Women Only Professorships

Kidchameleon

There are no barriers to women becoming professors. The fact that they have to try encourage them to make the step up says it all.

There are barriers to men taking the proposed professorships, its utterly sexist

vriesmays

Any man with talent or intelligence in an academic discipline should avoid univiersites as they're too feminised, liberal, left-wing and dumbed down now.

KiKi III

Kidchameleon wrote: »

There are no barriers to women becoming professors. The fact that they have to try encourage them to make the step up says it all.

There are barriers to men taking the proposed professorships, its utterly sexist

How many female professors do you know? I would assume these days there are no formal barriers stopping women from becoming professors, but it’s certainly possible that there are cultural barriers, implicit biases etc.

I don’t know that there are, I don’t know a lot about it. But it definitely seems like there could be.

And those types of barriers are real, even if they’re not written down somewhere.

Kidchameleon

KiKi III wrote: »

How many female professors do you know? I would assume these days there are no formal barriers stopping women from becoming professors, but it’s certainly possible that there are cultural barriers, implicit biases etc.

I don’t know that there are, I don’t know a lot about it. But it definitely seems like there could be.

And those types of barriers are real, even if they’re not written down somewhere.

What would be an example of a cultural barrier? Women are free to do whatever they want as far as I can tell?

KiKi III wrote: »

How many female professors do you know?

How many female construction workers do you know?

vriesmays

vriesmays wrote: »

Any man with talent or intelligence in an academic discipline should avoid univiersites as they're too feminised, liberal, left-wing and dumbed down now.

Kind of difficult to do that when you've either A) aimed your whole career development at being a professor, or You've already "done your time" in a university to get all the benefits.

Anyway, Irish universities haven't gone the way of the US yet, and while there are faculty departments or administrative areas which have gone feminist/liberal, many other departments have remained (for the most part) cancer free. So far.

IF we want Irish universities to resist feminist and PC/SJW culture, then we need to be encouraging more males to work there. It's really that simple. Running away and leaving the industry to the feminists is not going to encourage equality, and will simply ensure that feminist/SJW nonsense becomes established as an accepted institutional policy.. which has already happened in the US.

KiKi III

KiKi III wrote: »

How many female professors do you know? I would assume these days there are no formal barriers stopping women from becoming professors, but it’s certainly possible that there are cultural barriers, implicit biases etc.

I don’t know that there are, I don’t know a lot about it. But it definitely seems like there could be.

And those types of barriers are real, even if they’re not written down somewhere.

Those barriers are perceived to exist... except in reality they don't. Three decades of changes to our legal system, and the women's rights movements effect on Irish society ensured that any such barriers would be removed.

You state that the barriers exist, but are unable to name any. "It definitely seems like there could be"... right.

As for numbers of female professors, if you take the whole industry of Third level education, you'll find that females are a minority (although considering that's there's only two genders, it's easy to be a minority). However, if you look at particular departments or disciplines, you'll find certain areas which are dominated by female professors as opposed to male. You'll also find that many courses don't require a Professor, and will have a lecturer instead. The fact that nobody is complaining about the numbers of lecturers, I'd imagine there's a lot more female lecturers around.

Although, I would point out, that any time I return to Ireland to do lecturing I'm not seeing any Irish university or college as being a definite bastion of maleness. There's always many female professors/lecturers around.. so I do wonder at this supposed lack in the profession.

Upforthematch

vriesmays wrote: »

Any man with talent or intelligence in an academic discipline should avoid univiersites as they're too feminised, liberal, left-wing and dumbed down now.

What a load of bull. Plenty of opportunity out there.

KiKi III

Kidchameleon wrote: »

What would be an example of a cultural barrier? Women are free to do whatever they want as far as I can tell?



How many female construction workers do you know?

A cultural barrier would be a situation where most of the professors are of the same gender/ class/ race etc and display affinity bias when shortlisting candidates for promotion. This could be done on a conscious level or unconsciously.

So, two equally qualified people go for a job and he gets it because “we think he’d fit in better”, for no reason other than his gender - rather than say bringing them both back for another round of interviews or seeing how their references describe them as a fairer way of deciding.

By the way, everyone is prone to affinity bias. We like people like us. It’s been a survival mechanism for millenia, it doesn’t make anyone an awful person. But it does sometimes make it harder for some groups to get a fair shot.

As for three decades of change... while that’s true, 30 years is a pretty short period of time really and I think it would be quite naive to think any and all gender discrimination issues have been resolved in such a short timeframe.

Benoconnor80

Nah, if they're good enough appoint them.if they're not don't.

Charles Babbage

Deleted User wrote: »

Although, I would point out, that any time I return to Ireland to do lecturing I'm not seeing any Irish university or college as being a definite bastion of maleness. There's always many female professors/lecturers around.. so I do wonder at this supposed lack in the profession.

Spot on, there isn't a need for women professors, they can become the regular kind.



In any case, this may die a death with the election, perhaps the useless minister will lose her seat.

KiKi III

KiKi III wrote: »

A cultural barrier would be a situation where most of the professors are of the same gender/ class/ race etc and display affinity bias when shortlisting candidates for promotion. This could be done on a conscious level or unconsciously.

So, two equally qualified people go for a job and he gets it because “we think he’d fit in better”, for no reason other than his gender - rather than say bringing them both back for another round of interviews or seeing how their references describe them as a fairer way of deciding.

By the way, everyone is prone to affinity bias. We like people like us. It’s been a survival mechanism for millenia, it doesn’t make anyone an awful person. But it does sometimes make it harder for some groups to get a fair shot.

As for three decades of change... while that’s true, 30 years is a pretty short period of time really and I think it would be quite naive to think any and all gender discrimination issues have been resolved in such a short timeframe.

It's obvious that you didn't bother reading the last few pages considering I've already posted about unconscious bias, and yet, here you are telling me what it is. Awesome. :rolleyes: The sad part is that you can't identify any barriers, so you jump to unconscious bias... Something that the person does not know that they feel...

And I didn't say that all gender discrimination had been resolved. I said that the barriers had been removed due to legal and social changes. People are allowed to think that females or males are less suitable or even less able to do certain roles. They are not allowed to display sexism, or actively discriminate against either gender in areas which is protected by the law.

But their thoughts cannot be regulated... and anyone who suggests that they can is delusional. Unconscious bias is a step into thought control, and since you can't know another persons' thoughts, it's a witch hunt.

Charles Babbage

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Spot on, there isn't a need for women professors, they can become the regular kind.

Hold on. Not what I said.

I don't consider gender to be important in choosing professors. It doesn't change anything. As individuals, it is their behavior and beliefs which are presented in their work, that is important.

I don't like this gender war going on which is being pushed down our throats by SJWs/Feminists... It's dangerous.

Realt Dearg Sec

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You state that the barriers exist, but are unable to name any. "It definitely seems like there could be"... right.

I'd imagine there's a lot more female lecturers around.

You'd imagine...right.

Realt Dearg Sec

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

You'd imagine...right.

Yup.. I am a lecturer myself, but I don't know, hence the phrase used.

Anything more substantial to add, or are you just intent on nitpicking? Plucking sentences or a single point out of a series of posts that you don't like?

Realt Dearg Sec

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yup.. I am a lecturer myself, but I don't know, hence the phrase used.

Anything more substantial to add, or are you just intent on nitpicking? Plucking sentences or a single point out of a series of posts that you don't like?

I'm a lecturer too. But you did actually pluck that poster's sentence straight out of context, your point being they were making assumptions based not on evidence but on a vague, ill informed impression. Then in the same post, literally "imagine" a number that suits your argument. I dunno what department you're in, but I've worked in three Irish universities, in a department where you would definitely expect it to be more women, especially given you and other posters obsession with the supposed feminist/sjw obsession in such departments, and they literally all had an overwhelming majority of men in full time faculty positions. Even though at every level below that, including postgraduate and contingent, there were more women.

So, yeah, imagine away, but unless you have actual numbers, don't pretend it backs up your point (not that you're actually willing to state your point, because you are working through implication). Because it doesn't.

Realt Dearg Sec

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

I'm a lecturer too. But you did actually pluck that poster's sentence straight out of context, your point being they were making assumptions based not on evidence but on a vague, ill informed impression. Then in the same post, literally "imagine" a number that suits your argument.

Actually, I responded to the whole post(s) rather than plucking out a single sentence. And my response is hardly out of context... considering the discussion over the previous few pages...

I dunno what department you're in, but I've worked in three Irish universities, in a department where you would definitely expect it to be more women, especially given you and other posters obsession with the supposed feminist/sjw obsession in such departments, and they literally all had an overwhelming majority of men in full time faculty positions. Even though at every level below that, including postgraduate and contingent, there were more women.

I've said previously that I work in Business management, generally doing MBA related courses, although I also deal with Financial management. I don't work in Ireland, and I sometimes come back to Ireland as part of connections that my current university has with Irish universities. In most occasions where I've been invited to Irish universities, there tends to be a fairly even split between Male and female professors/lecturers. More females in the "soft" areas like communications, and more males in technical areas like accounting.

As for my "obsession" with feminism/SJW in academia, I've said that it's something that has happened in some departments, rather than being widespread.. as opposed to what's happened in the US... but then I get the feeling you've skimmed the last few pages rather than actually involving yourself in the thread.

So, yeah, imagine away, but unless you have actual numbers, don't pretend it backs up your point (not that you're actually willing to state your point, because you are working through implication). Because it doesn't.

As for responding to the other posters point, he/she said that there definitely seems to be barriers but the poster was unable to identify any of the actual barriers, instead later adding an unconscious/cultural bias... which nobody can identify anyway because it's in the persons head, and something that they might be unaware of... Yup.

My point is pretty clear considering I've been arguing against unconscious bias for the last couple of pages, and you're simply trying to dismiss it without actually engaging with it or the actual content of this thread. This is your only contribution to the thread, as far as I can see.

Lastly, you're right. I haven't been providing evidence of anything. I've been stating my opinion based on my experiences. As have you. Posters on boards are generally clued in enough, to decide for themselves whether they wish to take it or leave it with regards to opinions... and don't need to be told every time that it is an actual opinion. The absence of evidence in links is usually a sign that it is an opinion...

Realt Dearg Sec

Well your post obviously doesn't contest my central point, that you don't actually have any evidence regarding the numbers if women actually getting serious academic jobs, regardless of department. Saying it's an opinion doesn't change this, you just tried to weight that opinion with some spurious rigour and are now trying to backtrack on it. But are still happy enough to call someone else out on their lack of similar rigour.

As you mention, SOME departments have apparently become preoccupied with feminism. Which doesn't in any way contradict what I said, which was that even in THOSE departments that offend your business management sensibilities, women are outnumbered by men in every department I've ever worked in. In fact, if you can find me even one department in any major University in Ireland, except a women's studies department, where women outnumber men, I'll happily concede that you're correct and that there is no problem whatsoever with the general gender disparity in academic posts nationwide.

But while you're looking, it would be interesting if you could say in plain terms, rather than by innuendo and implication, why you think so many more men are employed than women in these roles, that would be a refreshing change.

In the meantime though, at least consider the possibility that it may be likely that people, however unconsciously, judge women more harshly than men, in various ways and for various reasons, and that this might account for the disparity. But if you don't think that's it, I would like to hear what you think does account for it. In plain language.

Like yourself, I'm now in a foreign University, in the states as it happens, and I would also question your absurd interpretation of the state of the American university, which owes a lot more to right wing media talking points than to the actual reality of academic life. But that's another matter...

Kidchameleon

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

but I've worked in three Irish universities, in a department where you would definitely expect it to be more women, especially given you and other posters obsession with the supposed feminist/sjw obsession in such departments, and they literally all had an overwhelming majority of men in full time faculty positions. Even though at every level below that, including postgraduate and contingent, there were more women.

Some great insider info there. Why is it that we see more women in academia yet we see less women at the top levels of academia? It is not gender bias - the women are there in the first place with every opportunity to rise up. No, it is the choice of those women to have a more balanced life (generally speaking). Men are more likely to seek status, women are more likely to forgo status for the good of their family. It is just nature. Look at countries like Sweden - the more equal opportunities people get, the more we see a divergence in the choices between the sexes.

KiKi III

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Some great insider info there. Why is it that we see more women in academia yet we see less women at the top levels of academia? It is not gender bias - the women are there in the first place with every opportunity to rise up. No, it is the choice of those women to have a more balanced life (generally speaking).Men are more likely to seek status, women are more likely to forgo status for the good of their family. It is just nature. Look at countries like Sweden - the more equal opportunities people get, the more we see a divergence in the choices between the sexes.

I like to hedge my posts by saying things like "I think", "I imagine" and "IMO" because I'm not an expert on these topics so unless I have what I'd consider to be pretty solid evidence, I'm not going to present my opinion as fact.

Which is exactly what you're doing in the bolded statements. Are you even open to the possibility that you could be wrong?

Most senior positions are held by professors in their 60s, so we can surmise that they graduated and started their careers in the 70s and 80s, when opportunities for women were pretty limited. Up until maybe 10-15 years ago the pipeline of women for professorships in most fields simply wouldn't have existed, because of being denied opportunity early in their careers.

I read somewhere that employment equality in this regard will be achieved in 2072. These types of professorships are aimed at achieving that balance sooner than 2072.

