lemma

I've literally been told all of this BS to my face from people in academia, so even if this guy is a troll, there are a lot of people who legitimately believe this. 
(And yeah, it really hurts to be on the other end of this when you've worked so hard. It can feel degrading. I have an honors ivy quant degree, a perfect GRE, a first-author paper submitted to Science, olympiad background, years of research and industry experience... but apparently that's not enough and all the smart men don't get into programs because of the dumb women like me taking their place.)

I've literally been told all of this BS to my face from people in academia, so even if this guy is a troll, there are a lot of people who legitimately believe this. 
(And yeah, it really hurts to be on the other end of this when you've worked so hard. It can feel degrading. I have an honors ivy quant degree, a perfect GRE, a first-author paper submitted to Science, olympiad background, years of research and industry experience... but apparently that's not enough and all the smart men don't get into programs because of the dumb women like me taking their place.)

I've literally been told all of this BS to my face from people in academia, so even if this guy is a troll, there are a lot of people who legitimately believe this. 
(And yeah, it really hurts to be on the other end of this when you've worked so hard. It can feel degrading. I have an honors ivy quant degree, a perfect GRE, a first-author paper submitted to Science, olympiad background, years of research and industry experience... but apparently that's not enough and all the smart men don't get into programs because of the dumb women like me taking their place.)

I've literally been told all of this BS to my face from people in academia, so even if this guy is a troll, there are a lot of people who legitimately believe this. 
(And yeah, it really hurts to be on the other end of this when you've worked so hard. It can feel degrading. I have an honors ivy quant degree, a perfect GRE, a first-author paper submitted to Science, olympiad background, years of research and industry experience... but apparently that's not enough and all the smart men don't get into programs because of the dumb women like me taking their place.)

I've literally been told all of this BS to my face from people in academia, so even if this guy is a troll, there are a lot of people who legitimately believe this. 
(And yeah, it really hurts to be on the other end of this when you've worked so hard. It can feel degrading. I have an honors ivy quant degree, a perfect GRE, a first-author paper submitted to Science, olympiad background, years of research and industry experience... but apparently that's not enough and all the smart men don't get into programs because of the dumb women like me taking their place.)

I've literally been told all of this BS to my face from people in academia, so even if this guy is a troll, there are a lot of people who legitimately believe this. 
(And yeah, it really hurts to be on the other end of this when you've worked so hard. It can feel degrading. I have an honors ivy quant degree, a perfect GRE, a first-author paper submitted to Science, olympiad background, years of research and industry experience... but apparently that's not enough and all the smart men don't get into programs because of the dumb women like me taking their place.)

I've literally been told all of this BS to my face from people in academia, so even if this guy is a troll, there are a lot of people who legitimately believe this. 
(And yeah, it really hurts to be on the other end of this when you've worked so hard. It can feel degrading. I have an honors ivy quant degree, a perfect GRE, a first-author paper submitted to Science, olympiad background, years of research and industry experience... but apparently that's not enough and all the smart men don't get into programs because of the dumb women like me taking their place.)

Honestly your first statement sounds like a perfect example of confirmation bias. You, and the others who pay attention to it, expect to see women getting into "higher tier programs" since you think they are getting chosen because of their gender, so you do and because you are looking for this "evidence/pattern" you focus on it to strengthen your argument that this trend is occurring even though it might not actually be a real trend. Have you looked for evidence that contradicts your belief that women get an advantage getting into higher tier math programs? Because recognizing contradicting evidence is one of the best ways to thwart confirmation bias tainting your personal view of something.
But since you are so upset about people citing your lack of evidence for this trend, I will also address your question as to whether this trend (if it is occurring) should be happening.  Women are routinely told they shouldn't/can't excel in math and often get harassed in these "boys club" type settings, so maybe it is okay if they are getting chosen because they are women. If women aren't encouraged to be in this setting, maybe having some opportunities that are open to them that are not open to similarly qualified men is not a bad thing since this can lead to changes in the system as these women enter the field which will then hopefully make the field that much more open to women following them.

