> If they were to admit applicants without considering their sex, the best schools in the country would end up with incoming classes that have an even greater predominance of women than they already do. So, largely unnoticed by the public, they have started to embrace a solution to this supposed problem that is simple, effective, and manifestly unjust: affirmative action for men.
If the situation were reversed, I’m sure the author wouldn’t care. For instance, look at nursing, where there doesn’t seem to be any rush to get more men into the field.
There's a huge difference between nurses or teachers and Ivy League students. Namely, the former are not remotely as prestigious roles. I highly doubt there are 20 candidates for each nurse or teacher job.
Affirmative action happens when we discuss privileged positions. Spots at Ivy League colleges definitely are positions of privilege.
So if the situation under consideration were nursing, there wouldn't be such a discussion because there wouldn't be affirmative action in place.
It's also not true at all. For instance, teaching in primary school is a field that is dominated by women where I live, and I (and I agree with the points described in the article) think it would be great to have more male teachers, so that girls and boys can both have rolemodels when growing up. This would also actually help to solve one of the problems that is described in the article, that boys feel unmotivated in school and fall behind.
Either you endorse making demographic facts part of admissions to aim at some kind of social justice target, or don't. An disturbingly large fraction of people who discuss this are hypocrites or willful idiots who can't or who refuse to see the conflict. The people who implemented affirmative action in the 60's/70's were not; They were just swinging around a crude tool to try to redress very obvious and profound institutional ills by forcing a bunch of known bigots to act as if they were not bigots.
ta9000|2 months ago
If the situation were reversed, I’m sure the author wouldn’t care. For instance, look at nursing, where there doesn’t seem to be any rush to get more men into the field.
techblueberry|2 months ago
Why we need more men in nursing: https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/schools/school-of-nursing-and-mid...
The nursing workforce needs more men: https://www.arizonacollege.edu/blog/nursing-workforce-needs-...
The benefits of increasing the number of men in nursing: https://www.nurse.com/blog/benefits-of-increasing-number-of-...
Why male nursing shouldn’t be a rarity: https://www.intelycare.com/career-advice/why-we-need-more-ma...
Men wanted: new efforts to attract male nurses: https://www.arizonacollege.edu/blog/men-wanted-new-efforts-t...
People talk all the time about needing more male nurses, teachers, guidance counselors, etc.
flail|2 months ago
Affirmative action happens when we discuss privileged positions. Spots at Ivy League colleges definitely are positions of privilege.
So if the situation under consideration were nursing, there wouldn't be such a discussion because there wouldn't be affirmative action in place.
emih|2 months ago
It's also not true at all. For instance, teaching in primary school is a field that is dominated by women where I live, and I (and I agree with the points described in the article) think it would be great to have more male teachers, so that girls and boys can both have rolemodels when growing up. This would also actually help to solve one of the problems that is described in the article, that boys feel unmotivated in school and fall behind.
mapt|2 months ago
"Discrimination" originates in a neutral term.
kankerlijer|2 months ago