24 July 2008

Bogus Bias: Feminasties Attack US Science

Ideologically brain-bound feminasties are attacking American science, trying to dismantle and destroy the most productive scientific establishment in the world, attempting to invent a fictitious bias to justify the carnage. Title IX has already plowed a destructive swathe through college athletics--now the feminasties want to wreak similar collapse in university science departments. But where is the bias?
You’ll find sweeping assertions of discrimination in academia against female scientists if you read the executive summary of the National Academy of Sciences’ 2006 report, which was issued by a committee led by Donna Shalala. But if you look in the report for evidence of bias, you find studies showing that female graduate students in general (and those without children in particular) are as likely as men to finish their studies, and that they’re as likely to have mentors and assistantship support.

...Although I don’t think the data show widespread bias against women studying for Ph.D.’s and faculty jobs, there are obstacles that keep women from wanting to study science in graduate school or pursue a career in academia. Along with Lab readers like Tamara and Oliver Young (and some of the Title Niners), I suspect the chief one is the difficulty of balancing their careers with with family responsibilities, particularly childrearing. _NYT
Politically motivated feminasties are taking a wrecking ball to everything they can touch. Far from wanting to maximise productivity and creativity for US science, these whining women of politicized science want to achieve power they have not earned. Affirmative action is all about placing unqualified, inexperienced people into positions they are not suited for.

Such political gender-mandering "bull-in-the-china-shop" shenanigans will only make it more difficult to do good science and engineering in the US. It might be unkind to suspect that the leftist backers of such measures may actually wish to reduce the quality of US science, but since that will be the end result of their ham-handed interference, it is an easy suspicion to happen upon.

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share


Blogger Mute Dog said...

Additionally, wouldn't forcing unqualified women into these field actually CREATE more gender bias because the women scientists (in general) will thus gain a reputation for being unqualified.

Friday, 25 July, 2008  
Blogger al fin said...

Yes, that will certainly happen. Perhaps even worse than that, is the waste of the woman's life when she feels pressured to go into a field that she doesn't enjoy. More on that here .

Friday, 25 July, 2008  
Blogger Robert Leyland said...

I usually agree with your opinions, so seldom feel the need to comment.

this time around I must take exception to the jibe about Title IX and athletics. It has been singularly the greatest boost to women's sports. The US representation in the Olympics, Womens World Cup Soccer etc. all have their presence enhanced by the title ix requirements.

If you want to point to foibles in college athletics look to the unequal treatment of the players, and programs of football (and to a slightly lesser extent basketball) vs all the other sports.

In the academic realm, you need to stand or fail on your merits, the playing field is level, as most sciences have records of exrtordinary achievements by women, particulalry physics and astronomy. That the credit that is due them is not recognized may be the failing of the system.


Friday, 25 July, 2008  
Blogger al fin said...

Thanks for commenting, Robert. Certainly many individual women, coaches, and staff have benefited from Title IX in sports. One would hope so, for all the incredible expense, displacement and devastation it has also caused.

When evaluating the success or failure of government legislation and regulation, one must always look at both the benefited party and the parties who suffer detriment as a result of the regulation or legislation. Too often, government officials pride themselves on their accomplishments without ever looking at the harm they have done. Title IX is one example of that type of one-sided evaluation.

One must also question whether one could have accomplished the good that was done, by another less destructive means. Legislation and regulations are sledge-hammers. Often all that is required is finesse and rational thought to achieve the desired ends--without the destructive side effects.

Saturday, 26 July, 2008  

Post a Comment

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” _George Orwell

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts