Women Only Professorships

mistersifter

A female friend of mine was helping to organize a humanities seminar a few months back. It was some gender themed event.

One postgrad student was to be awarded a grant to travel and present. My friend evaluated proposals and chose a male to receive the award. She was quickly told by her boss (also a woman) that she wasn't allowed to give the award to a man.

A small example of the twisted mentality that seems to be dominant in universities.

douglashyde

I work in 'tech' in a female dominated field/role. The company as a whole (a well known household name) has brought in a new policy requiring a min of 2 female candidates interviewed for every new role (not just my field), this often manifests as 1 male, 2 female candidates in the interview process.

Interestingly one (of many) negative fallouts from this is we often bring a token female into the hiring mix to hit this mandated requirement even if that person is not a strong candidate (I sit on interview panels).

Positive discrimination/action as a whole lowers the bar for females (creating a lower average) and creates a higher bar for males- this doesn't service real diversity well in the long run. Also, the label 'diversity hire' is used quite a lot, because it's true. These things do no favors for women as a whole.

Identity politics is bad for people and bad for business.

KWAG2019

Caquas wrote: »

Not to change the subject but the Leaving Cert has become a national disgrace. There is a major industry of grind schools here based on students learning answers off by heart but no-one ever lose marks for plagiarism in the Leaving Cert. The examiners are in on the game - they give top marks to all the students who regurgitate the identical essays. This farce is somewhat less detrimental to young women who tend to be more willing to play the game (but higher maths is less susceptible to plagiarism).

Gender studies is based on the premise that whenever women do better than men, that is due to women’s superiority. Why do women live longer? Why are so few women in jail? Why do women get lower car insurance? When the boot is on the other foot, then we’re victim-blaming.

Dare I suggest that women academics are disadvantaged because they produce less of the peer-reviewed research which should be essential for promotion to the highest academic posts?

http://http://theconversation.com/perish-not-publish-new-study-quantifies-the-lack-of-female-authors-in-scientific-journals-92999

Plagiarism will be addressed as student scripts are digitized and correction technology expands.

highwaymaniac

ixoy wrote: »

Had a chat with some of my female IT colleagues, in their 20s, about this. None of them experienced any sexism in any form in their careers but some of them got grief from other women for trying to pursue an IT career.

None of them want quotas in place because it would undermine their achievements in getting were they are (by being damn good at their jobs). Like others here, they all believe the best way is to encourage women by talking about careers and not blatant bribery. How do you make young women look at these potential careers and make them interesting to them.

I definitely agree with this, I think we need to forget about the mistakes of previous generations, I would hate to see young men being discriminated against based on the "sins of their fathers" in my opinion significantly less gender and other biases amongst the millennial generation, with the progression of time will the gender equality reach a natural normal equilibrium? Or could populist decisions like this one by MMoC actually contribute to instilling prejudice where none existed - I certainly think so.

Here's an idea - why didn't they target older male professors for early retirement or male professors generally for voluntary redundancy (only the average to poor performing). Then advertise the 20 new posts together with those newly vacant ones and have a random selection open competition based on pass/fail with minimum qualification requirements set and evaluated by an independent gender balanced board.

Do this a few times and the ratio of female/male applicants should set some sort of a benchmark for ratio of female/males for future appointments under standard interview.

Equality of Opportunity not Equality of Outcome.

Kidchameleon

PonchoMcHoncho wrote: »

Secondly, I get that if there's a pay issue it needs to be fixed, if there's issues with hiring they need to be fixed or lack of women going into certain fields.

That's the thing though, there is not problem with lack of women going into certain fields. The two genders have different preferences, that's why there are different decisions made when choosing what to study. Women are more likely to study "people" related fields and men are more likely to study "thing" related fields. The research on this is clear.

Stheno

Calhoun wrote: »

I think mentorship is one of the tools that both men and women need to take the next step forward, it helps give you that confidence you need to take a leap into the unknown even if you feel you aren't qualified.

I work in a business/tech organization and its a mixed bag between men and women who are capable of taking the leap above you describe. The one thing they all have in common though is that they have had a strong and supportive mentor who have taken them under their wing and guided them.

Agree 100% with this. From early on in my career I have engaged with mentors and it has undoubtedly helped me

Kidchameleon

douglashyde wrote: »

I work in 'tech' in a female dominated field/role. The company as a whole (a well known household name) has brought in a new policy requiring a min of 2 female candidates interviewed for every new role (not just my field), this often manifests as 1 male, 2 female candidates in the interview process.

Interestingly one (of many) negative fallouts from this is we often bring a token female into the hiring mix to hit this mandated requirement even if that person is not a strong candidate (I sit on interview panels).

Positive discrimination/action as a whole lowers the bar for females (creating a lower average) and creates a higher bar for males- this doesn't service real diversity well in the long run. Also, the label 'diversity higher' is used quite a lot, because it's true. These things do no favours for women as a whole.

Identity politics is bad for people and bad for business.

Completely agree with this. I am male but I find diversity targets to be patronizing towards those whom they supposedly help. If I were a woman, I would be offended by the likes of this behavior.

Asitis2019

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

Except, you know what?

Men in STEM tend to hire other men, regardless of whether they are actually the best candidate for the job. And those men who were hired never question whether or not they deserved to be hired, and thus the cycle continues.

I was on a panel where a young 20-something guy was interviewed for a developer role. He was absolutely useless, couldn't code his way out of a paper bag. And yet he got the role because he had 'potential', i.e. complete fluffy, nonsense decision making from the men on the panel who wanted someone just like them. We also interviewed a woman who had far superior technical skills and was far more deserving of the job, also a very nice lady, but 'not a good fit', apparently. Do you not think this happens every single day?

Men in this field very rarely seem to suffer from the same imposter syndrome women do. This guy truly believes he got the job because he was the best candidate. And why wouldn't he? He has no idea that a woman who was better qualified lost out because she was the wrong age and gender. He thinks he got it because he was the best, and he'd likely be against any gender-specific hiring process, even though he unknowingly benefitted from such a thing himself.

And so it continues.

First of all, you come across as somebody who has chip on their shoulder. Is it possible that your own personal predilections are colouring your view of these situations. You perceived that the woman was a better coder than the man - but unless I am mistaken, interview panels look for a combination of traits. While technical skills can be developed, other skills cannot. Perhaps your own bias towards the woman blindsided you as to their weaknesses.

Second, you are judging all this from your own limited experience. Boo hoo you went into tech late - and others went in earlier. That was your choice, nobody else's. Don't take your own personal regrets out on those who made better choices, just because they are male.

Third, if you hold such a dim view of your colleagues, perhaps you should seek employment elsewhere.

milehip

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

I volunteer as a mentor in a Dublin school and I see it there as well, girls feeling like they have to be pretty for boys, huge fake eyelashes, hair extensions, even a few saying directly to me that programming isn't a job for girls.

By the time these girls graduate, computers will probably be programing themselves.

Arrival

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Self sexualisation of women to compete with other women for instagram likes, turning to these sites to pay for their lifestyles trying to emulate 'influencers', its a sickness brought about in our youth and the pressures young women put on other women and their competitive nature against each other, but another topic for another day.

There has GOT to be a way we can blame men for this!

mvl

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

I absolutely loved programming as a kid and yet didn't choose comp sci as my degree...why? Because I hated being in the only girl in the class, subject to sexist 'jokes', not being credited for my work.

But when/where was that, may I ask; seems extremely odd; I've a 20 years career in tech myself (F) and thought the diversity ratio was around 20%, both in my university and later the companies I worked for - seeing a bit of increase last years, even if not yet as much in the high level mgt roles.

Huntergonzo

Arrival wrote: »

There has GOT to be a way we can blame men for this!

Well men created Instagram so there you go, problem solved, those pesky men strike again!!

Caquas

KWAG2019 wrote: »

Plagiarism will be addressed as student scripts are digitized and correction technology expands.

There is no desire to tackle plagiarism in the Leaving Cert. On the contrary, the whole system rewards it.

And the problem shows up in third-level where students are supposed to think for themselves but instead they get irritated if the lecturer doesn’t just give them “the answer”.

And even those who support these women-only Professorships cannot imagine that the new jobs will improve the academic standards of our colleges. It’s just a big pay-rise for a select group of female lecturers.

Asitis2019

Caquas wrote: »

There is no desire to tackle plagiarism in the Leaving Cert. On the contrary, the whole system rewards it.

And the problem shows up in third-level where students are supposed to think for themselves but instead they get irritated if the lecturer doesn’t just give them “the answer”.

And even those who support these women-only Professorships cannot imagine that the new jobs will improve the academic standards of our colleges. It’s just a big pay-rise for a select group of lecturers.

100pc agree with you.

Even as the metrics might improve, standards are definitely decreasing.

paleoperson

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

Yes, blame the women for not applying and not the fact that the entire sector has historically been extremely hostile to women. I absolutely loved programming as a kid and yet didn't choose comp sci as my degree...why? Because I hated being in the only girl in the class, subject to sexist 'jokes', not being credited for my work. It wasn't until I got old enough and angry enough at being underemployed with my sh1tty Arts degree that I decided to move into tech finally...and I still get plenty of stupid comments about being a 'diversity hire' from men who weren't even born yet when I was starting programming.

But yeah, let's blame women for the 'choices' they're making.

Programming as a kid? Most of us never even had programming classes or were near a computer as a kid, I also never had programming classes in secondary and I went to a nice and pretty good secondary school. You must have grown up in a privileged environment to begin with. I also didn't have a computer until I was about 15 around the year 2000. I know several others in the same boat, a few never touched computer programming until college and did well in it. What about the lack of encouragement for all of us? Also computer programming is not a good job.

Calhoun

Stheno wrote: »

Agree 100% with this. From early on in my career I have engaged with mentors and it has undoubtedly helped me

The thing with mentors as well is its not a single sex, funny thing for me is that some of the best mentors i have had have been female.

I am thankful that they did not see my sex as an impediment to help they just did.

Charles Babbage

mistersifter wrote: »

A female friend of mine was helping to organize a humanities seminar a few months back. It was some gender themed event.

One postgrad student was to be awarded a grant to travel and present. My friend evaluated proposals and chose a male to receive the award. She was quickly told by her boss (also a woman) that she wasn't allowed to give the award to a man.

A small example of the twisted mentality that seems to be dominant in universities.

This story is in the category of: I went to Cork once and met a gobsh i te on the train, with Cork people like that things must be bad in Cork.

mistersifter

Charles Babbage wrote: »

This story is in the category of: I went to Cork once and met a gobsh i te on the train, with Cork people like that things must be bad in Cork.

I don't claim it to be anything other than a small example of the same kind of idiocy being talked about in this thread i.e. opportunities being denied to deserving people because of some silly idea about the 'oppression' of women.

Diemos

mvl wrote: »

But when/where was that, may I ask; seems extremely odd; I've a 20 years career in tech myself (F) and thought the diversity ratio was around 20%, both in my university and later the companies I worked for - seeing a bit of increase last years, even if not yet as much in the high level mgt roles.

The poster mentioned that she decided for herself that she would be the only girl in class and face sexist 'jokes' so opted for an arts degree and skipped by a programming under grad.
The reason you won't be told when and where this was is because it never happened.
My experience would mirror yours, around 20%.

I've worked in a number of tech companies and sat on numerous interview panels, none have been boys clubs, they hired the best, simple as that, regardless of gender, race, orientation etc. Someone will have to pick up the pieces if your new hire is a dud.
Closest I've come to sexism would be HR's 'jokes' that we better 'hire more girls to get the numbers right'. Seemingly oblivious to their own skewed 'numbers'

In my experience if the poster has been excluded for not being a 'fit' for the company then the interview must have been a car crash outside of the tech test. I've seen plenty of very technically capable people who are just unable to work as a team and there is a level of arrogance held by some techies that is breathtaking. They don't even have the common sense to dial it back when putting their best foot forward.

skooterblue2

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

I understand that men feel hard done by by initiatives which encourage hiring women but honestly...it doesn't even begin to make up for the years of disadvantage women have faced in STEM fields.

What disadvantage? Women outnumber men 2:1 in Biology, on par in chemistry
Women dominate the statistics parts of maths.

When you apply for course at college through the CAO, you are just a number. However if you dont apply and complain afterwards you look like a tit if you have an arts degree complaining about it (I have come across it). As for corporate culture? Wouldnt it be best to "know before you go?". Like how many straight christian men are there working for TUSLA? How many girls make it to 2nd year engineering?

exaisle

This effectively means that the best people for these 20 posts may not get the job.

I wonder how the women who get these jobs will really feel about that?

Typical public service bullsh1t.

Positive action? That's just another way of saying "positive descrimination in favour of women". That's the same as negative descrimination against men. It's just descrimination on grounds of gender. And that's wrong in anybody's language.

splinter65

Ugh ugh ugh. Imagine giving a lecture in a fairly full auditorium and most of the learners are looking at you thinking “she only got this position because they wouldn’t let any men compete for it”.

Treppen

Charles Babbage wrote: »

This story is in the category of: I went to Cork once and met a gobsh i te on the train, with Cork people like that things must be bad in Cork.

Shur for all we know you could be a computer.

lainey_d_123

paleoperson wrote: »

Programming as a kid? Most of us never even had programming classes or were near a computer as a kid, I also never had programming classes in secondary and I went to a nice and pretty good secondary school. You must have grown up in a privileged environment to begin with. I also didn't have a computer until I was about 15 around the year 2000. I know several others in the same boat, a few never touched computer programming until college and did well in it. What about the lack of encouragement for all of us? Also computer programming is not a good job.

LOL 'programming classes'? i don't think anyone who starts programming as a kid takes classes. I lived in one of the roughest areas there is. Had the fortune to be given an old computer belonging to a family my aunt cleaned for because they knew I was fascinated by them. Found a good few books on programming in the local library and just messed around with it. Don't know where in the world you grew up, but my school had IT classes in a computer lab and we were allowed to use the lab out of hours a bit. I definitely didn't go to Blackrock College, so either you were incredibly unfortunate or you're talking sh1te. I'm the same age as you and I don't think my experiences were atypical.

Also, programming is not a good job?

LOL, OK. Wouldn't like to see what you thought of the salary for most jobs, so.

You're incredibly lucky.

I think I'm about the same age as you. Programming or IT classes in the local tech that I went to in the 90's. LOL, never.

They had a few old apple yokes from the 80's they never turned on and eventually near the leaving they got 2 or 3 windows PCs. I don't remember really using those either.

Edit: I also would regard programming as a good job. I dont understand why it would not be regarded as one.

kowloon

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

Lots of men in this field like to believe that women don't get hired because they're not good enough or that any woman hire is automatically a 'diversity hire'.

Won't forcing diversity hiring make that worse? Every man who loses a position to a woman will have the option of blaming the system rather than themselves.
Beyond the ad campaigns trying to get girls into engineering and the likes I don't see what can be done without resorting to more discrimination.

lainey_d_123

Diemos wrote: »

The poster mentioned that she decided for herself that she would be the only girl in class and face sexist 'jokes' so opted for an arts degree and skipped by a programming under grad.
The reason you won't be told when and where this was is because it never happened.
My experience would mirror yours, around 20%.

I've worked in a number of tech companies and sat on numerous interview panels, none have been boys clubs, they hired the best, simple as that, regardless of gender, race, orientation etc. Someone will have to pick up the pieces if your new hire is a dud.
Closest I've come to sexism would be HR's 'jokes' that we better 'hire more girls to get the numbers right'. Seemingly oblivious to their own skewed 'numbers'

In my experience if the poster has been excluded for not being a 'fit' for the company then the interview must have been a car crash outside of the tech test. I've seen plenty of very technically capable people who are just unable to work as a team and there is a level of arrogance held by some techies that is breathtaking. They don't even have the common sense to dial it back when putting their best foot forward.

You're utterly, completely wrong, and if you don't believe me, I couldn't give a flying fcuk. I *was* the only girl in my secondary class, and there were a small handful of girls doing comp sci where I went to college. Nowhere near 20% of the cohort. Not even 10%.

It's quite breathtakingly arrogant to make such assumptions about an interview you weren't part of, but there you go. The interview was absolutely fine. There wasn't a single woman working in the place, let alone on the panel, so it came as no surprise to hear I wasn't a 'cultural fit'. End of. If you think I'm a technical person with no people skills, you're 100% wrong. I was offered multiple positions, accepted the best one and have been promoted since (not that i need to justify myself to you) and have an excellent working relationship with my colleagues, so you're full of sh1te tbh.

This is exactly the problem with someone reporting unconscious bias or sexism - people who weren't anywhere near the place deciding it 'didn't happen' because it doesn't fit their own world view. You're as bad as the idiots who claim there's no racism in Ireland because they've never seen it....when that's because they're fcking white.

lainey_d_123

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

You're incredibly lucky.

I think I'm about the same age as you. Programming or IT classes in the local tech that I went to in the 90's. LOL, never.

They had a few old apple yokes from the 80's they never turned on and eventually near the leaving they got 2 or 3 windows PCs. I don't remember really using those either.

Edit: I also would regard programming as a good job. I dont understand why it would not be regarded as one.

Maybe. I definitely didn't go to a particularly good school but we had 8-10 Windows PCs around 2000 ish. The stuff we learned at school was quite pointless/easy but people who had an interest in programming would do bits themselves and just mess around on them. I would have thought all secondary schools had some sort of computers...tbh I think we even had a Windows machine in primary.

padd b1975

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

Exactly.

I find it shocking and unbelievable that we don't hear a peep out of any men while men are hiring and promoting other men, but the second the tables are turned (just more openly), they're up in arms about it.

Dead right they are too.

Maybe if women had did the same back in the day we wouldn't have a problem.

paleoperson

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

You're utterly, completely wrong, and if you don't believe me, I couldn't give a flying fcuk. I *was* the only girl in my secondary class, and there were a small handful of girls doing comp sci where I went to college. Nowhere near 20% of the cohort. Not even 10%.

It's quite breathtakingly arrogant to make such assumptions about an interview you weren't part of, but there you go. The interview was absolutely fine. There wasn't a single woman working in the place, let alone on the panel, so it came as no surprise to hear I wasn't a 'cultural fit'. End of. If you think I'm a technical person with no people skills, you're 100% wrong. I was offered multiple positions, accepted the best one and have been promoted since (not that i need to justify myself to you) and have an excellent working relationship with my colleagues, so you're full of sh1te tbh.

This is exactly the problem with someone reporting unconscious bias or sexism - people who weren't anywhere near the place deciding it 'didn't happen' because it doesn't fit their own world view. You're as bad as the idiots who claim there's no racism in Ireland because they've never seen it....when that's because they're fcking white.

They always say unsuccessful candidates weren't the right "fit", what else are they going to say - your answers were bad and they didn't like you? If the interviewers don't think people will get on with you and you're one of them they won't hire you, that goes for everyone.

What's "breathtakingly arrogant" is how every time you go through a setback in life it was due to discrimination that you conclude by your own supposed reading between the lines of what was actually said, while every time you get ahead it's due to your own merit.

CageWager

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

I was offered multiple positions, accepted the best one and have been promoted since.

So you interviewed for multiple jobs and received multiple offers and subsequently received a promotion but yet you argue that women don’t receive job offers and promotions???

lainey_d_123

lainey_d_123 wrote:

I understand that men feel hard done by by initiatives which encourage hiring women but honestly...it doesn't even begin to make up for the years of disadvantage women have faced in STEM fields.

I wanted to start with this last point of yours. I'm curious...

First. Why should men today, who are in no way responsible for any discrimination that happened previously, nor were in a position to affect such discrimination, be discriminated against? After all, job placements are limited in many fields due to supply/demand so, why should women be given priority over them?

Secondly, at what time (in the future I assume) will men stop being blamed for past discrimination?

Third, when will women be blamed in equal measure as men for such discrimination, since in many cases where women did achieve positions of authority, they reinforced the established preference of males over females?

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

As I've said all along, this isn't conscious discrimination. I wouldn't work with people like that. It's unconscious bias, and we're working on addressing it.

Subconscious gender bias in hiring is a throwback to less enlightened times, and modern social conditioning over three decades has mostly removed it as a definitive factor, except in industries which are predominately one gender. Along with anti-discrimination laws in the workplace to bracket hiring practices. However, this is brought up time and time again. When will it stop being applied to industries that have a wider range of genders?

Take Business for example. The gender ratio is far more balanced at the lower end of the salary scale. Equal representation exists there, but this unconscious gender bias is constantly brought up to suggest sexism by male managers. It's rarely, if ever, applied to female managers. In fact, generally, it's assumed that all managers are male... and the females are not responsible in the slightest for the hiring or promotions practices of the industry.

Wouldn't you consider this to be rather.... biased? And an inaccurate interpretation of the status of gender in employment?

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

I would definitely be in favour of more men applying for and getting roles in things like primary education (both actually working as primary teachers and lecturing on university level teaching courses) and would support such measures to encourage men to apply. I think it's a shame that men are put off such jobs because of the perception that they aren't the right gender for the role or unconscious bias leading them not to be selected in cases where they were the most qualified candidate for the role.

Men are put off primary school teaching for two main reasons. First, was the salary, and benefits. There were previously many males in primary school education, but the pay cuts encouraged them out of the profession... with the increase in pay, there are more males returning but most have found better incomes doing other work.

The second, and more importantly, was the shift to believe men to be potential sexual predators. The danger of being accused of inappropriate behavior scared away many males from the job. Nothing to do with any gender perception that it was unsuitable work.

And being a teacher, I can say that it's not a unconscious bias, but a very real and open bias by school boards to seek female teachers for primary education. I should know. I applied for primary teaching jobs after I got certified... and was told politely that I should consider secondary education instead. My mother is a primary school principal, and she's said the same thing. The vast majority of parents don't want male teachers in such a role. Just as they don't want men teaching kindergarten, which again, I'm qualified for, but it's near impossible to gain such positions in Ireland.. not an unconscious bias, but a very real hiring practice. Good luck anyone changing it though because too many different parties want it to be that way.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Separate to your post.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

As regards third level education, I thought back to my lecturers in University. Slightly more males than females. All the female lecturers taught communications, HRM, advertising, etc. The males taught financial management, Business admin, and accounting was an equal mix. I do wonder at this gender disparity that is supposedly around, and whether it's being considered equally about different disciplines. Or whether it's simply taking all University professors as one lump and determining there's an imbalance.

And is it just about professors? What about those who lecture but aren't professors? I'm a business management lecturer, with an MBA. I don't have a PHD (yet) because there's absolutely no practical use for one in most business fields. There's little real demand from universities for the the lecturer to have one either, with real world business experience being more important... and that's where women tend to lag behind. Few women go from business management in the private sector to lecturing... not because of some bias, or obstacle to them doing so, but because they're either staying as a high paid professional or having a family.

I genuinely do wonder about the logic behind all these gender imbalance claims, and whether there's any consideration to the realities of life. And perhaps more importantly, the choices that people make (or don't actually make) in developing their lives.

