Sextus Propertius

Yeah dude, you sound *exactly* like someone I’d wanna have in my grad school cohort and work with for 6 years

Yeah dude, you sound *exactly* like someone I’d wanna have in my grad school cohort and work with for 6 years

Yeah dude, you sound *exactly* like someone I’d wanna have in my grad school cohort and work with for 6 years

Yeah dude, you sound *exactly* like someone I’d wanna have in my grad school cohort and work with for 6 years

Yeah dude, you sound *exactly* like someone I’d wanna have in my grad school cohort and work with for 6 years

Yeah dude, you sound *exactly* like someone I’d wanna have in my grad school cohort and work with for 6 years

Yeah dude, you sound *exactly* like someone I’d wanna have in my grad school cohort and work with for 6 years

Yeah dude, you sound *exactly* like someone I’d wanna have in my grad school cohort and work with for 6 years

Yeah dude, you sound *exactly* like someone I’d wanna have in my grad school cohort and work with for 6 years

Yeah dude, you sound *exactly* like someone I’d wanna have in my grad school cohort and work with for 6 years

Yeah, I understand the loopholes that are available to make decisions based on factors that aren't allowed usually. And I'm not saying that the female candidates aren't qualified--in fact, for various reasons they may be more qualified than their male counterparts (especially if they're a double or triple threat, which, in academia, is someone diverse in two or three respects). But this is not supposed to be an explicit consideration, and the fact that it is just means that males with equal qualifications are not being considered. Even if it is not an insidious plot and more just a consequence of human psychology, it is still problematic; since, particularly, it is legally questionable, and we're all supposed to follow the laws.
I'm not sure you understand what it is for something to be illegal. If something is easily the source of lawsuits then it is probably illegal; if not there will be plausible arguments to be made for its illegality. Minimally, it is weird to hold both that you don't think it is likely to be illegal, but will also easily be a source of lawsuits.
 
Maybe affirmative action is normatively justified, but I know philosophers more accomplished than you that think raping an unconscious woman is sometimes morally neutral. So, I'm not quite sure how we should handle normative claims in the real world.

This is interesting because I happen to be a lawyer.

The sense I’m getting is that Berkeley first round is only for their top-top applicants, and they’re only flying out the ones they’re pretty sure they can fund the first round, and are determining what packages they should get based on that visit. It still seems highly possible that Berkeley admits more. I didn’t apply to any Ivies except Princeton (for a myriad of reasons) but I was told by a senior faculty member that they probably wouldn’t make announcements until mid February. I received funded offers from Toronto and Washington this week. That only leaves Princeton...

My friend and I both got emails for flyouts from Berkeley. No word about funding yet, but I have been told that this is a de facto acceptance with funding offers later to come