<p>Some college have a greater percentage of men and some a have greater percentage of women. I think it is because some college are more oriented toward fields more popular amongst men while others are more oriented toward fields more popular amongst women.</p>
<p>I might add that now that I'm in to Brown, I wouldn't mind gender-blind admissions.</p>
<p>I think the hypocrisy that anhydrosis was referring too is like the macro vs. micro perspectives they teach you in intro economics: if a bunch of people are seated while watching basketball, and one row stands up, the row behind them have to stand up to see, and pretty soon everyone stands up. Maybe that's a terrible example, but that post made me think of it...</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
And there are more females in the world then men, because they have a SLIGHTLY higher infant survival rate for some reason.
[/Quote]
</p>
<p>Are you sure? I've read elsewhere that it was the other way around.</p>
<p>Frankly, I don't see too much of a difference between this and the situation twenty years ago with females. Of course, for quite a bit of history, females were horribly discriminated against.</p>
<p>This article is very similar to an article that ran in (I think) USA Today a few years back. Like that article, this one is shockingly devoid of hard evidence or relevant statistics. There's only a vague claim that the male and female applicants to Richmond have scores that are "virtually identical." Are they really about the same or are the male scores higher? I suspect they are higher, not just as a matter of logic but because the article surely would have mentioned them if they were lower. As far as I know, that would be the first time the recipients of some AA advantage actually outscored the allegedly disadvantaged group.</p>
<p>Basically - this is AA for males (predominantly WMs).</p>
<p>
[quote]
LACs like Williams that emphasize sports also have no difficulty with gender balance.
[/quote]
Actually, gender imbalance exists even at Williams (possibly because the sports emphasis at Williams includes women's sports). According to the 2006-2007 Common</a> Data Set, the number of female applicants to Williams was 7.7 % higher than the number of male applicants. </p>
<p>Williams apparently does not discriminate in favor of men, however. The number of accepted women was 11.0 % higher than the number of accepted men. The number of enrolled women was 9.4 % higher than the number of enrolled men.</p>
<p>Great....that can make up for me being Asian! If I wasn't applying to engineering schools....</p>
<p>
[quote]
Frankly, I don't see too much of a difference between this and the situation twenty years ago with females. Of course, for quite a bit of history, females were horribly discriminated against.
[/quote]
They were discriminated against, but I wouldn't call it 'horribly' discriminated against. Other groups had it WAY worse.</p>
<p>
[quote]
We have no idea of what the outcome would be if we relaxed gender stereotyping and paid women what we pay men
[/quote]
People should be paid based on how well they do the work, not based upon their gender.</p>
<p>All that 'wage gap' stuff that feminists talk about is garbage. The wage gap is created because of bad statistics, not because of discrimination against women.
You can't just take the average male wage and the average female wage and say that women are discriminated against because the average woman makes less than the average man. You are comparing apples and oranges. It's unfair to say that there is discrimination against women just because a male doctor makes more than a female teacher.</p>
<p>A fairer way to see if there is a 'wage gap' is to compare jobs within the same field. In fact, the average woman actually makes dramatically more than the average man in many fields. (<a href="http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/28/commentary/everyday/sahadi_paytable/index.htm%5B/url%5D">http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/28/commentary/everyday/sahadi_paytable/index.htm</a>) However, this is still unfair, because you are still comparing apples and oranges. </p>
<p>An even fairer way to see if there is a 'wage gap' is to compare jobs within the same field where both the man and the woman are doing the same work to the same quality. However, this is again unfair. Let's say a man and a woman both graduate with a master's in aerospace engineering. They both go to look for jobs. Boeing and Lockheed are both hiring. Normally an entry level job would pay say 50 000$/year. However, Boeing is short on engineers, so they are willing to pay 75 000$ a year. The man goes to work for Boeing, and the woman goes to work for Lockheed. Is this discrimination against the woman? No. It just means she is working at a company that pays less.</p>
<p>The only true way to see if there is a 'wage gap' is to compare jobs at the same company within the same field where both the man and the woman are doing the same work to the same quality.</p>
<p>i'm pretty sure the gender imbalance in science majors is why i received a CAS scholarship from NYU and the huge EEC scholarship from Bard.
granted i am not going to use either of them, but it was hard to feel fully proud of them knowing that they could have been based mostly on my gender.</p>
<p>i'm really not sure how i feel about the problem actually.. it's complex in that it's not easily fixed and it's comparable to affirmitive action. i really couldn't begin to say what the best solution is.</p>
<p>Im assuming most ppl on this discussion thread are aware of the controversy behind the comment of Harvard's former president. For those who don't, the bafoon basically said that the reason why females are underrepresented in the sciences, may be one that is based on the genetic makeup of women. </p>
<p>I say that to say this. With findings such as the ones we are discussing on this board, we must be careful not deem "nature" as the reason for the given phenomenon. In other words, we can not simply say, "Girls are smarter than boys" and vice versa, because then we as a society fail to address the given issue, in this case educating our nation's boys. Are boys given enough attention in schools? Does the high rate in female guidance counselors have some sort of corelation to the high rate of female applicants? Where does gender-expectations/ peer pressure come in? How has the feminist movement effected both genders? </p>
<p>This issue is clearly very complicated and it will take tons of research to assess the factors coming into play here. </p>
<p>And by the way, I'm a male Brown Univeristy student who worked his a** to get accepted. So the 40/60 male to female APPLICANT ratio means nothing to me.</p>
<p>and then you factor in the race issue</p>
<p>Women do better durring school, but in the real world men thrive and become the CEO's, Presidents, etc.</p>
<p>"For those who don't, the bafoon basically said that the reason why females are underrepresented in the sciences, may be one that is based on the genetic makeup of women."</p>
<p>Yes, because its 100% improbable that gender, which affects virtually every aspect of a person, doesn't touch anything like predisposal to certain subject areas because THATS SEXIST!!!!11eleven</p>
<p>The comments made by the ex-Harvard prez., Larry Summers, included a reference to IQ scoring ... if you analyze the statistics and go out so many standard deviations, you will find that there are a far higher ratio of men than women... even though the first standard deviation is pretty close. Also, men dominate at the bottom end of the IQ scale. I don't recall the exact percentage applicability, but he was talking about people in the less than .05% range... maybe even .01%.</p>
<p>Interesting article for sure. I wish some of the girls would apply to Engineering !! Being in engineering, its like being in an all boys esp if you are in Computers or Elec engineering like myself, we have a ratio of 9: 1 (boy: girl) and only 20% of engineering is girls. This number is falling down every eyar with less girls wanting to take up applied sciences and most of them going for general sciences or arts.</p>
<p>Do 2nd tier private schools like Emory and GW have a big difference in admit rates between men and women ? I would think that they would strive for equality but then again, I guess they can do what they want. Thanks. mbj</p>
<p>goodusername: I wouldn't categorize "wage gap" as all garbage. There was a recent Sup Crt case that focused on a female mgr at WalMart I believe -- I may be confusing Wal Mart gender discrimination cases. She was anonymously sent a memo showing how for most of her 17 yrs of service, she was paid less than counterparts who started the same time. If that were my mother or sister, I know there'd be some executives' mouths I'd like to shove my fist down.</p>
<p>While the "old boys club" may not be as ridiculous as before, it's wrong to say it doesn't exist. </p>
<p>Signed, Dad of two girls!</p>
<p>I cant say if this is fair at all or if it should happen but once schools get down to vassar type numbers (40/60) it starts to discourage both boys and girls from applying. Schools have to attract students to apply so they get better candidates and so their acceptance rate looks competitive. So they are basically forced to give the underrepresented an admissions advantage.</p>
<p>It has nothing to do with school. The vast majority of public school grades are not legitimate anyway, especially in the humanities. Union teachers are very, very political and grade accordingly. They are also obsessed with feminist ideology often, so some teachers favor the girls. </p>
<p>But that makes very little difference. The only reason for these higher rejection rates is because MORE WOMEN APPLY TO THOSE SCHOOLS. I think it is terrible that a college would value drama over a casual sport because athletics, even if the athlete won't play in college and they play in a club(or just for fun) and not a school, can make one excel in academics, especially humanities.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
They were discriminated against, but I wouldn't call it 'horribly' discriminated against. Other groups had it WAY worse.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>Not twenty years ago, but long before that.</p>
<p>Anyway, I don't like this idea one bit. I would certainly not like anyone to think that I need a leg up just because I'm male.</p>