Women, minorities, bias and affirmative action by SignyM

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Women, minorities, bias and affirmative action

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 17:51
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 932
PAGE 1 of 1

Tuesday, November 14, 2006 8:27 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Transgender Experience Led Stanford Scientist To Critique Gender Difference

Ben Barres has a distinct edge over the many others who have joined the debate about whether men’s brains are innately better suited for science than women’s. He doesn’t just make an abstract argument about the similarities and differences between the genders; he has lived as both.

Barres’ experience as a female-to-male transgendered person led him to write a pointed commentary in the July 13 issue of Nature rebuking the comments of former Harvard University president Lawrence Summers that raised the possibility that the dearth of women in the upper levels of science is rooted in biology. Marshalling scientific evidence as well as drawing from personal experience, Barres maintained that, contrary to Summers’ remarks, the lack of women in the upper reaches of research has more to do with bias than aptitude

Where Summers sees innate differences, Barres sees discrimination. As a young woman — Barbara — he said he was discouraged from setting his sights on MIT, where he ended up receiving his bachelor’s degree. Once there, he was told that a boyfriend must have solved a hard math problem that he had answered and that had stumped most men in the class. After he began living as a man in 1997, Barres overheard another scientist say, “Ben Barres gave a great seminar today, but his work is much better than his sister’s work....

In his commentary Barres points to data from a range of studies showing bias in science. For example, when a mixed panel of scientists evaluated grant proposals without names men and women fared equally well. However, competing unblinded a woman applying for a research grant needed to be three times more productive than men to be considered equally competent....

In 2004, the 64-person selection panel consisted of 60 men—all nine grants went to men. In 2005, the agency increased the number of women on the panel, and six of the 13 grants went to women. Barres said that he has now set his sights on challenging what he perceives as male bias in the lucrative Howard Hughes Investigator program, an elite scientific award that virtually guarantees long-term research funding.

In his commentary, Barres listed additional ideas for how to retain more women and minorities in science, above and beyond the standard cries to simply hire more women. He suggested that women scientists be judged by the quality of their science rather than the quantity, given that many of them still bear the brunt of child-care responsibilities

Barres said that critics have dismissed women who complain of discrimination in science as being irrational and emotional, but he said that the opposite argument is easy to make. “It is overwhelmingly men who commit violent crimes out of rage and anger,” he wrote. “If any one ever sees a women with road rage, they should write it up and send it to a medical journal.”

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/07/060714174545.htm

I exapnded the quote.

One of my fantasies is to have a blinded loan, grant, or job application process. I expect if that ever happens "affirmative action" will disappear.

---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 14, 2006 10:21 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

bump

---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 14, 2006 1:56 PM

PHAEDRA

Thank you for posting an informative and challenging article. I hope that it gets a lot of responses and spurs debate in this important area.

Phaedra (a bad luck name)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 14, 2006 3:38 PM

KANEMAN

Blah!!

Women...Good
Minorities....Good
Affirmative action.....Bad

We all know why. The injustice(government sanctioned gender based racism) outweighs the good intention.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 14, 2006 5:26 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

SignyM,

Thanks for the post.

To some extent discrimination of course serves a small segment of society better than the rest. There is no question that this society is NOT a meritocracy. And even more than that, it is NOT the land of equal opportunity.

But discrimination does serve a purpose. When you have more applicants than resources - medical school places, jobs, grants, whatever - it makes getting rid of the excess socially acceptable. That way the lack of opportunities for every qualified person doesn't have to be addressed.

BTW - I can't IMAGINE why every application shouldn't be blinded. And I mean for everything - for jobs, post-graduate school, loans, grants ...

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 14, 2006 5:36 PM

FUTUREMRSFILLION

Quote:
Originally posted by kaneman:
Blah!!

Women...Good
Minorities....Good
Affirmative action.....Bad

We all know why. The injustice(government sanctioned gender based racism) outweighs the good intention.

I really hate it when we agree.

----
Bestower of Titles, Designer of Tshirts, Maker of Mottos, Keeper of the Pyre

I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

FORSAKEN original

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 14, 2006 5:51 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"The injustice(government sanctioned gender based racism) outweighs the good intention."

I DON'T agree.

The fact is education and opportunities are not distributed equally. EVEN WITH PEOPLE OF SUPERIOR MERIT, what this article shows is current, pervasive and persistent discrimination. IF you could get rid of discrimination and unequal opportunity, there would be no need for affirmative action. But as long discrimination persists, you need a countervailing systyem.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE