<p>Not (necessarily) to add fuel to the affirmative action/gender discrimination/racial discrimination fire that's always being stoked over here, but I thought people might be interested to read the piece my friend Phil* wrote for his blog and had picked up by Slate.</p>
<p>*'05, lived in MacGregor D-Entry with me; MIT SB/SM in course VI, Stanford PhD, soon-to-be professor at the University of Rochester; posts over here sometimes as pgbovine</p>
<p>Great article…a real eye opener. The discrimination against the woman wannabe programmer made me nauseous. Thanks for sharing.</p>
<p>@redbluegoldgreen Here we go again. FYI, some engineering schools I applied to offer women FREE tuition. The sexism against men is ridiculous, and you then say that there’s some “discrimination against women” in society. Media brainwash, it’s disgusting me.</p>
<p>I think the point was about total acceptance of Asian males who look the part. Therefore, they get all the unearned percs because it’s assumed they are self-taught or genetically inherently superior. That means everyone else loses out. Keep focused on the message.</p>
<p>Undefined123,</p>
<p>I understand your perspective. You are correct that there are some colleges that are working to encourage more women to consider STEM fields. No one is disagreeing with that.</p>
<p>However, that does not mean that discrimination against women is not happening. As a male high school student, you may not have seen it personally, but that does not mean it is not happening. </p>
<p>I understand that it seems unfair that you may not, in certain cases, receive the same treatment as women in recruiting because of the historical and ongoing actions of others. However, it can be difficult to undo thousands of years of damage that, all too often, is still going on. Unfortunately, no one has come up with a better solution.</p>
<p>I hope not, but perhaps one day you will see this type of discrimination happen to your girlfriend, or wife, or daughter, then maybe you will understand. </p>
<p>In the case illustrated in this post, the discrimination against women is not direct or intentional. It is caused indirectly by the stereotyping/profiling assumption that this man is more competent. This type of indirect or I intended bias is very common. When you are attuned to it, you realize that it happens all the time.</p>
<p>First of all, I think the author makes a big leap when he lumps white males in with Asian males. Does any of us know that such an assumption of competence would be greater with white males or Asian females? I would guess the latter.</p>
<p>Second of all, if you model the fairness of how well different groups of people as if it was an investment where your input is work ethic and talent, the people who get shafted the most are the people who are way beyond the curriculum. The people who are in the perfect position are people like the author, who can consistently do what the teachers ask pretty well but nothing beyond it.</p>
<p>The author’s assertion is that the technical competence of ‘majority males’ isn’t challenged, and in fact, is artificially inflated. Are you kidding me? My technical competence was repeatedly challenged unfairly throughout my first 9 years of school. And it wasn’t just hurt feelings at stake. I ended roughly 4 years behind where I should have been because people decided the placement tests must have been wrong and that there must have been something fraudulent about what I was doing outside of class. Imagine having to apply to college with your 8th grade credentials; this is what I had to do. And now I have to listen to claims that I must have had an unfair advantage. It’s a little much to take.</p>
<p>@Much2learn: and what is being done to combat discrimination against men?
Not to sound anti-feminist here, since honestly it matters little to me, but I’ll be looking forward to the day that women ask men on dates/pay for dates and also play best of 5 instead of 3 at the Grand Slams.</p>
<p>…I don’t want to talk about race.</p>
<p>Hamletz,</p>
<p>Far too many women have to deal with real discrimination: being denied jobs, being offered less money for the same work, being presumed to be less competent, and being sexually harassed. I am not sure what discrimination you are thinking of, but I don’t think that guys paying for dates is equivalent at all. The last time I checked, no one was forcing guys to pay for dates.</p>
<p>You may not realize it, but men are now the minority of college students ( I think they are about 45% of college students). As a result, guys (even white guys) and are getting preference from many colleges over women as the schools try to achieve a balanced class. Oddly, I have not heard any guys complain about the evils of this practice. I have also not heard even one of them suggest that the lower percentage of men may be caused by men being genetically inferior. Instead they continue to complain about the few colleges where women are the minority and receive a preference. I have yet to see anyone roll their eyes when they find out a guy is attending Brown University and say “He’s just there because of affirmative action.” </p>
<p>Why do you think that is?</p>
<p>^LOL. There’s no affirmative action for men at Brown.</p>
<p>And Much2Learn, you’ve made the rookie mistake of statistics by assuming that the behavior around the mean is reflected in the behavior of the tail. The fact that girls <em>on average</em> perform better does not mean that the same is true at the highest region of ability, such as for those for whom ivy admission is realistic. And it is not true, in fact. For instance, you can look at the gender distribution at the top regions of the SAT and it’s quite clear that women aren’t performing better than the men.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would hardly call it “many”–small mid-tier liberal arts schools such as Kenyon College and also some english depts at larger schools have said they are doing this. Regardless, for what it’s worth, when this practice was discussed on other threads, I expressed my disapproval.</p>
<p>Hmm. so are you suggesting that men are genetically inferior?</p>
<p>Also. I do agree that men have the advantage over women in the workforce/etc., but do realize that women have the advantage over men in the social arena - just as it is “socially frowned upon” for women to go into, say, math, it is just as “socially frowned upon” for a man to become a fashion guru. I think we would agree that both of these are Western “traditions” that have lasted thousands of years.</p>
<p>In addition, when hiring elementary school teachers (or other “traditionally female roles”), women are usually preferred over men - I think we would agree for the same reason that men are preferred over women as, say, computer programmers. Women hold the larger proportion of “emotionally relevant” jobs, say as therapists, educators, librarians, and men hold the larger proportion of “hard labor/thought” jobs, say as engineers, construction workers, and truck drivers. And through psychology, each gender has been proven to be - on average - better than the other at what each does. This is hard fact.</p>
<p>
The last time I checked, a guy not paying for dates was usually single.</p>
<p>But let’s not turn this to a feminism argument - I’m not interested (unless you answer my initial question in the affirmative).</p>
<p>
This is a naturalistic fallacy – just because things are a certain way, that doesn’t mean that’s the way that’s best or ideal.</p>
<p>
I don’t think the argument is that the technical competence of majority males isn’t ever challenged, just that it’s not challenged as frequently, or as personally, as it is for members of non-majority groups.</p>
<p>College Alum314,</p>
<p>Quote, “There’s no affirmative action for men at Brown.” </p>
<p>You really think that the guys being accepted at much higher rates is not related to the fact that they consistently have more ladies applying to Brown? </p>
<p>You are correct that men score slightly higher in the tail of the SAT, but what does that prove?You continue to cherry pick facts. It is also true that the ladies have better grades in high school, better grades in college and have lower dropout rates in college.</p>
<p>Hamletz,</p>
<p>Quote, “Hmm. so are you suggesting that men are genetically inferior?”</p>
<p>You are smart enough to tell that I am not saying that at all. It is clear that I am drawing an analogy. When guys do better at something, someone often suggests that it may be because women’s genes are different and they may not have the capability. I am pointing out that never hear that reason thrown out when it is the other way around and the women have better scores than the guys.</p>
<p>Hamletz,</p>
<p>Quote: "men have the advantage over women in the workforce/etc., "
Quote: “women have the advantage over men in the social arena”</p>
<p>Quote: “it is “socially frowned upon” for women to go into, say, math”
Quote: “it is just as “socially frowned upon” for a man to become a fashion guru”
Quote: “these are Western “traditions” that have lasted thousands of years.”</p>
<p>It is disappointing to me that someone smart enough to be accepted to MIT would be such a bigot. </p>
<p>Those first two quotes are just stereotypes that prejudge men and women. Why don’t you tell us all how people are from different races too while you are at it? You already implied in post #7 that you would like to. </p>
<p>The last 3 quotes may be true, but that does not mean that they are good or right. By that standard slavery has been around for thousands of years, and must be good too. I am hoping you will not agree with that.</p>
<p>Quote: “The last time I checked, a guy not paying for dates was usually single.”</p>
<p>Still, it is a choice you are making. Are you really not capable of understanding the difference between discrimination and paying for a date?</p>
<p>The thing that I do not understand at all is that many people read these posts. If you said these things about any other UR group, all hell would break loose on this board. But when you say them about women, very few people respond, and nothing changes.</p>
<p>Why do so many people just put up with this type of behavior when it relates to women? It will never change if no one is willing to say enough is enough. It is not okay to presume that women are inferior at thinking jobs. Then the same person that makes this type of statement argues that there is no discrimination in the workplace. I mean ***? </p>
<p>Does anyone besides me care about this issue? </p>
<p>I don’t know why I keep thinking that I can reason with the bigots of MIT. They must be smart, and open to reason I tell myself. But I am wrong. It is pointless. Grrrrrrr</p>
<p>
I do, to both of those, though usually if financially feasible we split. I think I would be uncomfortable in a relationship where I was not the primary breadwinner. Actually, that happened, once, and it was horrible.</p>
<p>Do you know how it feels to have a man you don’t want stare at you from across the table like he owns you, like he has purchased your body for the price of your jeans? It’s disgusting. I’m not an object. I can’t be rented or owned. I can pay for my own dinner.</p>
<p>
Are you sure you got into MIT? Like, are you sure you’re sure?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, I didn’t know there was a disparity in the admission rates at Brown. I checked and the difference for one year was like 7% vs. 10%. I will say, however, that this is not enough to conclude that there is affirmative action. Similarly, the much larger disparity in admissions rates of men and women at Caltech in the 90’s did not mean that they had affirmative action; in fact, they did not at that time (they may have it now.) MIT also has much larger admission rates for women than do men. The admissions office claims and I believe this is due to so-called self-selection; that is, less women apply to MIT that are longshots. While there is some gender-related affirmative action at MIT, it is not as pronounced as might be suggested from the gender rates.</p>
