Slashdot Mirror
Dutch Science Academy Plans A Women-Only Election (sciencemag.org)
greg65535 writes: In order to reduce its gender imbalance, the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) in Amsterdam will hold special election rounds, one in 2017 and one in 2018, for which only women can be nominated.
The plan "does not come at men's expense," argues the academy's president, Jose van Dijck, because all the regular election rounds for membership will also still continue as planned. Currently 13% of the academy's 556 members are women, a slightly higher percentage than the 10% at Germany's national science academy and the 6% in the U.K. The plan was proposed by two male board members and approved by a 73% majority, though ironically, the first female president of the U.S. National Academy of Science says "I don't think we would do that. Other people might feel that women elected this way somehow did not meet the same standards as their male counterparts, or even other women elected through the regular process."
The plan "does not come at men's expense," argues the academy's president, Jose van Dijck, because all the regular election rounds for membership will also still continue as planned. Currently 13% of the academy's 556 members are women, a slightly higher percentage than the 10% at Germany's national science academy and the 6% in the U.K. The plan was proposed by two male board members and approved by a 73% majority, though ironically, the first female president of the U.S. National Academy of Science says "I don't think we would do that. Other people might feel that women elected this way somehow did not meet the same standards as their male counterparts, or even other women elected through the regular process."
Most elections for leadership in professional societies in science and engineering fields only have men running. Because there are so many men-only elections, it only seems fair to have a women-only election. Unfortunately, there are many misogynists here who will complain that this isn't yet another men-only election.
I thought we already knew separate was not equal?
Women don't belong in science. They don't work hard, not nearly as hard as men do. Science is hard work and requires a lot of commitment to produce results. Women simply do not belong in science.
first female president of the U.S. National Academy of Science says "I don't think we would do that. Other people might feel that women elected this way somehow did not meet the same standards as their male counterparts, or even other women elected through the regular process.
If you want people to stop using the "You only got _____ because of _____" you need to stop giving people ______ because of __________.
XX-chromosomes dept.
This is fucking slashdot. Not Reddit. I'm perfectly content with www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes existing. I have no qualms about them. However I don't read it because that's not what I want to read. Consequently I read slashdot for none of this shit.
Damn it new owners. You were doing good. And I'll admit that it's been better than the Dice years but Make Slashdot Great Again by cutting out this crap. There's enough in tech to not even ever have to bring up gender and politics.
Rrrriight...
So, with the equality of opportunity achieved long ago, the inequality of results is telling us something... Instead of admitting, that maybe, just maybe, there is something inherently different about the genders, these people double and triple on their dogmas.
We already have Women Grandmasters in chess — because appallingly few ladies could rise to the real GM. The Dutch will now have Women Academics. Though they wouldn't be as good as the real Academics, their titles and privileges will, no doubt, be made equally acceptable (and, perhaps, financially-rewarding) as the real thing. Not at men's expense? Indeed. At the expense of all the Dutch...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Black, white, yellow, green, male, female..... whatever happened to simple merit?
If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
Why not select a country's President this way? Oh, wait...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Racism and sexism by the new world order.
When the pendulum swings the opposite way, that's not an excuse.
The Dutch Academy has abandoned merit for political correctness. Who will take any of them seriously again?
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Also, unworthy of any institution claiming to respect science. Correcting the result of an application of a metric is about the most stupid and unscientific thing possible. Any halfway competent scientist knows that.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
...and this is why you see a rise in Nationalism and Populism around the globe. We're sick of the immature and out-of-touch wealthy elitists running things into the ground with unproven beliefs brought on by feelings of guilt and shame and a desire to pat themselves on the back while they enjoy an expensive play hosted by dark skinned racists. The more they do this, the more we will rise. War will come, and they will lose, badly. Can't wait for them to show up on the battlefield with their feelings scribbled out on some cardboard shields. It will be easy picking.
It is good to see that Marcia McNutt is smarter than the Dutch.
Of course anyone elected in a special "we won't let others participate because of their gender" election will be viewed as being selected because of gender rather than pure merit. Because they _will_ be.
