Too Late for Sexism

Colleges & Universities Massachusetts Institute of Technology
1

<p>Why should MIT have to lower admissions standards for women? Brilliant teenaged girls who are interested in math, science, and engineering aren’t likely to overlook MIT when they apply to universities. Not only is it one of the best universities in the world for someone interested in a STEM career, MIT has accepted women since it opened its doors. This isn’t true of many of the great universities in this country; Caltech, for instance, has only accepted women since 1970. (MIT was founded in 1861; Caltech in 1891). Does history affect culture? Of course it does. </p>

<p>There are posters on these boards who feel understandably bitter at not having been lucky enough to be admitted to MIT (and yes, there’s some luck involved in any elite college acceptance), or who resent the attention MIT gets, and lash out at targets they perceive as soft – young women. There’s nothing noble, or wise, about sexism. It doesn’t take a creative mind to spew biased anecdotes, or speculate about data that’s not available. </p>

<p>For those who weren’t accepted by MIT: do you really find it inconceivable that there are seven hundred women on the planet who are as intellectually capable as you are? </p>

<p>Thankfully, the women at MIT are resilient. They have to be. They got where they are in spite of the sexism that still permeates our high schools, even our homes. They want the best education available to them in the subjects they love and – here’s where the subjective in admissions decisions can come into play – most of them dream of using their passion for science and engineering to make the world a better place. </p>

<p>The women of MIT have been making extraordinary contributions for more than a century. They have rarely received the credit they deserved, but never should any one of them be accused of taking the desk of a more deserving man. We should be applauding the women at MIT – past, current, and future – and not heaving stones at them. We need them. As much as at any time in our history, we’re facing critical issues on this planet, ones for which we need scientists and engineers. We need our best women on the job, or we will fail. </p>

<p>It’s much too late to wallow in sexism. </p>

<p>We need the rest of you too – so put down the stones, swallow the venom, and get back to your books and your labs and your dreams. Civility isn’t weakness. It isn’t even necessarily feminine.</p>

2

<p>

</p>

<p>Indeed, it shouldn’t have to.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Awww shucks. I’m touched.</p>

3

<p>Here here :D</p>

4

<p>I agree that sexism has no place on these boards. But pointing out that MIT gives preference to women in admissions isn’t sexism. The fact that you don’t like to see it pointed out doesn’t make it an -ism.</p>

<p>Clearly MIT’s gender preferences in admissions don’t hurt it in an immediate way. Women do very well at MIT, even though they face a slightly lower bar for admission and even though some of them do get in ahead of more academically accomplished men. The gender-balancing policy in MIT admissions serves its students well socially and acdemically. </p>

<p>Reasonable people can even disagree about whether MIT practices gender-based affirmative action, but having the temerity to discuss the issue doesn’t make one a sexist. On the other hand, throwing around loaded terms to (vainly) try to stop a discussion that you don’t like does make you dishonest.</p>

5

<p>Ben: have you been actually <em>reading</em> anything posted to this forum lately? There’s rational debate, and then there’s sexist flaming. I’ve been around this site for around two years now, I’ve been pretty good-natured about the AA/“underqualified females” debate. (I know it may not seem that way through all my sarcasm, but that’s just how I am.)</p>

<p>But these past couple of days I’ve been about ready to tear my hair out with the level of sexism I’ve been reading. I’m not even kidding when I say it’s actually taking a toll on my faith in humanity to read some of the utter crap people have been spewing lately.</p>

<p>We can (and have, and will) debate the AA issue to death, and then continue to debate it after that too, but it would be really nice if the more blatantly disgusting of the sexist comments would die down first.</p>

6

<p>Oh – actually, that’s a good point. I haven’t been reading most of the recent wildfire of threads because I get a bad taste in my mouth… I mostly stick to the ones that have evolved toward discussing a half-reasonable issue.</p>

<p>JerseyMom has called me a sexist even though I’m such a champion for women’s equality, so that’s the only reason I took the bait. I agree with Laura… intelligent debate about these issues is good, actual sexism is bad.</p>

7

<p>Why is it sexist to speculate that MIT uses gender to help make admission decisions?</p>

<p>Is it sexist to say that LACs value qualified guys more than qualified girls?</p>

<p>Is it racist to say that MIT (or any other top school!) uses affirmative action?</p>

<p>I really don’t see what’s so bad about questioning/awknowledging that MIT would give preference to a female over a male (provided the female is capable of doing well at MIT).</p>

<p>That being said, there have been some pretty outrageous comments over the past couple days claiming that MIT females aren’t qualified or don’t ‘deserve’ to be there. Clearly, those things are untrue and should not be said.</p>

8

<p>

</p>

<p>That sentence is ambiguous; do you mean that there is a distinction between gender-based AA and what is described above (“lower bar for admission”, “gender preference”), or that those are interchangeable concepts but there is room to debate whether a lower bar exists at all?</p>

9

<p>The latter, of course. And I’m a big fan of using data to settle the question.</p>