<p>I have a big problem with you throwing around the word ‘bigots’ without saying who you are talking about and why. I haven’t said anything bigoted on this thread or others.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not cherry picking anything. Again, you are assuming that the behavior at the mean is the same as at the tails. Has anyone ever said the grades of boys who are of high ability (say, who get into ivy leagues) is worse than the girls? Or that they do worse there when admitted? There was at one point a slight difference in the grades at MIT, although I’ve made my arguments about what factors may explain this. I am willing to change my view if I saw data of the performance of each gender in each major. However, schools do not release such data. </p>
<p>I know plenty of women who are in tech of different generations. Those in my parent’s generations uniformly have terrible stories about discrimination. Those in my generation simply do not have these stories suggesting systematic bias, except for those in software or sysadmin or if they have to work in companies that are owned by foreign-based companies. (To be specific, some women of my generation have mentioned to me that there may be an isolate jerk.) I assume that things are better for women who are applying to college today. While I do acknowledge there may be more subtle forms of bias or disadvantages for women, particularly when they get out in the working world, and I am willing to listen, I think it is a mistake to paint with a broad brush based on what happened in the 60’s or 70’s.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Women may historically have been preferred in certain professions, but these are almost always less prestigious and pay less than the professions that are male-dominated. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t agree with this statement.</p>
<p>Slight misunderstanding here I think -</p>
<p>Note that I have never once stated that I agreed with those “traditions”. I simply stated them as existing, and I hope you agree with me that they do exist, and have existed. I personally do not agree with them - only acknowledged their existence.</p>
<p>About the psychology - correct me if I’m wrong (please do), but I learned in AP psych that women are generally more adept at sensing emotion, and men are generally better spatial thinkers (I think it had something to do with neural connections). Maybe I overextended that claim, but that’s where my previous statement came from.</p>
<p>@lidusha: I am not stating that I am against feminism. I am stating that I’m not interested in a large forum post war, inevitably following a thread on feminism, that (unfortunately) seems to be happening. Also, I applaud you for your other comments - personally, I feel each person paying for his or her own is optimal - but it remains that the vast majority of women expect men to pay.</p>
<p>@Much2learn: It is indubitable that men are more physically gifted, and it is also indubitable that women gain many advantages from XX (less X-linked diseases and such). Both of those are genetic components - I do not rate either as “superior” to the other. There are members of both genders who do; just please don’t auto-assume that I think guys are “better”, because I don’t believe so.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh really. You need to work on your communication skills, Hamletz. That or your views on women. Possibly both. It’s not looking so good for you.</p>
<p>I agree I need to work on my communication skills - otherwise I wouldn’t have caused a misunderstanding.</p>
<p>Although - where in any of my posts have I said that I disagree with women’s rights at all? I just wanted to point something out to Much2learn - I felt that he/she had not considered a perspective, and gave my opinion on the matter. Then I stated a couple of facts that were apparently offensive and gave the impression that I’m anti-women’s-rights. Maybe it’s because you and Much2learn are so passionate about the topic - I’m not. Should I be? Just because I’m not with you doesn’t mean I’m against you.</p>
<p>Also, lidusha, I can understand your resentment of me through my other post, but as I’ve said before, I simply stated fact, not opinion. May I ask that you refrain from personal attack or judgment? From your other posts/blog posts, you sound like a great person - I don’t want that to change.</p>
<p>In response to discrimination against women in the workforce:
If you need to preface what you’re saying with “not to sound anti-feminist,” you should probably reconsider what you’re about to say.</p>
<p>
Your phrasing heavily implies that you think that it lasting thousands of years (tradition?) justifies inequity.</p>
<p>
You are directly stating here that women have been proven to be on average worse engineers and computer scientists than men. That’s ********.</p>
<p>
The moment you bring up gender and the workplace you are having an argument about feminism.</p>
<p>
You’re right, I do resent you, and I’m judging you pretty hard. Being a woman in a technical field is not easy. Discrimination is real. Peers, superiors, underlings, and the media taking women’s intellectual contributions less seriously because of their gender is real. The effects on women and their ability to grow and contribute to society are real. The impact on our economy is real.</p>
<p>I’m a fantastic person, and I can be very nice when you’re not directly attacking my right to my career. I’m not going to be nice to people who say the things you said in this forum, no matter who they are. But I am especially not going to let you think, as a man who is possibly going to go to MIT and eventually hold leadership positions out in the real world, that continuing to express that the women you work with are inferior to men, either because you can’t tell you’re saying it or because you actually believe it, will be pleasant for you, or that it will go unnoticed.</p>
<p>I did not, and I will not, directly attack your right to your career.</p>
<p>
A-hem. Sure, I phrased it incorrectly, and I’m sorry you interpreted it incorrectly. Because it definitely does NOT justify inequity. Yet - can you disagree with any of my claims in that paragraph? No, because they’re facts.
Read post #16.
Your definition of feminism must be a lot broader than mine.
Again, I never said that. Give me one place - one place - where I explicitly “express that the women * work with are inferior to men”. Actually, post #16, last paragraph.</p>
<p>Anyway, this is a private argument via a public forum - message me if you have any further concerns.</p>