You want more women in the academy? Go meet some, and recommend them. Can't find enough candidates? Make some. Mentor somebody. Teach somebody. Encourage somebody. But don't give her a participation ribbon. Give her the knowledge and vision to go after the real thing.
Administration positions in science are not held by the best scientists anyway. It's not like a meritocracy where Einstein would be Top Chairman of Top Department. It's kind of a luxury to be exempted from the committees and the admin. Many of those who do admin (including locally to get grants, which is what university-level admin actually cares about) are just untalented nobodies slogging away to make a living. Anyone who volunteers to do admin even if they have other options should be allowed. Women should not be exempted.
Seriously, this is like giving an award to those who don't finish first.
Nice Alt-Right bait.
Let the fury begin!
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
The plan "does not come at men's expense," argues the academy's president, Jose van Dijck, because all the regular election rounds for membership will also still continue as planned.
This guy is being a total Dijck.
(Sorry, couldn't resist)
#DeleteChrome
Mansplaining.
I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
It's the usual trick, create a group to decide who can run for election in order to rig the outcome.
USA just had an election and the guy with FEWER votes is heading for the Whitehouse. And that will mean the "Red" team controls, Senate, Congress, President and Supreme Court. Which means they can pass whatever laws they want to ensure they continue to be in power, despite getting fewer votes.
This trick is the classic way of turning a democracy against itself, defining that only his chosen ones are allowed to run in elections. So the real power is in the hands of the person defining who can run for election.
And the Apparatchiks will do their job of enforcing those rules, so don't expect the FBI, CIA, NSA etc. to fix anything. They'll do exactly what is needed to enforce these new rules, and if they don't, well there are apparatchiks lower down who will promoted over them.
See how nobody is batting an eye here, that they're having an ELECTION that is pre-rigged? Why bother with the election at all? Why not just pick some women if the vote doesn't matter as much as the fact you're a woman!
And when the election laws are passed in the USA, you won't complain, just as you're not complaining that a man with fewer votes, is heading to the Whitehouse, with the support of foreign state hackers.
As equality. Equality being bent to mask discrimination. So I applaud those who hold everyone to the same standards based on knowledge, not based on labels. Still tho, how is this ironic? Does the writer not know the word? Jw
Mathematically incorrect. A plan which foresee a woman only election, if the number of member is maintained constant, can only be at the expense of the men's number. Now the obvious goal is to put more women, whether one find that good or bad is up to one's ethic and socio political feeling. But to say it won't come at men's expense is a lie. If men are excluded no matter their capacities because forcefully the number of women is increased by artificially having women's election, then you are doing at their expense. Again I am not judging whether it is right or not to do that, just that the it will come at the expense of men which would have been elected otherwise.
The problem I have with all that is simple , I think this is the wrong approach. What we should strive for , is equality of opportunity, not equality out of outcome. Equality out of outcome is artificial and forcefully place people with lesser capacities, take the place of people of better capacity , to have a certain goal non related to their work capacity. E.g. you want a 50/50 women/men no matter how good people are, you will most probably forgoe better hire just to have a quota filled. What we should strive for is an equality of opportunity, e.g. striving to make sure your gender or race do not matter, what is your work quality should. That is an equality of opportunity. Equality of outcome are never good, they have by definition enforce a sexist selection, to get that outcome.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Here's the way the rest of us see it.
Here I am, postdoctoral fellow, as good as any other candidate out there right now. I'm up for, let's say a professorship, they open up the Anita Sarkeesian Endowed Professorship and Chair of Fucking Over Men. The 85 year old men who joined the department in 1960 before the school was even reputable all sign off on it saying that they had unfair advantages that got them into their professorships. The move doesn't effect them, but fucks all of the men my age over.
We all see you. We think it's fucking sad.
Madam Curie won two nobel prizes, one in chemistry (1911), one in physics.(1903). She didn't need "women's privilege" to do it. She did it the old fashioned way, she earned it. All women's privilege does in any area is debase it. But if the Dutch wish to debase their science for reasons of gender pandering and political correctness, that is their right. Too bad. They can kiss goodbye to respect for Dutch scientific achievement.
E Proelio Veritas.
Will their banquets be "Dutch Treat" now?
First, the obvious one: Rigging an election to give a group of people an advantage is not going to result in it being fair or the outcome being the best possible. But the problem is much bigger than that. Because it will accomplish exactly the opposite of its stated goal. Instead of improving the status of female scientists, it will deteriorate it. Because, well, why did they get that job? On merit? Nah. Because of the lack of dangling bits between their legs.
Scientists are a merit-crazy bunch. Status is not a matter of money or influence, but one of fame and merit. What did you publish, what did you patent and also where do you work. And they react very poorly if there is even as much as a hint that you do not "deserve" the position you have.
So even if these women are the best scientists this planet has to offer, they will always be regarded as only having that position because of their vagina, not their brains.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
In order to reduce its gender imbalance, the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) in Amsterdam will hold special election rounds, one in 2017 and one in 2018, for which only men can be nominated.
The plan "does not come at women's expense," argues the academy's president, Jose van Dijck, because all the regular election rounds for membership will also still continue as planned. Currently 13% of the academy's 556 members are men, a slightly higher percentage than the 10% at Germany's national science academy and the 6% in the U.K. The plan was proposed by two female board members and approved by a 73% majority, though ironically, the first male president of the U.S. National Academy of Science says "I don't think we would do that. Other people might feel that men elected this way somehow did not meet the same standards as their female counterparts, or even other men elected through the regular process."
If it had read as edited here, feminists would be shitting blocks of osmium.
Basically this has nothing to do with equality. This is all about "special" treatment because some selfish individuals simply can't understand that equal representation doesn't always happen, and even if it does, it takes TIME for it to percolate through every layer of society and profession.
This hurts EVERYONE. Because it's telling people that if you can claim to be in a suitably "oppressed" segment of society, that it's perfectly OK to lower standards just to let you get by...
In the end, it just becomes a race to the bottom, and the honors of such positions are rendered meaningless.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
If we want more women in science academia, the obvious solution is to enlarge the hiring pool, which is faculty. If tenured position could be reached before menopause, it would be more attractive.
The pendulum has swung so far to the left, they've become the Nazi's of the new world. It's literally a frightening thing to observe. They, like the Nazi's, believe they're doing what's right for mankind. What's right for the world. They don't get it. They're so indoctrinated that what they're doing is good, they can't see outside of their little bubble. Very frightening indeed.
This is not even affirmative action, which an argument can be made for. it's like telling say, a person of dark pigmentation that they specifically can't get in because of their genetics. Well, I give them credit for honesty. not so much for achieving equality purposeful sexual discrimination
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Here we go again idiots
The Paralympics make sense to me. I don't think I need to get into detail about this (Including the mandatory note of an amputee running faster than a fully organic champion).
Is that what they are saying for women in science ?
I'm not enough of a misogynistic bastard to think it makes sense, and that's saying a lot.
Contemplating this silly idea disqualifies the Dutch science academy from ever being taken seriously again.
Irrelevant news and morons using moderation to mod down what they disagree on. 2018 resolution: so long.
And women elected in these will forever be branded as "diversity hires" and never given credit for anything, even if they deserve it. The only thing that "affirmative action" shit like this accomplishes is it creates deeply seated prejudice. It may be hidden, but it's there, and people don't forget. The only way to avoid this is by promoting strict, unyielding meritocracy.
Equality my ass. World is full of double standards.
It will be much better to have the election with men voting for women and women voting for men.
(LGBT is tricky issue here but let's forget about it for a moment.)
This way, the academic merit will be much more focused on since you can't vote on gender.
It's why I've left the Left. I'm still mostly liberal (come at me bros) but I no longer stand with Democrats.
Your comparison would only make sense if people winning the Paralympics were awarded medals in the Olympics.
I see the majority of the comments here coming from tunnel vision. Would a female nerd feel welcome here at /. ? I don't think so.
The playing field of women in a man' s world is hardly related to merit, but much more to hidden and unconscious sexism, hidden and unconscious exclusion.
Just look at the nature of the majority of comments here, and you will notice that woman are framed in a position of weakness and shortcomings.This has nothing to do with the capabilities of woman, but much more with the bind spot of men.
It's entertaining to watch alt-right squeaking in horror: "Somewhere, a women-only election is being held! Argh! Injustice!".
Sometimes they even delve in alt-science. Remember sometime there was German phisics (as opposed to Jewish phisics).
I'm sorry is this /. or onion news?
Being Dutch, let me first say I am terribly ashamed of this news. But perhaps all is not yet lost. There is this pesky thing called our Grondwet (constitution)... Let me quote its very first and most important part, Artikel 1:
"Allen die zich in Nederland bevinden, worden in gelijke gevallen gelijk behandeld. Discriminatie wegens godsdienst, levensovertuiging, politieke gezindheid, ras, geslacht of op welke grond dan ook, is niet toegestaan."
Translation: "All persons in the Netherlands shall be treated equally in equal circumstances. Discrimination on the grounds of religion, belief, political opinion, race, gender or any other grounds whatsoever, is not permitted."
There is recent legal precedent on this issue, by the way. A tiny extremist religious party in The Netherlands tried to exclude women from running as candidate for that party because, according to their religious views, God did not intend women to lead the people (or something like that). A judge then ruled in very clear language that, in this country, you cannot exclude people based on gender.
It drives me nuts that the 'politically correct' want to forget that our nation gained independence after 80 years(!) of bitter war, which was fought in order to -wait for it- ..... put an end to discrimination. Sure, back then it was mainly about Catholics discriminating against Protestants, but it was no accident that *gender* was included so explicitly in Artikel 1.
get over it
every time i hear a dutch female scientist talk about the atoms in her vagina i go crazy
Watching a bunch of people in the Netherlands compromise the objective process of science by purposely voting in people who will by sheer probability alone will exclude candidates more qualified than the limited pool of selection in this case. Yay science!
Nothing like setting yourself up for mediocrity before you even start. God forbid that you try to get the best person for the role - it's clearly far better to restrict your choice by some arbitrary metric.
If the best person for a job is a woman, which is often the case, that result would show itself through in an open and fair contest. How is this not sexism again?
Is that what they are saying for women in science ?
Now this is a text book example of framing...
This hurts EVERYONE. Because it's telling people that if you can claim to be in a suitably "oppressed" segment of society, that it's perfectly OK to lower standards just to let you get by...
Now this is a text book example of framing... Why do you think that representation of women is solely a matter of academic standards and quality? Your reasoning (and tone of voice of bringing your argument across) is really framing women into equality and lesser standard.
What a great idea. I wonder if it's been tried before?
Solution: don't have children.
I chose not to have children. My life is much better for it, despite having to pick up the slack for the ugly breeders at work to take care of their even uglier children.
I should not be penalized because someone else doesn't use birth control.
Why should breeders get an unfair and systemic advantage over normal people? Should they be allowed to park in blue zones, too? Do we have a Special Breeder Olympics?
Having children is a choice. Want to advance in your career? Kids might hold you back?
Don't breed.
Selfish pigs.
I was going for "sarcasm", but I don't blame you. The tone of voice doesn't translate well into text.
Irrelevant news and morons using moderation to mod down what they disagree on. 2018 resolution: so long.
So the 'regular' version will be men only? otherwise it's just discrimination, as why do women get their own price but men don't. Discrimination is illegal, even if it's positive discrimination, it's still discrimination.
Do not forget - nomination of black scientists, oriental scientists, disabled scientists and last but not least LGBT scientists.
Jokes aside, I would reject any award given to me if it would be made because of political reasons,not achievements.
I find this really offensive to women.
Read carefully. The still ongoing practice is to reward the GM-title to a woman winning championship among other women — the top WGM becomes a GM automatically regardless of how she'd stand against real GMs.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Meritocracy is the only way to achieve social justice. Electing someone based on his /her gender is just another form of discrimination. I come from a Country ( India ) which has practiced +ve discrimination for decades and we are all the worse for it.
Linkedin http://in.linkedin.com/in/robinsaikatchatterjee
Discriminating on the grounds of gender is entirely illegal.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
I'm sorry, but I was under the impression that what was being asked for by the universal suffrage movement was EQUALITY.
This isn't equality. This is special treatment because equal treatment hasn't resulted in equal outcome.
This is awarding of a position because of reproductive anatomy, rather than intellectual anatomy.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!