Oh, and yes, I do consider this to be institutionalized discrimination, and positive action to be blatant sexism. We have equality laws that provide the opportunity based on skills and education. I don't believe that women need extra benefits beyond that especially when it means blocking men entirely from such positions. Reverse discrimination is still discrimination.

nkl12xtw5goz70

In a world crying out for skilled IT professionals, many employers don't care if they're interviewing a one-legged trans dwarf. If they have the skills, they'll get a job.

So why are women underrepresented? In the US, for instance, women now earn 58 percent of all college degrees, but just 18 percent of computer science degrees. These stats are mirrored in other Western countries. Feminists would have us believe that this is because of "discrimination," when the reality is that women are voluntarily making different choices in college, earning the vast majority of degrees in nursing, teaching, and psychology, for instance.

In these debates, fields in which the gender imbalance favours men are heavily slated for being unacceptably sexist. Meanwhile, when the gender imbalance favours women, as in primary teaching or nursing, there is no comment around the virtual absence of men.

Around a quarter of primary schools in the UK don't have a single male teacher. If one in four schools didn't have a single female teacher, it would be front-page news, with task forces investigating sexist hiring practices and feminists calling for female role models for girls. When it's the other way around, there is silence.

Day Lewin

Back in the long-ago, when I was doing the Inter Cert (as it was then called) there was a maths syllabus that had an Honours Maths level, like still nowadays I believe, and a Pass Maths course, for girls only.

It was one of the things that made me rage, and made me a back-then feminist when it was neither P nor P, and moreover was almost impossible to get anyone, male or female, interested in.

Professorships "for women only" have a faint whiff of the same. I am reminded. Not impressed.

I'm a post-feminist nowadays.

nkl12xtw5goz70

Day Lewin wrote: »

Back in the long-ago, when I was doing the Inter Cert (as it was then called) there was a maths syllabus that had an Honours Maths level, like still nowadays I believe, and a Pass Maths course, for girls only.

Honours maths and pass maths have always been open to both genders, but the state once ran another Inter Cert course in "elementary maths," aimed at girls who wanted to become primary teachers. Ironically, the aim was to encourage girls into the then–male dominated field of primary teaching.

Girls-only elementary maths was abolished in 1968, so unless you did your Inter Cert more than half a century ago, you're unlikely to have encountered it.

Assetbacked

A lot of female gender-equality types in progressive societies like Ireland tend to not have great relationships with their parents in my experience, which seems to foster a need to rebel even without a cause.

Eric Cartman

Assetbacked wrote: »

A lot of female gender-equality types in progressive societies like Ireland tend to not have great relationships with their parents in my experience, which seems to foster a need to rebel even without a cause.

While not to relevant to this discussion I have to say I agree, I don’t think ive ever met once of these types whose father was present, or if present, sober at the dinner table during their childhood, completely anecdotal but if im not the only one saying it....

Marcos

Arrival wrote: »

There has GOT to be a way we can blame men for this!

Internalised misogyny - there you are job done. It also means of course that nobody can criticise current feminist thought. Men can't obviously because if they do they're all misogynists, so that's no problem. It becomes more difficult when it's women criticising feminism. So now women who disagree with even some aspects of feminism are victims of internalised misogyny i.e. they can't have any thoughts themselves because it's all mens fault.

Of course any similarities with false consciousness in Marxist thought is entirely coincidental. I mean it's not like they just took the catch all term for Socialists who disagreed with whatever form of Socialism / Marxism / Leninism / Stalinism was currently in vogue, or even pointed out difficulties in them; and then applied exactly the same arguments to identity politics and changed the words. :rolleyes:

Ulysses Gaze

Leroy Huge Technologist wrote: »

In a world crying out for skilled IT professionals, many employers don't care if they're interviewing a one-legged trans dwarf. If they have the skills, they'll get a job.

So why are women underrepresented? In the US, for instance, women now earn 58 percent of all college degrees, but just 18 percent of computer science degrees. These stats are mirrored in other Western countries. Feminists would have us believe that this is because of "discrimination," when the reality is that women are voluntarily making different choices in college, earning the vast majority of degrees in nursing, teaching, and psychology, for instance.

In these debates, fields in which the gender imbalance favours men are heavily slated for being unacceptably sexist. Meanwhile, when the gender imbalance favours women, as in primary teaching or nursing, there is no comment around the virtual absence of men.

Around a quarter of primary schools in the UK don't have a single male teacher. If one in four schools didn't have a single female teacher, it would be front-page news, with task forces investigating sexist hiring practices and feminists calling for female role models for girls. When it's the other way around, there is silence.

Because tech is now seen as "sexy" and a number of the world's richest men are young techies. There's money and status in IT too which differs from 25/30 years ago where it was more akin to a Dilbert cartoon. Or at least that was what the perception was.

It's interesting you mention it because not all, but a lot, of the clambering for more women in tech comes from either women who don't work in the field or from women who don't, or have never, worked as programmers but who work in the softer side of Tech (Marketing, Finance, HR etc).

Marcos

highwaymaniac wrote: »

I definitely agree with this, I think we need to forget about the mistakes of previous generations, I would hate to see young men being discriminated against based on the "sins of their fathers"

I would love to think so, but I think things are not going to get better, not if things continue as they are. One example I can give is I know a guy in his early 30's who is a primary school teacher in Dublin. He's well liked and respected by everyone in the school. He was telling me he attended continuing professional development seminar with a number of different primary teachers from different schools. I forget what the training was on, but he disagreed with something and he said so politely. A majority of the female teachers rounded on him accusing him of sexism, misogyny and everything else. It got very heated very quickly and only stopped when female colleagues from his school stepped in to defend him, assuring the room that they worked with him, and that he was exactly the opposite.

highwaymaniac wrote: »

in my opinion significantly less gender and other biases amongst the millennial generation, with the progression of time will the gender equality reach a natural normal equilibrium?

The most vocal of those accusing him were new graduates. So going on that, I'll have to disagree with you there. I can only imagine how they treat male pupils in their care.

highwaymaniac wrote: »

Or could populist decisions like this one by MMoC actually contribute to instilling prejudice where none existed - I certainly think so.

I agree with you there, but my first thought was MMoC doesn't care about that. She only cares about seeming relevant so she can get re-elected. But then I remember that she was a school principal before being voted in. :eek:

highwaymaniac wrote: »

Equality of Opportunity not Equality of Outcome.

That's the way it should be, the best candidates regardless of gender.

Day Lewin

Leroy Huge Technologist wrote: »

Honours maths and pass maths have always been open to both genders, but the state once ran another Inter Cert course in "elementary maths," aimed at girls who wanted to become primary teachers. Ironically, the aim was to encourage girls into the then–male dominated field of primary teaching.

Girls-only elementary maths was abolished in 1968, so unless you did your Inter Cert more than half a century ago, you're unlikely to have encountered it.

Cough, cough...blush...
It's this awesome face cream, I look so much younger than I am, because I'm worth it.

It was described as "Girls only"

No mention of a trade. And I was in a co-ed school.

nkl12xtw5goz70

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Because tech is now seen as "sexy" and a number of the world's richest men are young techies. There's money and status in IT too which differs from 25/30 years ago where it was more akin to a Dilbert cartoon. Or at least that was what the perception was.

Women who want money and status seem to be going into law and medicine, so that the majority of young lawyers and doctors are now female. There's nothing to stop women from earning computer science degrees and working in tech, but they're just not making that choice en masse. And I don't buy that it's down to "sexism" or "discrimination."

hatrickpatrick

The fact that women being under-represented in employment in third level education is seen as a discrimination issue for which affirmative action is needed, while women being over-represented in admissions to third level education is seen as a "well girls are just better at school than boys, tough sh!t" says it all. Either both examples of gender imbalance are worthy of affirmative action or neither, it's that simple.

blanch152

Leroy Huge Technologist wrote: »

In a world crying out for skilled IT professionals, many employers don't care if they're interviewing a one-legged trans dwarf. If they have the skills, they'll get a job.

So why are women underrepresented? In the US, for instance, women now earn 58 percent of all college degrees, but just 18 percent of computer science degrees. These stats are mirrored in other Western countries. Feminists would have us believe that this is because of "discrimination," when the reality is that women are voluntarily making different choices in college, earning the vast majority of degrees in nursing, teaching, and psychology, for instance.

In these debates, fields in which the gender imbalance favours men are heavily slated for being unacceptably sexist. Meanwhile, when the gender imbalance favours women, as in primary teaching or nursing, there is no comment around the virtual absence of men.

Around a quarter of primary schools in the UK don't have a single male teacher. If one in four schools didn't have a single female teacher, it would be front-page news, with task forces investigating sexist hiring practices and feminists calling for female role models for girls. When it's the other way around, there is silence.

What is voluntary about taking options pre-determined by cultural pressures? After all, we are told that many women have no problem with FGM and wearing the Sharia. The west is much more enlightened yet some outdated cultural pressures remain intact. They are less visible, can be disguised as voluntary choices, but nevertheless, they are there.

suicide_circus

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The fact that women being under-represented in employment in third level education is seen as a discrimination issue for which affirmative action is needed, while women being over-represented in admissions to third level education is seen as a "well girls are just better at school than boys, tough sh!t" says it all. Either both examples of gender imbalance are worthy of affirmative action or neither, it's that simple.

it is an absurdity. i'm embarrassed for anyone who thinks this kind of thing is a good idea.

WrenBoy

blanch152 wrote: »

What is voluntary about taking options pre-determined by cultural pressures? After all, we are told that many women have no problem with FGM and wearing the Sharia. The west is much more enlightened yet some outdated cultural pressures remain intact. They are less visible, can be disguised as voluntary choices, but nevertheless, they are there.

Sharia is the system of law prescribed by Islam not a garment, can I get an example of the pressures being put on women to keep them out of tech for example despite the accounts of posters here who have both found a surplus of opportunity for employment in this sector they are being somehow pushed away from ? I genuinely don't see it.

Edit- I also find the comparison of women who suffer FGM and subjugation under religion ruled societies to women who feel its difficult to be a top level engineer because of a vague idea of societal pressure to be embarassing.

jmayo

PonchoMcHoncho wrote: »

My experience is the polar opposite. More than half my lecturers were female. I graduated from a class with only 2 female students (to 25 male).Neither of which was fantastic academically but they were both the first picked up by multinationals for engineering roles while better students didn't fair so well. Where I work now most of the female applicants are for BA or tester roles. More women than men get hired for those roles. If a female engineer applies you can guarantee they have the job. There's huge demand for female engineers.

The actual disparity is caused by the lack of women in software development and engineering which is why there's huge demand for female engineers and a lot more men with the experience required for senior roles.

Something tells me if you as an experienced female engineer are struggling and getting feedback of "it's not a good cultural fit" your interviews are absolutely horrendous.

I have found that female engineers were more likely to be hired first.
And lots of men also do not get jobs because "they are not seen as a fit".
What is the excuse for them not getting jobs ?

And there are lots of areas which are male dominated, often because women do not want that type of work or because women are not qualifying in sufficient numbers.

And I have know girls/women in college and starting out in work who specifically decided to go into a career that would allow them time off work to start/rear a family, possibly work from home or return to work later with no repercussions to progression or earning potential.

And maybe a certain poster did not get jobs because some just sense the massive chip on the shoulder and steer clear.

blanch152

WrenBoy wrote: »

Sharia is the system of law prescribed by Islam not a garment, can I get an example of the pressures being put on women to keep them out of tech for example despite the accounts of posters here who have both found a surplus of opportunity for employment in this sector they are being somehow pushed away from ? I genuinely don't see it.

Edit- I also find the comparison of women who suffer FGM and subjugation under religion ruled societies to women who feel its difficult to be a top level engineer because of a vague idea of societal pressure to be embarassing.

I never said it was about women feeling difficult to be a top level engineer because of a vague idea of societal pressure.

The point is that such cultural pressures are often unseen, unnoticed and unconscious, but real nonetheless. I wouldn't underestimate how strong they are.

Yes, Islamic cultural and religious pressures are obvious and clear, and we have our own examples at home with how Traveller cultural pressure results in young girls leaving school before secondary starts and being married off at 16/17, but the other more subtle cultural pressures are still there beneath the surface.

blanch152

blanch152 wrote: »

I never said it was about women feeling difficult to be a top level engineer because of a vague idea of societal pressure.

The point is that such cultural pressures are often unseen, unnoticed and unconscious, but real nonetheless. I wouldn't underestimate how strong they are.

Yes, Islamic cultural and religious pressures are obvious and clear, and we have our own examples at home with how Traveller cultural pressure results in young girls leaving school before secondary starts and being married off at 16/17, but the other more subtle cultural pressures are still there beneath the surface.

Unseen, unnoticed and unconscious cultural pressures are not exclusive to women.

Men in our culture are seen as having no value if they are unable to provide for a family, and the value is really only value in the sense of an employee who gets worked to the bone with little or no thanks and fired when they are no longer useful.

or alternatively are sexually attractive hot bad boy stud types who are valuable to women for a short window of their lives to get knocked up by them.

So yeah no free rides for anyone. Grass is always greener and all that.

WrenBoy

blanch152 wrote: »

I never said it was about women feeling difficult to be a top level engineer because of a vague idea of societal pressure.

The point is that such cultural pressures are often unseen, unnoticed and unconscious, but real nonetheless. I wouldn't underestimate how strong they are.

..the other more subtle cultural pressures are still there beneath the surface.

But no one can seem to point to what these pressures are, from where they stem or how they can be addressed and until they can you are trying to fight ghosts. I suggest these "pressures" come from women themselves, and apply to males and female alike. Low self esteem, lack of interest in certain subjects of study and perceived lack of ambition are not foisted on women by some smokey entity in the ether these are things that effect everyone and people react differently according to their own individual personalities but engaging in social engineering isn't the solution imo.