<p>Yes, I looked it up, and they are going to have 24 million more men of marriagable age then women, soon.</p>
<p>But, I don’t know the size of the population of China to know what kind of percentage of population that is. Oh well, off topic. :)</p>
<p>
It’s a significant problem in China and increasingly in India as well. Hard to know how they will resolve it. Polyandry maybe?</p>
<p>As ye sow, so shall ye reap.</p>
<p>But how different would the results be between female applicants applying with an intended major of psychology versus engineering?</p>
<p>
Kidnapping surplus Russian women, buying women from other countries without the gender gap. Going to war to kill off the surplus males.</p>
<p>114-100 would be about 10-15% imbalance. That doesn’t sound that much to me. Does anyone know how big the imbalance was in Western Europe after the second world war? I have a feeling it was greater than that. We know how it played out in Europe.</p>
<p>Just to drive my point that schools release detailed admit stats. We know for international applicants it is very hard. I heard 1% at schools below 10% admit rates. How much easier is it for unhooked female applicants from a surburbanf HS in a populous state?</p>
<p>One place the thread topic may not be true: Howard University.</p>
<p>When D was struggling last year with rejection after rejection, one of my employees said he could speak to someone at his alma mater (Howard) and she’d probably get in. He’s white, I’m white, D is white (more of a pinky beige) but I thought: what a great opportunity for this sheltered suburban kid to be in the minority for once. I think she would have learned a lot.</p>
<p>“Being rejected with 10% admit rate feels different from being rejected when in truth the rate 3%.”</p>
<p>It may, but it shouldn’t. That’s an angels-dancing-on-the-head-of-a-pin distinction. Teenagers don’t usually understand what 10% really means for them. Heck, adults often fail this test, too.</p>
<p>Yes, I personally, just failed that test upthread. :p</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And business schools.</p>
<p>pg …:)</p>
<p>Let’s not go “shouldn’t” At any rate some teens do understand what 10% means. I certainly hope some teens do They teach stats in HS. The teens that are applying below-10% schools are our best hope. </p>
<p>More important point is that someone who applied thinking the rate is 10% may not have applied had they known it is really 3%.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And service academies.</p>
<p>I wonder what the next categopry will be that people are so sure is wildly disadvantaged. In a few months, we’ve been from white unhooked to everyone not a legacy or athlete to all Asian Americans to only Asian Americans who fall into the lower socio-economic strata…and now it’s women or white women?</p>
<p>Definitely NOT happenning in pre-med / Medical filed of study. 50% and over and growing, at some places still under 50%, but definitely growing, many deans at Med. Schools are also women.<br>
The same for scholarships. I do not know much about top schools, D. did not apply. She got very good Merit packages at every place that she applied and ended up attending UG on full tuition Merit award which was going up over years, as she piled more awards later. No local/community, all were awarded at her college. If the goal is to go to UG cheaply, it is not that hard to accomplish. If the goal is to go to the one with prestigious name, then it is very different story. All along kindergarten thru graduating from UG, D. has never experienced any kind of discrimination and so far it continues at Med. School. Actually she just was selected for opportunity that had only 10 spots and very many applicants. She could not figure out why she got it, but was very happy with that.</p>
<p>No one knows if anyone is disadvantaged wildly or not. If no one is disadvantaged, stats will silence them once and for all. If indeed there’s a diffrential, people will be better informed and choose accordingly. Win-win, don’t you think?</p>
<p>
It’s the beauty of the American melting pot–we’re all disadvantaged.</p>
<p>Many people thought women’s colleges were historical anachronisms and would die out, but they’re not. The OP’s point is one reason why. </p>
<p>Many co-ed LACS are female dominated anyway. A student at a women’s college that has a relationship with a co-ed school that’s skewed toward men may actually find it easier to obtain suitable male companionship than at a co-ed LAC.</p>
<p>If this is what you mean by stats [that] will silence for once and for all:</p>
<p>*for example, x% white girls from NY were admitted with SAT xxx GPA yyy type stats. …so you know roughly what your chances are and help you decide to apply or not. *</p>
<p>But, we’ve been saying over various threads, that placing yourself vis-a-vis stats can be misleading. That’s a piece of the puzzle, not the whole. You’re thinking that breaking down the categories into gender/geog will somehow tell more? </p>
<p>So, if a school accepts 40% of vals who apply, you want to know what proportion were male/female and/or from what states? Again, looking for statistical fences to lean against. You’d need to account for major, experience in that field and those nifty holistic qualities.</p>
<p>Doesn’t Naviance offer a glimpse that’s at least related to a kid’s own high school?</p>
<p>When one says LACs are dominated by women, you may mean only enrollment numbers. You’d need to break that down, too, for an accurate view- plus, what do you mean by dominate? Do women get better grades, enter tougher fields, hold most campus leadership roles, etc.</p>
<p>If women want to truly get preferential admissions treatment at LACs, there are some excellent ones that discriminate 100% against males. There are far more all female LACS than there are all male schools. Wellesley, Smith, Mt Holyoke, Bryn Mawr, just to name a few of the better known ones are examples.</p>
<p>At the more selective private schools whose admissions processes are meant to “build a diverse freshman class of unique individuals”, applicants who look like a common stereotype at that school (demographics, extracurriculars, intended majors, etc.) are probably at a disadvantage.</p>
<p>Funny story that is true. I know a young woman who was WL at Providence college as was a young man. No question when comparing the two, which one had the better profile. Absolutely none. Yet, the young man cleared the waitlist which really got the mom of the young woman in a huff. Discrimination against females, and yes, she was right, as Providence is fighting a lop sided ratio. It still is predominantly female despite that effort. She was as also WL and denied at a number of LACs and other such schools which was a real bone of contention. I asked if she had applied to any of the very good LACs that I mentioned in my above post, and the mom looked at me like I was crazy. No way, she said, The girl did not want to go to an all girl school. </p>
<p>She is currently very unhappy at a school that is 70%+ female and one of the issues is that there are few dateable males there. She has filed her transfer papers. So what is a college to do?</p>