Unless you're a woman. Then all bets are off:
College progressives these days are obsessed with gender parity: they say there aren't enough women seeking STEM degrees, for example.
But they do say they want "parity." So it must be progressive to criticize a lack of gender parity when men are underrepresented, right?
A Dartmouth op-ed recently criticized the school's hiring of primarily women to fill roles on the student life executive board at the school. Student Ryan Spencer made a bid to be part of the board, a bid that ultimately failed. Of the 19 current members, only four are male. In other words, 80 percent of those hired for the board are female.
Spencer took to the pages of The Dartmouth to take issue with the disparity. He stated his disbelief in claims that merit was the deciding factor, not gender.
Spencer has a valid point, of course. If the numbers were flipped, wouldn't feminists be outraged? Wouldn't people be demanding a change? Of course they would. They'd launch protests over the exclusion of so many women -- and maybe with good cause.
However, there are no protests planned in Spencer's defense. Instead, the outrage is all directed at him.
1 comment:
Actually, it's pretty common for people to be concerned about gender parity when men are underrepresented. For years there's been a push to help boys to better in school and to graduate from high school and enroll in college at the same level that girls do. It's routine to see efforts to interest more males in teaching. There's now a push on to encourage more men to become nurses.
It's not a left or right issue. Sensible people recognize that men make up about half the population, and that if males are struggling, whether with academic issues or reading difficulties, it's not good for our country.
Post a Comment