Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Applying Title IX to science enrollment – what possibly could go wrong?

    Applying Title IX to science enrollment – what possibly could go wrong?

    A lot, according to Hans Bader, who sees a coming quota system in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math enrollment:

    Quotas limiting the number of male students in science may be imposed by the Education Department in 2013. The White House has promised that “new guidelines will also be issued to grant-receiving universities and colleges” spelling out “Title IX rules in the science, technology, engineering and math fields.” These guidelines will likely echo existing Title IX guidelines that restrict men’s percentage of intercollegiate athletes to their percentage in overall student bodies, thus reducing the overall number of intercollegiate athletes. (Under the three-part Title IX test created by the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights, where I used to work, colleges are allowed to temporarily comply by increasing the number of female athletes rather than cutting the number of male athletes, but the only viable permanent way to comply with its rule is to restrict men’s participation relative to women’s participation, reducing overall participation.) Thus, as Charlotte Allen notes, the Obama administration’s guidelines are likely to lead to “science quotas” based on gender.

    Bader notes the hyprocrisy of gender-balancing quotas applying only in areas dominated by men:

    Gender disparities in a major are not the product of sexism, but rather the differing preferences of men and women. The fact that engineering departments are filled mostly with men does not mean they discriminate against women anymore than the fact that English departments are filled mostly with women proves that English departments discriminate against men. The arts and humanities have well over 60 percent female students, yet no one seems to view that gender disparity as a sign of sexism against men. Deep down, the Obama administration knows this, since it is planning to impose its gender-proportionality rules only on the STEM fields (science, technology, engineering, and math), not other fields that have similarly large gender disparities in the opposite direction.

    Read the whole thing for the gory details of the coming War on Men in science.


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    Anchovy | July 11, 2012 at 6:47 pm

    Wonderful…. now we are going to be driving across bridges engineered by people who can’t check to see if the toilet seat is up or down.

    […] saw that William Jacobson at Legal Insurrection had linked to this piece by Hans Bader on coming quotas for men in science and […]

    […] STEM fields, and, by extension, a minimum number of female enrollees.  (Hat tips: Instapundit and Legal Insurrection.) While the Obama Administration dresses this up as “anti-discrimination,” what […]

    Yeah, I’ve been writing about this crap for a long time.

    Did a post on it at the Conservatory, and I see the trackback is on this thread.

    I’ve got a complete category in my livejournal on MATH/SCIENCE needs chicks:

    It gets a bit tiresome, especially when you’re a woman who’s in that top 1% for math. I left that world over a decade ago, and have been enjoying corporate life since. The corporate world is much more amenable, and you get to work on problems people actually care about. It’s not my problem that math/science academia doesn’t like their chances for getting dates amongst grad students.

    American Freedom Fighter | July 12, 2012 at 4:33 pm

    Read your livejournel post. It was really good. I too left academia.

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend