Slashdot Mirror
The Push For Quotas For Women In Science
mlimber writes "The NYTimes has a story about how Congress has quietly begun to press for an equal number of women in the hard sciences and engineering under Title IX, which is best known for mandating numerical equality for boys' and girls' sports for institutions that accept federal funding. The problem is, the article says, it is not merely that women face discrimination from male colleagues, though that is often true, or that they are discouraged from pursuing these fields. Rather, women with aptitude in these areas often simply have other interests and so pursue their education and careers in other fields like law, education, or biology. Opponents of this plan, including many women in scientific fields, say implementing sex-based quotas will actually be detrimental because it will communicate that the women can't compete on even terms with men and will be 'devastating' to the quality of science 'if every male-dominated field has to be calibrated to women's level of interest.'"
Ever notice that fields women take an interest in generally make less money? And yet they are typically just as important?
Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
MIT and Caltech have extremely high numbers of Asian students compared to Caucasian students. Far above the Asian population percentage. Why is no one fighting for quotas for Caucasians to compete with Asians?
Oh right. Because, quotas are a dumb idea. n/m.
Camping on quad since 1996.
I'm replying to a note because I'm too stupid to be able to find the button that says "post a new note". Having that behind me, lets talk about women in science. I worked for one of the big 3(it starts with an F) for 17 yrs. I was discriminated against for being a white male twice over the 17 yrs minorities (one woman and one black male) was promoted ahead of me who were either less, or much less qualified. While I still was able to work my way to a manager level, it was very discuraging to see this type of thing happen. On a personal level, it was very easy to get angry. This was bad for the company and the industry and thus the country, but a bigger issue was that the individuals that were promoted could not handle the job, and thus it made the company less competitive. Doing this once or twice is no big deal, but when it's done 100 or 200 times over all levels of management, it becomes very significant. It's not that a person is a woman or black or some other minority that causes the problem. The problem is that they are not the BEST QUALIFIED person for the job. Everyone makes key decisions, in a vehicle it only takes one or two poor decisions to affect you in the market place. While this issue was not what brought down the company I worked for (soon to be bankrupt), it did contribute significantly to their demise. Also, I want to say that I agree completely with earlier comments that indicated the biggest issue is number of candidates available. When 90% of the workforce is white male, than 90% of the management should probably be white male. That's assuming men and women have the same aptitude for the task at hand.
dear moderator, go fuck yourself.
Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism