<p>If students would just accept that admissions officers don't choose students based on criteria that students think they use...</p>
<p>" It would seem surprising that there would be a paucity of males applying to places like Amherst unless they are unpopular with males. "</p>
<p>Males are more likely than are females to choose colleges based on the big time sports that are available. That's why males as a group tend not to want to go to LACs. Men also are more likely to choose fields like engineering, that typically are not strong at LACs.</p>
<p>"If schools are lopside gender-wise, they can just make an effort to socialize with schools that are lopsided the other way. There was a lot of MIT-Wellesley social mixers,"</p>
<p>That won't address the fact that many males don't want to be in the overwhelming minority in college, and many females want to be around males in their daily life -- classes, dorms, clubs, etc. The gender imbalance issue isn't just about dating.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Regardless, I disagree with this practice of favoring one gender over the other. There are creative ways to insure that there will be male-female interaction. If schools are lopside gender-wise, they can just make an effort to socialize with schools that are lopsided the other way. There was a lot of MIT-Wellesley social mixers, for instance. So instead of Tufts and Lehigh (an engineering school that I think is male-dominated) trying to balance their own enrollment gender-wise individually, they could just increase the social interaction between them. This is obviously more feasible if a college is located in an area that has a lot of colleges.
[/quote]
This is a bad idea. The purpose of having adequate amounts of males and females is so that they learn to work with each other in a classroom environment so that both groups can learn to work together in the real world. Having mixers does not encourage this at all. Proposing this as an alternative makes me think that you think the only reason why schools seek adequate amounts of males in females is for social/dating purposes.</p>
<p>Hunt:
Any system that was designed to reject anyone deemed "qualified for admissions" is, by your definition, inherently unfair.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But honestly, the example Narcissa give is probably a person who would not have been accepted to MIT if she had been male.
[/quote]
The point of this thread is to discourage this sort of negative thinking and diminishing of other's accomplishments. What you and Narcissa are doing is the equivalent of telling someone who got an A on test that they probably would have failed if the test had been different and focused on different concepts. What I have been saying is what's the point of this sort of thinking? You are not helping anyone. In fact, you are probably hurting people.</p>
<p>Also, this whole thinking is stupid because you all assume that gender does not influence a person's life. You all are saying, "What if she was a boy and had the same stats...," which is stupid because that could never happen. You cannot change a person's gender and expect it to not influence the rest of his or her life. It is likely the case that had this girl been born a boy that she would have been an even better candidate for admission. Perhaps the whole stigma of "boys being better than girls at math and science" prevented her from reaching her potential.</p>
<p>Would anyone care if the LAC gender ratio was 60-40% or 55-45%? MIT was 55%-45% male-female and I didn't really notice. What would the gender ratio be if the liberal arts colleges just admitted the best candidates? Would it really be that dramatic?</p>
<p>"Perhaps the whole stigma of "boys being better than girls at math and science" prevented her from reaching her potential."</p>
<p>To say this is an insult to all those women in our parent's generation who actually experienced real discrimination.</p>
<p>
[quote]
To say this is an insult to all those women in our parent's generation who actually experienced real discrimination.
[/quote]
Where is the substance behind your outrage? </p>
<p>What exactly is "real discrimination?" </p>
<p>Do you think that stereotypes like "boys are better than girls at math and science" either do not exist or do not have substantial effects on girls? Do you think there are fewer women in science and math related field simply because women are not interested in these sorts of jobs? (Which is also a stereotype.)</p>
<p>Become more informed before pretending to be outraged.</p>
<p>I'm guessing by real discrimination they mean actual caps set by colleges on their enrollment in higher education.</p>
<p>The mayor's son got into princeton with a 3.0.</p>
<p>not going to say which city, but it's a really big one.</p>
<p>I don't really care though, since it doesn't affect me.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Do you think there are fewer women in science and math related field simply because women are not interested in these sorts of jobs?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Obviously the blanket statement that "women are not interested in these sorts of jobs" is untrue, but what if a smaller proportion of women are interested in these sorts of jobs? (Of course I am not claiming that this is actually true.) How would that reality play into the push for 50-50 gender equality at tech schools? </p>
<p>
[quote]
Become more informed before pretending to be outraged.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No offense meant, but I don't get where you're going with this... What do you hope to gain by aggressively accusing people of being "uninformed" before even giving them a chance to reply to your questions?</p>
<p>Life is not fair for all the times. All you can do is to do your personal best, and don't can about the result. Or life will always be miserable</p>
<p>As of last spring, there were 32 students in the top 10% of my class (I'm now a junior).
27 of them were female.
5 were male. </p>
<p>how's that for lopsided?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Obviously the blanket statement that "women are not interested in these sorts of jobs" is untrue, but what if a smaller proportion of women are interested in these sorts of jobs?
[/quote]
Well, I think you need to ask yourself why professions relating to math and science attract a smaller proportion of women.</p>
<p>
[quote]
No offense meant, but I don't get where you're going with this... What do you hope to gain by aggressively accusing people of being "uninformed" before even giving them a chance to reply to your questions?
[/quote]
The purpose was to assert two things: collegealum314 is uninformed about this topic and his or her "outrage" is totally disingenuous. I will conceed that it is possible for him or her to simply just be uninformed on this topic and to be genuinely outraged by what I said (simply because he or she is uninformed).</p>
<p>Anyways, I did not give collegealum314 time to respond because those were rhetorical questions. I am hoping that when collegealum314 sees those questions and is unable to answer the questions for himself or herself that he or she will realize how uninformed he or she is and how stupid it is not to consider stereotypes that have been shown to have detrimental affects on girls and prevented many of them pursuing careers in math and science related fields as "real discrimination."</p>
<p>Lastly, my asking what "real discrimination" was not a rhetorical question. I want to see how collegealum314 will try to come back from that one...</p>
<p>
[quote]
As of last spring, there were 32 students in the top 10% of my class (I'm now a junior).
27 of them were female.
5 were male.
[/quote]
I don't think anyone said girls were poorer students so that's besides the point.</p>
<p>^^no but a couple of people did voice doubts of whether the proportion of male-female academically qualified applicants was actually drastic enough to effect admissions
just providing a personal example of how large of a gap there was at my school.</p>
<p>
[quote]
^^no but a couple of people did voice doubts of whether the proportion of male-female academically qualified applicants was actually drastic enough to effect admissions
just providing a personal example of how large of a gap there was at my school.
[/quote]
Oh ok. I thought you were talking about my post that was talking specifically about math and science performance.</p>
<p>I've heard all of Newjack's arguments before. We have all heard them. I just disagree with them. Or at least I believe the assumptions they are based on no longer hold true because of the active movement to correct them over the past four decades. </p>
<p>I don't believe the vast majority of girls are actively discouraged from math or science proficiency before graduate school. By "real discrimination," I mean having teachers saying things like, "Wow, you did well writing up this proof. Did your boyfriend help you with that?" This is something that happened to a professor while an undergrad at MIT in the 70's. Or a comment like, "These professions are masculine," which is something my mother heard. </p>
<p>My conclusions that this sort of active discrimination don't exist for the vast amount of females before college are based on my own experience, the female friends that I had in school, and the experience of female family members that went into heavily male-dominated engineering professions. One of my former (female) students went to grad school in science and was featured in the alumni newsletter. They asked her about how she overcame the discouragement she experienced as a female going into science. She said she was never discouraged at any point. Maybe there are more backward towns where these sorts of things could occur. But it's extremely rare that I have heard anything like this.</p>
<p>Today, females make up at least half of the doctors, biologists, and chemists coming out of school. They are also well represented in more quantitative disciplines like chemical engineering. So the statement that females aren't represented in math/science professions is incomplete; they are only not represented in certain math/science professions. The main one that they are under-represented in is computer science. People have hypothesized that this is because most programmers are attracted to computers by computer games, and the current computer games appeal to boys. I wouldn't consider this "real discrimination," but it is something that deserves to be addressed. There is a grad student at Carnegie Mellon working to develop computer games that are more appealing to young girls in an effort to attract more females to computer science. </p>
<p>All the examples I have heard of discrimination have occurred after undergrad, either by faculty or in the real world. The discrimination against females in industry is typically in engineering. One female I know didn't experience discrimination until her company was bought out by a foreign company. The management was chauvinistic. Another one I know experienced it in as a systems administrator in industry; she said she didn't experience this chauvinism when she went to grad school for economics, however. I have also heard from from friends that there are reduced expectations of ability for females in a fairly well-known software company. And of course, as an MIT alumni, I have heard that the report that came out about 5 years ago saying that female faculty members were not as supported as the male ones. I have not heard this from current MIT female undergrads, however. The poster MollieB asserted this in one of the threads on the MIT forum. Had this been thirty years ago, undoubtedly her answer would have been different. But again, this is not relevant to what happens in high school and before that.</p>
<p>Colleges accept people with lowers stats because their schools do not provide enough resources or they have a hook.</p>
<p>^^no but a couple of people did voice doubts of whether the proportion of male-female academically qualified applicants was actually drastic enough to effect admissions</p>
<h2>just providing a personal example of how large of a gap there was at my school.</h2>
<p>Well, I know that the number of males vs. females in the higher ranges of the SAT is roughly equal. </p>
<p>I don't believe in affirmative action for guys btw.</p>
<p>Weel, some schools have a higher number of females or males enrolled. I would say that it would depend on the college.</p>
<p>at my school 11 girls were accepted into UCLA while only 2 guys were accepted...one of the guys doesn't count cuz he's gay...and the other guy is me xD</p>
<p>" only 2 guys were accepted..one of the guys doesn't count cuz he's gay"</p>
<p>That comment is nonsensical, ignorant, and offensive.</p>