While brave men and women are fighting and dying, whiny, coddled, crybaby millennial college students here at home are demanding that their law exams be postponed because they just can’t deal with the emotional distress of not being granted the lynching in Ferguson that they’d set their tiny little minds on. It’s just too much to handle for the special little snowflakes, don’t you see?
One professor at Oberlin, of all places, had a delightful answer to the pleading, sniveling little turds trying to get out of taking their exams on time.
But what made His Majesty laugh out really loud was this pathetic, spineless, mewling, incoherent blather penned by a spoiled brat at Haaah-Vuhd. (That link also shamelessly stolen from Ace).
Over the last week, much has been said about law students’ petitioning for exam extensions in light of the circumstances surrounding the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner at the hands of police officers.
Much, but not nearly enough. But that will surely change if you keep it up, you petulant little unmanned brat.
Students at Harvard Law School, Columbia Law School, Georgetown University Law Center and several other schools requested that their administrations allow extensions on final exams for students who have been confronting the aftermath of the recent failed grand jury indictments of the officers who killed the unarmed black men.
Brown was armed quite credibly with his fist and his body mass, using the former repeatedly against the officer’s face while trying to take his sidearm away. But we’re sure he was only wanting to put the firearm in a safe place so nobody would get hurt. Guns are dangerous, don’t you know?
If you don’t consider a couple of hundred pounds of muscle backing up two angry fists “armed”, then you’re more than welcome to contact us for a demonstration. Provided you sign a waiver first, that is.
In response, opponents of exam extensions have declared that to grant these requests would be a disservice to the students.
It would be, but considering how worthless you millennial invertebrates have already proven yourselves to be, we much doubt that more damage can be done to you than what has already been so thoroughly achieved by your sorry excuses for “parents” and their utter failure to provide you with anything that might be mistaken for parenting.
Law students, they argue, must learn how to engage critically with the law in the face of intense adversity.
Or, in the case of your kind, any adversity at all, a concept wholly foreign to you.
Drawing comparisons to events surrounding the Civil Rights Movement and other times of intense turmoil, these opponents portray today’s law students as coddled millennials using traumatic events as an excuse for their inability to focus on a three-hour exam.
That, we believe, is what is commonly known as “an accurate description of the suspect”, a term you should be familiar with.
In essence, law students are being told to grow up and learn how to focus amidst stress and anxiety—like “real” lawyers must do.
Real lawyers out in the real world doing actual lawyering, as opposed to spoiled shitless, entitled wimps like yourself doing mainly keg stands and panty raids.
Speaking as one of those law students, I can say that this response is misguided: Our request for exam extensions is not being made from a position of weakness, but rather from one of strength and critical awareness.
Weakness is strength, ignorance is knowledge, cowardice is courage. You’ve memorized your Orwell creditably, we must say. It’s just that his point flew over your pointed head entirely, but that should hardly come as a surprise to anybody.
Although over the last few weeks many law students have experienced moments of total despair, minutes of inconsolable tears and hours of utter confusion, many of these same students have also spent days in action—days of protesting, of organizing meetings, of drafting emails and letters, and of starting conversations long overdue.
Despair, tears and confusion? What the hell have you been doing? Facing the French charge at Agincourt? Staring down a German Panzer Division? Oh, you’ve been wasting your study time running around in the streets waving signs and holding meetings, not to mention that most dreadfully demanding and heartbreaking chore: writing emails and letters!
We take it all back. Courage such as yours comes but once every thirty generations. We hold our manhoods cheap that we were safe abed at home while you fought with Noble Harry upon St. Crispin’s day in his immortal 3rd Suffolk Regiment of Letter Writers. Dammit, but you gave those infernal Frenchies hell when you did bravely face their charge, painstakingly typed out “cry havoc” and didst most courageously unleash the fliers of war!
Surely no mere mortal can deny you a postponement upon having shown such valour in the face of almost certain death and dismemberment! Indeed, let us proclaim this day a holiday and give you a ticker tape parade (provided that we use recycled, organically grown, fair price tape only, of course).
We have been synthesizing decades of police interactions, dissecting problems centuries old, and exposing the hypocrisy of silence.
And whilst you’ve found the answers to literally hundreds of years of problems, did you, by any chance, find a cure for cancer as well? Surely that can’t be much to ask after you’ve successfully unraveled the Gordian knot of unsolvable quandaries that have vexed mankind for eons.
I have seen the psychological trauma brought on by disillusionment with our justice system send some law students into a period of depression.
Awww… Somebody read a story that made them cwy? Here, have some ice cream.
After all, every death of an unarmed youth at the hands of law enforcement is a tragedy. The hesitancy to recognize the validity of these psychic effects demonstrates that, in addition to conversations on race, gender and class, our nation is starving for a genuine discussion about mental health.
We certainly do. We see a lot of mental health issues in your writing that ought to be addressed, so repair yourself to the psychiatrist’s office post haste, or just hie yourself off to Bedlam directly to save some time.
But to reduce our calls for exam extensions to mere cries for help exhibits a failure to understand the powerful images of die-ins and the booming chants of protestors disrupting the continuation of business as usual in cities across the country.
Howling, vandalizing mobs. Hardly powerful images, much less uncommon when savages are let loose upon society without adequate adult supervision.
Where some commentators see weakness or sensitivity, perhaps they should instead see strength—the strength to know when our cups of endurance have run over and when the time for patience has ended.
Listen, young craven one, we already did discuss your sad allegiance to Newspeak, did we not?
Perhaps they should instead see courage—the courage to look our peers in the eyes and uncomfortably ask them to bear these burdens of racism and classism that we have together inherited from generations past.