Outside of acadmia, I worked for an extremely talented female CEO a couple of years ago who rose to senior management in her 20s because she's quite a brilliant woman (now in her 50s) She tells the stories of being asked to make tea or take notes by men far more junior than her because they assumed she was the secretary.

KiKi III

Deleted User wrote: »

It's obvious that you didn't bother reading the last few pages considering I've already posted about unconscious bias, and yet, here you are telling me what it is. Awesome. :rolleyes: The sad part is that you can't identify any barriers, so you jump to unconscious bias... Something that the person does not know that they feel...

And I didn't say that all gender discrimination had been resolved. I said that the barriers had been removed due to legal and social changes. People are allowed to think that females or males are less suitable or even less able to do certain roles. They are not allowed to display sexism, or actively discriminate against either gender in areas which is protected by the law.

But their thoughts cannot be regulated... and anyone who suggests that they can is delusional. Unconscious bias is a step into thought control, and since you can't know another persons' thoughts, it's a witch hunt.

Actually, I was discussing affinity bias, which is related to but not the same thing as unconscious bias. Essentially what you're saying above is "they're allowed to have sexist thoughts but not to hire based on them" which is true but doesn't seem very likely to work out.

And while we can't regulate people's thoughts, there are steps that can be taken to biases.

CtevenSrowder

KiKi III wrote: »

Actually, I was discussing affinity bias, which is related to but not the same thing as unconscious bias. Essentially what you're saying above is "they're allowed to have sexist thoughts but not to hire based on them" which is true but doesn't seem very likely to work out.

And while we can't regulate people's thoughts, there are steps that can be taken to biases.

You mean like making it illegal to act on those biases? But we already do that. The other steps discriminate. And discriminate against people who may not have these biases. They also assume that these biases are held based off large generalisations. Its not quite the good idea you may think.

Gynoid

I googled affinity bias and unconscious bias and fcuk me but it seems like a good way for vague pop psychologists to make a lot of money. The number of courses, trainings, modules, it is like an invasive rash. If it was a real thing it should have already innoculated all work places long ago.
One area of responsibility I have in my job is sorting through the prospective employees applications. It is a very physically demanding job for which they are applying. One could imagine that a company might think bigger, stronger bodies would help. But my bosses do not even ask the sex of the applicant when they discuss employing people with me, just what are their qualifications, what is their experience. Genuinely. What is their sex is NEVER asked.

I honestly think this made up war between the sexes is for younger people to have the vicarious thrill of battles that were fought and won a long time ago. Remembering stories from the past where senior women were asked to make tea fir example - honestly that is grievance nostalgia. Laugh loudly at people who are neanderthals if anything like that ever happens to you, or if really upset, pursue the legal course of action freely available to all.

Present generations of feminists should find new and real problems. There are plenty of them. Heres a starter kit. Women imprisoned in other countries for not wearing scarves. Girls in this country who are subjected to FGM. Pro pornography and prostutution decriminalisation movements that ignore the gross debasement of women inherent in those activities. The growing acceptance of surrogacy in spite of the vast abuses it encourages. The hyper sexualisation of children. The savage mutilation of childrens bodies by trendy gender affirmation.
There is plenty to work with.

Kidchameleon

KiKi III wrote: »

I like to hedge my posts by saying things like "I think", "I imagine" and "IMO" because I'm not an expert on these topics so unless I have what I'd consider to be pretty solid evidence, I'm not going to present my opinion as fact.

Which is exactly what you're doing in the bolded statements. Are you even open to the possibility that you could be wrong?

I have backed everything that I have said up with evidence if you care to have a read over the thread. It is not my opinion, it is fact. There is nothing stopping a woman becoming a professor, women don't need special treatment. They need to be treated equally. Are women incapable of becoming professors with out an unfair advantage?

Men and women are different. We are different physically for example - women can give birth, men cannot. Men and women's brains are different too, mens tend to be larger with specific programing geared towards hunting and problem solving. Women's brains tend be be smaller with specific programming geared towards care of children and empathy (https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/behind-online-behavior/201507/men-systemize-women-empathize). These differences occurred because of evolutionary need, they are not sexist. You can argue with mother nature all you like but if you look beyond the notes your gender studies teacher gave you, you will see that it is true.

Many, many studies on IQ (https://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/SexDifferences.aspx) have noted a difference in male and female ADULT scores. Men tend to occupy both extremes of the IQ distribution whilst women tend to occupy the median. This explains why we tend see more male geniuses (as well as more mentally retarded males) than we do female. It explains why men are more likely to win Nobel prizes and even become professors. It is nature, not sexism.

KiKi III

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

You mean like making it illegal to act on those biases? But we already do that. The other steps discriminate. And discriminate against people who may not have these biases. They also assume that these biases are held based off large generalisations. Its not quite the good idea you may think.

I mean like unconscious bias training, blind shortlisting of CVs, diversity on interview panels etc.

KiKi III

Gynoid wrote: »

I googled affinity bias and unconscious bias and fcuk me but it seems like a good way for vague pop psychologists to make a lot of money. The number of courses, trainings, modules, it is like an invasive rash. If it was a real thing it should have already innoculated all work places long ago.

It takes an astonishing level of self-belief to be able to decide that something that has been proven over and over again doesn't exist based on a google search.

As for my former CEO, the point i was trying to get across is that many of those men who patronised her in her 20s are still in their roles and at very senior levels - and I find it highly unlikely that their attitudes have changed dramatically with age.

I believe feminism doesn't have to and shouldn't choose between opposing FGM and the other atrocities you mentioned, and advancing equality issues for Western women.

Gynoid

KiKi III wrote: »

It takes an astonishing level of self-belief to be able to decide that something that has been proven over and over again doesn't exist based on a google search.

.

There are studies emerging that can also be googled that are seriously questioning the efficacy of bias retraining.

And thanks, I do have quite a good level of self belief, if not quite astonishing. Perhaps that is why as a woman I have always felt I could do whatever I wanted if I worked hard enough at it. I think any namby pambying of anyone because of their sex is inherently biased and patronising.

The aspersions cast by men or women meant little to me throughout life, which is probably why I have not been troubled by this apparently rampant sexism. Nor do they now as in the aspersion just cast by you as to my egotism...perhaps a little unconscious bias training might be useful when it comes to handling opinions that you do not agree with

CtevenSrowder

KiKi III wrote: »

I mean like unconscious bias training, blind shortlisting of CVs, diversity on interview panels etc.

Unconscious bias training is an absolute heap of garbage. There is little to no evidence that it has any affect, and again its is just broadly assumed that these biases are held in the first place.

Silentcorner

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Unconscious bias training is an absolute heap of garbage. There is little to no evidence that it has any affect, and again its is just broadly assumed that these biases are held in the first place.

The people making money about Unconscious bias are out and out charlatans...what about the unconscious bias of the people lecturing about unconscious bias...charlatans and simpletons the lot of them!!!

It's much easier to fool someone than to convince someone they have been fooled!!

Realt Dearg Sec

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

Well your post obviously doesn't contest my central point, that you don't actually have any evidence regarding the numbers if women actually getting serious academic jobs, regardless of department. Saying it's an opinion doesn't change this, you just tried to weight that opinion with some spurious rigour and are now trying to backtrack on it. But are still happy enough to call someone else out on their lack of similar rigour.

Hold on a second. There's a difference. You're calling me out because I voiced an opinion and didn't provide any evidence on the numbers of female professors (which has been listed earlier in the thread by other people). You're jumping on me because of the language I used, and the lack of evidence. Fine. Fair enough.

The other poster made a claim of definite barriers that seemed to exist, and was unable to provide any examples of those barriers... only later adding a unconscious bias as a barrier. You claimed that I took that out of context.. which I still don't see how I did.

Entirely different situations. If you can't see that, there's no real point discussing anything with you.

But while you're looking, it would be interesting if you could say in plain terms, rather than by innuendo and implication, why you think so many more men are employed than women in these roles, that would be a refreshing change.

Innuendo and implication...? where have I done that? No. Seriously.. your own posting style in directing posts to me has been rather snide, and I see little point dealing with you. I haven't sought to disrespect you in any way, so why start with me?

And I did say previously that there were perceived barriers regardless of whether they were there now. That the barriers did exist in the past, and that some believe that the barriers still exist regardless of the changes in the law and social perception. Which you would know if you had bothered to read the thread.. because it's obvious you haven't.

And, no. I'm done with you. You're correct in that I didn't provide any evidence about the numbers of female professors, but then I didn't claim that my experience represented the whole story. I voiced an opinion based on my experiences, and you decided to jump in on that. Fine. And I'd probably have no issue discussing it with you, if you weren't so.... meh.

KiKi III

KiKi III wrote: »

And while we can't regulate people's thoughts, there are steps that can be taken to biases.

It's more the case that we shouldn't even try to regulate peoples thoughts. What are these steps?