Oh, please. If anything, the reverse is true. If a male and female candidate are interviewing for a job in the hard sciences and the male is a little more qualified, dollar-to-a-donut the female gets hired. Universities are scrambling to hire females. The problem is: So is private industry and they usually pay more.
They should put that at the front of these articles so I won't have to waste time reading them.
Isn't this true of both sexes and everybody? Aren't we all constrained by biology and society?
Good study and good conclusions clouded by the need to PCify the thing.
My company employs hundreds of engineers. Many are women, but the women are mostly asian (born outside the USA). One could argue that asians are smarter, but that doesn't explain the large number of white, male, American born engineers we also employ.
When I went to college there were few women in math, physics, and chemistry classes, and very few women in engineering classes.
Normal people knew that.
I’d have to agree. I encountered a little bit of prejudice as a woman scientist in training when I was in graduate school many years ago, but it was nothing serious, nothing problematic. I made the choice not to put in the 16-hour days and 7-day weeks my male colleagues put in. Could not see any way to raise kids, keep a husband, and still do the work a serious career in science required. It would also have demanded a gypsy lifestyle for some years after getting a doctorate as I would have had to do some post-doc fellowships in different places, and that wasn’t practical for family living either. Finally just accepted that there were a lot of other fascinating things I could do that didn’t involve locking myself in a lab a hundred hours a week.
But it was my choice, and I was not forced out of science by male chauvinists! Some men were extremely supportive. As long as a woman actually does good science and doesn’t try to use her sex, she will find her male colleagues helpful.
They probably already have tenure, or they wouldn’t have touched this topic. If not, they can get a long-term gig at The Heritage Foundation or another right-of-center think-tank.
Steci at least certainly has tenure in a named chair, what’s more. If the author is using strict academic usage, so does Wiliams (who is called a professor, not an associate professor or assistant professor), what’s more if that’s the case, neither is in a position where they have to worry about promotion either.
“Well, Steci and Williams just lost tenure.”
Yea, if I were them, I’d check every chance to see if some cocaine didn’t just show up...followed by police.
Writing stuff like this is like criticizing the Imam in Iran - you don’t get to live a normal life hence (if any at all).
Choices--not discrimination--determine women scientists' success, researchers say
Absolutely. Especially today.
As proof all one has to do is watch the Science Channel. There's a lot of women 'Scientists' (dumb term) in those series. And one very cute (kinda hot actually) Young woman Physicist from Harvard(1) whose working on String Theory - Gravity is her specialty.
(1) unfortunately she also sets off my gaydar, I have a hunch she likes girls :-(
"The Mathematics of Sex: How Biology and Society Conspire to Limit Talented Women and Girls"
Or this paragraph:
The "substantial resources" universities expend to sponsor gender-sensitivity training and interviewing workshops would be better spent on addressing the real causes of women's underrepresentation, Ceci and Williams say, through creative problem-solving and policy changes that respond to differing "biological and social realities" of the sexes.