I'm not sure what has been posted on that site that indicates that boys are doing better than girls. Care to present a more specific link. Because the statistics of higher education certainly don't show this, particularly in the sciences where there appears to by systemic (though declining) discrimination against women.
Typo, sorry, fixed.You said that you cannot see how boys are doing better than girls then state the opposite. What are you trying to say?
Wow. Just wow. You have no clue as to the position of women in science, do you? Women are vastly outnumbered by men in the sciences in general, and no, I don't buy for one instant that child rearing has anything to do with that. As you move higher and higher in education, women systematically make up a smaller and smaller percentage of the population. By the time you get to professorships, there are very few left. See, for example, this paper:There isn't discrimination against women in science, there is systemic discrimination in their favor. That is a simple fact now for those in school. In the workplace the reason it doesn't pan out as well is because women have babies during the time academics pursue tenure and this puts them at a disadvantage competitively.
I'm not sure what has been posted on that site that indicates that girls are doing better than boys. Care to present a more specific link. Because the statistics of higher education certainly don't show this, particularly in the sciences where there appears to by systemic (though declining) discrimination against women.
Wow. Just wow. You have no clue as to the position of women in science, do you? Women are vastly outnumbered by men in the sciences in general, and no, I don't buy for one instant that child rearing has anything to do with that. As you move higher and higher in education, women systematically make up a smaller and smaller percentage of the population. By the time you get to professorships, there are very few left. See, for example, this paper:
ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/improving/docs/g_wo_etan_en_200101.pdf
Of particular interest are figures 2.4 and 2.5 (page 27 of the PDF) in the second chapter, which is dedicated to examining the status of women in science.
Yes, well, in the US there's also a significant problem with our African-American population, within which the number of women in college vastly outnumber the men largely because a large portion of the men are in jail. If, after correcting for that issue, there's still a significant imbalance, maybe I might admit there's a gender problem. But, as it is, there's an obvious race issue that needs to be looked at.From the site
- In 2004, only 43% of college undergraduates were men-a number that is expected to continue to decline as fewer men enter college.
- In 2001, only 60% of male high school graduates were enrolled in college by October, compared to 64% of female graduates.
- Once in college, males are more likely to withdraw from or leave school without completing their degree.
- For every 100 women in America who earn a bachelor's degree, only 73 men complete the same degree.
- Women who earn master's degrees outnumber men by more than 30%.
I don't think the site is talking about the higher strata of the academia and professorships... it's about education.
Yes, there are. These are aimed at leveling the playing field, and have been mildly successful at increasing the levels of women in the sciences. But these programs are not widespread, nor do they eliminate the discrimination that women experience in the sciences, for example:Did you read what I wrote? I have far more of a clue here than you think. And you are completely wrong when you claim discrimination.
edit:
Discrimination at the college level that is. In high school and below I have no clue. In college there are tons of programs aimed at getting women into science, and supporting them once there. They are the only discrimination is to give women more help than men which is undoubtedly what they do. As I said before the problem is childbirth comes usually in a PhD program or near the beginning of a career and that flubs things up.
Try using some US data instead of brining stuff from Europe over and over. The fact is men are falling behind in the US and it isn't because African American men are under represented in comparison to African American women.Here we see there is a 23% pay gap that cannot be explained by other factors (such as lack of senior-level positions).
There isn't any substantive difference between the discrimination of women in science between Europe and the US. For example:Try using some US data instead of brining stuff from Europe over and over. The fact is men are falling behind in the US and it isn't because African American men are under represented in comparison to African American women.
You said women were discriminated against, the fact is in universities in science and engineering they are discriminated for, given special opportunities. And these programs are widespread.
Yes they are still under represented, but a large part of that is the reason I already said.
Bullshit. The entire purpose of these programs is to help level the playing field. The only reason they exist at all is to do this. And they are only partially successful at doing so.Women are being "discriminated" against is quiet laughable. There tons of program out there that help women, but, non for Men. If anything Men are the one that's being discriminted against
Bullshit. The entire purpose of these programs is to help level the playing field. The only reason they exist at all is to do this. And they are only partially successful at doing so.
Men don't need the support groups because we are in the positions of power, and are (both consciously and unconsciously) continuing to better support other men (typically white men) than we do women (and members of other races).
If there was equality, then they wouldn't have any use for them.No.. it is for giving women more special benefits in my eye. If women claim that they care so much about equality, then they shouldn't need those program.
But this is just plain false. Find me one reliable statistic that shows that women have it better. Just one. Something like, oh, income, or frequency of sexual assault or harassment, or attainment of senior-level positions.Now that is just laughable...
Boys and Men are falling behind in school and colleges, and there aren't any kind of program to help them out. Men need to start focusing on helping young boys and Men.
Not trying to be rude but, it piss me off to no end that women nowadays still scream "discrimination", when they are actually treated better than Men in the US. Hell there is even a special law that protect women.
Previous research by Ginther and Hayes (1999, 2001) showed that the majority of the gender salary gap in the humanities disappears when separate salary regressions are estimated for each academic rank. I estimate salary differences for each rank to examine whether the gender salary gap may be explained by differences in endowments captured by rank. The salary gap decreased from more than 17%in 1973 for the estimates that pool rank to a high of 9% for assistant professors. The gender salary gap for assistant professors falls to 5% by 1997. The salary decomposition shows a change in the proportion of the gap explained by endowments and coefficients over time. Prior to1985, differences in coefficients underlie the majority of the gap. Afterward, differences in endowments explain the gender salary differential.
The influence of gender on faculty salaries in the United States said:A higher male-female earnings gap at the professor level relative to junior ranks suggests that relatively recent entrants in the academic labour market face a less discriminatory environment than did their predecessors.
Race is not the cause sorry if you doubt it for some reason, but you are wrong.And no, the statistic that women are doing better at the bachelor's level is completely uninteresting, at least until you can show that race is not the cause of this disparity.
If there was equality, then they wouldn't have any use for them.
But this is just plain false. Find me one reliable statistic that shows that women have it better. Just one. Something like, oh, income, or frequency of sexual assault or harassment, or attainment of senior-level positions.
And no, the statistic that women are doing better at the bachelor's level is completely uninteresting, at least until you can show that race is not the cause of this disparity.
Academic Careers and Gender Equity: Lessons Learned from MIT said:Finally, at least in the United States, the tenure timetable, having to prove that you are this expert in the first seven years of the career, creates another difficult demand. All of this makes the ideal, the perfect academic someone who gives total priority to work and has no outside interests and responsibilities.
The latter is something the senior women faculty in science at MIT believe absolutely. They cannot conceive of any other way to be a first-rate scientist, which may explain why most of them are not married and have no children. And in some ways that may be the greatest inequity of all: the profession is set up in such a way that men academics routinely have families, while women, given current rules, find it much more difficult...
And families? No it must be some mistake.In a study of biotech firms, for example, we found close to a fifty-fifty male/female division among the scientists (Carré and Rayman et al., 1999;Eaton, 1999). When we interviewed some of these employees, most of whom had been post-docs at a university and had expected to have an academic career, they told us that they preferred the biotech environment because there they could do their scientific work with proper support without having to fight for tenure, or to worry about where the next grant is coming from.
And though the men also reported this feeling, it came more often from the women. The pace, they said, was different and the focus was clearer, which made it easier to combine work with family....
Hence the rules and practices, both formal and informal, that currently exist in research universities, may sooner or later prevent them from recruiting the best available talent. It is particularly important, therefore, that the university presidents, at the meeting we had, set out as one of their goals that no faculty member should be disadvantaged by having a family. We need to model a better life for our students if we want to attract the best of them to the academy.
