiblities equally then why is the mother the only party who requires a specialized "mommy path." Why do we expect employers to accept and accomidate professional mothers when families are unwilling to change the balance of caregiving responsibilities?
The truth is that most women choose to take on the role as primary caregiver and most men do not. Employers should not be held responsible for they way in which individual's choose to prioritize thier lives. If we were having a conversation regarding the career challanges of parents versus non-parents it would be different. In my opinion, however, you can't have a conversation about the mommy path without eventually coming around to the conclusion that women are different than men in that they are more emotionally connected to their role as a mother than their career and that they should not be penalized for this. I find that ludacris and therefore I cannot entertain a discussion regarding the mommy path. Choices are choices and they usually have consequences.
The second group that I have a beef with this week: Christian leaders. Here we go again with the religious world taking the hard line on a issue that hasn't even been fully articulated yet. So we have the Tomb of Jesus movie and we have the filmakers engaging in discourse regarding the existence of compelling evidence and the need for further investigation regarding the validity of this possiblity. These guys come off looking intelligent, responsible and accomidating. On the other side we have religious leaders getting all worked up and dismissing years of work on the part of those involved in this project with distain and without a second look. They end up looking like asses.
I have no problem with the Christian world refusing to accept that Jesus was not ressurected. I personally refuse to accept this, but why do they have to be such jerks about it. Why for once can't religious leaders realize that thier superiority complex does little more than isolate the general population. Real believers aren't likely to be swayed in their religious convictions by one day of headlines and non-believers might appreciate a little consideration on the part of Christians. After all, if we have so much faith why should we be afraid of investigating the facts of this discovery?
Monday, October 16, 2006
Defensive Driving
Never heard the term Defensive Driving? Clearly you weren't raised in my home. Don't worry, I'm here to help you understand.
Basic Presumptions of Defensive Driving:
1. You are the only person on the road with adaquate driving skills. Everyone else only passed their tests through sheer luck or by sleeping with the examiner.
2. Everyone on the road is an idiot who is 1-2 seconds from ramming into you.
3. Defensive driving is the only thing standing between you and a horrible fiery death.
How to drive defensively:
1. Never trust a blinker. A blinker does not mean someone is turning. People don't know what they are for and use them wholly for thier own amusement. They also may be fascinated by the funny clicking sound it makes.
2. Never trust a green light. A green light does not mean go, it means pause and make sure that one last car isn't speeding through the intersection before proceeding. Contrary to popular belief, people do not let themselves be controlled by stoplights. To some people red simply means drive faster.
3. If there is a car stopped a crossroads to the street you are driving on, they are most certainly waiting for the opportunity to pull out in front of you. Slow down and poise your hand on the horn to fire a warning shot should they decide to move at all from thier standing position. Honk if they blink.
If you fail to untilize the basic tenants of Defensive Driving you will most certainly be involved in an accident. When you are it will be your fault. Even if the officers on the scene assess that it was the other driver's mistake that caused the collision, your father will most certainly say, "You should have been driving defensively."
Basic Presumptions of Defensive Driving:
1. You are the only person on the road with adaquate driving skills. Everyone else only passed their tests through sheer luck or by sleeping with the examiner.
2. Everyone on the road is an idiot who is 1-2 seconds from ramming into you.
3. Defensive driving is the only thing standing between you and a horrible fiery death.
How to drive defensively:
1. Never trust a blinker. A blinker does not mean someone is turning. People don't know what they are for and use them wholly for thier own amusement. They also may be fascinated by the funny clicking sound it makes.
2. Never trust a green light. A green light does not mean go, it means pause and make sure that one last car isn't speeding through the intersection before proceeding. Contrary to popular belief, people do not let themselves be controlled by stoplights. To some people red simply means drive faster.
3. If there is a car stopped a crossroads to the street you are driving on, they are most certainly waiting for the opportunity to pull out in front of you. Slow down and poise your hand on the horn to fire a warning shot should they decide to move at all from thier standing position. Honk if they blink.
If you fail to untilize the basic tenants of Defensive Driving you will most certainly be involved in an accident. When you are it will be your fault. Even if the officers on the scene assess that it was the other driver's mistake that caused the collision, your father will most certainly say, "You should have been driving defensively."
itunes, we need to talk
I think there has been a mistunderstanding. See itunes, a while back I decided to make a mix CD of songs that I liked back in high school. What can I say, I thought it would be fun. Anyway, my friends and I had a blast singing along to it on a roadtrip to the lake and it's a fun throwback to the days of yore. Here's the thing itunes, just b/c I made a mix CD of 90's music doesn't mean that I'm the world's biggest fan of Shawn Colvin, The Smashing Pumpkins and Verve Pipe. Seriously itunes quit giving me recommendations to this music. "Based on your purchase of 'Sonny Came Home' by Shawn Colvin we think you might like Jewel." I don't like Jewel itunes. No one likes Jewel anymore. So just stop. I've bought lots of good music from you. Entire CDs of music that highlights my superior tastes. Okay so I bought one Paris Hilton song. Why do you have to focus on the negative itunes? Stop judging me! I think you need to leave now.
Friday, September 15, 2006
Oh great, another idiot taking to himself!
Attention all people with WiFi headsets for your mobile phone:
You are not that damn important!
What, do you need your hand free to carry a human heart? A biochemical weapon (like in The Rock)? The fate of the free world? No tool! You just want your hands free so you can gesture wildly and look like even more of an ass. "Ugh, these voices in my head are driving me CRAZY!"
Stop it!
You are also making the rest of us look like idiots. We, stupidly, think you are talking to us instead of thin air. We have entire conversations with you that make absolutely no sense before we realize you are busy having some uber-important conversation about how jiggly Jello is.
Now get that damn thing out of your ear!
You are not that damn important!
What, do you need your hand free to carry a human heart? A biochemical weapon (like in The Rock)? The fate of the free world? No tool! You just want your hands free so you can gesture wildly and look like even more of an ass. "Ugh, these voices in my head are driving me CRAZY!"
Stop it!
You are also making the rest of us look like idiots. We, stupidly, think you are talking to us instead of thin air. We have entire conversations with you that make absolutely no sense before we realize you are busy having some uber-important conversation about how jiggly Jello is.
Now get that damn thing out of your ear!
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
It's not you, its myspace...
I did a speech in undergraduate about how leaving your cell phone at home is the psychological equivalent of forgetting to put on your pants. You just feel naked without it. You also feel like you are missing everything. These days it's more like having your hand actually cut off, because you will literally try to use it a million times and always forget you don't have it. But this entry isn't about cell phones. It's about myspace.
Nowadays not being able to check myspace is like not watching 90210 was in third grade. You feel like you missed everything, and everyone keeps saying stuff about myspace that you haven't seen yet. Myspace is making us all attention whores. We need instant feedback about everything. People actually send out bulletins about how they need picture comments or they updated their page. Should I really care that you have a new background on your page? Do you really need me to tell you that you look hot in that pic to feel good about yourself? I think we may be too connected if that is the case. I may need a chance to miss you.
My grandparent's literally can't comprehend the internet, but if they could they would probably think it was intrusive. Which it sort of is, I mean, what's the point of knowing everything about someone or what they are doing every single second of the day? I mean I have a blog, a facebook, a myspace, email, AIM and my cell phone rings countless times a day. Aren't I just at your beck and call? I think we need some space. No not MYspace just SPACE. Thanks.
Nowadays not being able to check myspace is like not watching 90210 was in third grade. You feel like you missed everything, and everyone keeps saying stuff about myspace that you haven't seen yet. Myspace is making us all attention whores. We need instant feedback about everything. People actually send out bulletins about how they need picture comments or they updated their page. Should I really care that you have a new background on your page? Do you really need me to tell you that you look hot in that pic to feel good about yourself? I think we may be too connected if that is the case. I may need a chance to miss you.
My grandparent's literally can't comprehend the internet, but if they could they would probably think it was intrusive. Which it sort of is, I mean, what's the point of knowing everything about someone or what they are doing every single second of the day? I mean I have a blog, a facebook, a myspace, email, AIM and my cell phone rings countless times a day. Aren't I just at your beck and call? I think we need some space. No not MYspace just SPACE. Thanks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)