We’ll give you that one, were you ever to try to look us in the eyes and “ask” us to bear the burdens for deeds we never committed against people who are long dead. That would take courage. Or one last full measure of colossal stupidity.
We have taken many exams before, but never have we done this. We are scared, but no longer will we be spectators to injustice.
Oh my, the soaring language. You might want to save that for more worthy causes than talking yourself out of taking an exam, because as it is, you’re just making yourself look rather silly, which you really don’t need to do as you are already silly by your mere existence. And what, exactly, are you so scared of? That the police of Ferguson are going to descend upon Harvard and beat some sense into you? Much as we should like to see it happen, it might even have a salutary effect, we very much doubt it.
You keep forgetting the 11th Commandment:
Thou Shalt Not Take Thyself Too Seriously.
Our focus and critical thinking are at an all-time peak while the importance of our textbooks is at a low.
This whole concept of studying and taking exams? You’re so very much not getting the concept at all. Having your focus and critical thinking skills at an “all-time peak” is actually a good thing, right up close to an exam. Oh, but “the importance of your textbooks is at a low.” We forgot. Too bad for you, because the importance of your textbooks is not for you to decide upon when you’re at school, you insufferable dunce.
“Sir, my focus and my marksmanship is at an all-time high, but the importance of my rifle is at a low, so can we just put off tomorrow’s firefight until next week?”
It is not that law students are incapable of handling their exams.
Just the current generation of them, it would appear.
It is that we are unwilling to remove ourselves, even for a few days, from this national conversation.
Ahem. Listen, private Snowflake, we don’t give one singed hair in Lucifer’s arse what you are “unwilling” to do, except inasmuch as it provides us with a most welcome excuse for putting you in front of a firing squad should you fail to reconsider within the next approximately two seconds.
As future practitioners, professors, judges and policymakers, we have all been trained not only in the faithful application of the law but also in the critical examination of its effectiveness. And by our analysis, responsible members of the legal community can no longer defend our criminal justice system as exemplifying fair process when that system so frequently produces the same unjust result—life drained from an unarmed black body by a barrage of government-issued bullets.
Ferguson is an example of a life “unjustly” drained from an “unarmed” violent offender trying to maim and/or kill a police officer while depriving him of his sidearm?
Alright, we agree. No need for those exams. You all fail. Instantly. Pack your dunnage and piss off back to momma’s teats. Dismissed. Any single individual on the Grand Jury in question, on the other hand, ought to be at least issued an honorary degree if you are the best that Harvard can produce. Speaking of Harvard, if that is the kind of “analytical thinking” and “understanding of the law” that you churn out, we strongly recommend that the institution be shut down, the professors set to the task of disassembling every mortared brick of it upon pain of death, after which they will be sued into penury for fraud.
We recognize that this is a moment for change. If not us, then who? For most of us, we know that if we get lower grades this semester, this cost will have been worth the importance and privilege of joining a national movement to fundamentally reform this country’s approach to law enforcement and criminal justice. But just because we are willing to pay this price does not mean we should have to.
It DOES, however, mean that if your “courageous” proclamation that you’re willing to pay the price is to have any sort of credibility, then you have to be willing to bear it without any caterwauling, whining, puling, sniveling and crying your widdle eyes out.
So you fail.
The most striking irony behind this criticism comes from the constant refrain we have heard over the years from every “real” lawyer who has offered us a job,
A situation that is hopefully about to change rather dramatically, unless those firms really want new lawyers who will go sulk in a corner every time they’re under pressure in a courtroom. In which case we’d like their names so that we may never, ever, mistakenly retain one of their idiots.
as well as sometimes from these same critics, about how detached legal education has become from the realities of legal practice. Our requests for exam extensions are requests for our faculties and administrations to recognize that this movement is our legal education—that when we march, when we advocate, when we demand accountability and action we are employing the analytical skills and legal knowledge that we have learned in our law school classrooms far more than we would be if we responded to a hypothetical exam prompt.
Are you sure that you want the faculties to take that seriously, face value, as what you mean to say with all of this? That your petulant reaction and everything you’ve said truly represents your understanding and retention of what you’ve been taught in law school?
Think about it. Carefully. Because your parents are about to be out tens of thousands of dollars of very real money (and they deserve it, for having fucked you up this badly, but we digress) if you answer it incorrectly.
We really shouldn’t, because you clearly don’t deserve it, but let’s summarize and help you a bit:
You’ve had access to the same evidence in the Ferguson case as everybody else. You have the same access to sources as everybody else, access that previous generations of law students could only dream of, thanks to the Internet. You have, by your own admission, spent all of your study time and your free time, which is copious (and just shut up, we went to tough schools ourself, studying very demanding subjects, so we know what we speak of when we say that), applied all of your vaunted analytical and critical thinking skills to this particular case, again by your own admission, and the result you’ve come up with, your ultimate verdict based on all of that combined with your years of legal teachings, is that an unarmed guy was unjustly murdered by a cop.
We’d fail you in a heartbeat based on that alone, because clearly you’re at least 18 cartridges short of a full magazine, and any time spent on trying to teach you anything would be an utter waste.
Each year as classes of law students enter and exit our nation’s legal institutions we are told the same thing: You are the future of the law. Well, the future is now.
If you’re the future of the law, then at least we have decades of watching you idiots get clobbered into paste in court rooms across the nation by actual lawyers to look forward to.
Note to self and anybody else: If that’s the state of our law schools, then we can only say “never retain a lawyer who’s less than 40 years old, and if you can’t afford that, represent yourself.” The saying that a man who represents himself has a fool for a client remains true, but it’s still better than having an imbecile for your counsel.