@justwonderin I'm going to be quite frank with you here, because I think that's the only way it'll get any points across. A person can tell a lot about you from the way you argue and debate a topic. I think the better question shouldn't be why another person got in, but rather why you didn't (this will help if you're planning to apply again next cycle). This way of thinking that you have, could have potentially reflected across on your SOP (one of the most important pieces of your application), and that alone could have potentially been the reason why you did not get in. This is of course speculation, I have no idea how or what you wrote in your SOP. Regardless, their is a severe flaw in the logic and argument flow that you are having in this post, and it may have potentially reflected in your SOP; and thus, may be a potential reason your competition got in with a "similar" application while you didn't. 
You made a post regarding how people feel towards gender discrimination in the application process. Many stated they don't think it exists, and thus, asked for proof it does exist before they can tell you how they feel about it (I.E. I can't really tell you how I feel about the earth being flat....because it's not flat). You replied you don't have evidence to support your claim, but you are sure it is a thing. Then people came and provided evidence how you are wrong about your claim in the first place. You replied by basically "I don't have evidence, I'm right". As you can see, that is the argument form of a toddler, you aren't right because you feel  you are right and you definitely aren't right because you saw one (or more) examples of your claim (that is generalization). This is not a science thing (even though you commented on STEM), this is the proper logical flow of thought. 
As far as I can see, you applied to a school, didn't get in, then conjectured the reason your competition got in was because of their gender, and then came here asking what we thought about a topic that some don't think even exists. Then when people provided evidence that your assumptions are wrong,  you basically said "No, I'm right, so tell me how you feel about it". This is exactly what flat earthers do. They don't have evidence the earth is flat, evidence is provided that the earth isn't flat, but they then proceed to tell you that they "know" the earth is flat and ignore all further evidence or logic you provide. See, you come across as what I would call "flat earther logic", which is not highly valued in academia. So if your SOP gave off that "flat earther logic" vibe, that may have been potentially been a valid reason why you didn't get in. 
Also, downvoting people instead of providing a proper counter-argument is also very child like. You're tethering on the edge of basically trolling in my eyes. If you are trolling, then ignore all the above, and thanks for wasting our time. If you are not trolling, try and see why your post and responses got such a negative response, and see what you can improve about yourself and your way of thinking. 
 

To clarify, I am talking about discrimination for admissions -- and maybe this doesn't happen in all STEM fields, but it certainly does in math. Take a male candidate's application, change nothing but the gender, and they would have a whole new tier of schools accessible to them.
Again, I don't think anyone who is familiar with this would contend that math grad schools don't have this (fully intentional) bias. My question is more whether or not it is justified.

I cried in front of one of my professors on my third day of undergrad. I think some other students also saw. I was a long way from home and feeling culture shock, and was struggling to understand the class - I was overprepared for half of it, and very underprepared for the other half of the class. 
She was very compassionate, and spent an hour and a half with me in her office working through my reading that week. I had to work so hard in that class, and she helped me immensely. 
We're all human, you know? Sometimes, no matter how well we usually manage ourselves, emotions can be really strong. I would think quite negative things about a professor who ostracized a student who was vulnerable. It feels really bad to be that overwhelmed, and I think most people (including professors) are empathetic enough. 

It didn't hit me until I walked onto campus and got my office. That first day. 
It really hit me after the first coursework seminar. 

This this this. I was a salaried employee, but I was still junior (the head of the division was in her mid 50s, and junior staff were in their 20s and 30s). Professional life can be very hierarchal, but as a PhD student you have 100% ownership of your project. You don't get that level of responsibility as a professional until you are right at the end of your career. 

My university considers PhD students as employees. We have the same annual leave as administrators and professors, our email structure doesn't trigger student discounts, we are invited to all staff events and are allocated office space alongside postdocs. 
When I leave in the morning, I tell my partner that I'm going to work. When people ask me what I do, I tell them that I teach and research at a university, and that I'm working on my PhD at the moment. 
I spent a few years in the workforce and the PhD feels similar in many respects. It feels more like a professional job than an undergraduate program. 

I just finished my sign, heading out tomorrow to join the march for part of the morning.  I can't stay the whole time, but I think this is an important safety issue for us as teachers at universities just as it is for high school students.  I really want to encourage these high school students to keep at this and help make a change.   Anybody else going in their city?

This this this. I was a salaried employee, but I was still junior (the head of the division was in her mid 50s, and junior staff were in their 20s and 30s). Professional life can be very hierarchal, but as a PhD student you have 100% ownership of your project. You don't get that level of responsibility as a professional until you are right at the end of your career. 

Yale G&G has an awesome culture, enjoy! (Not going to Yale for a PhD but have a lot of familiarity with that particular department.) 

I'm on $42,500 in Australia, which is large (most PhD students here are on $27,500). I find it very comfortable and am able to save more than half of my stipend. I would say I spend about $10,000 a year on accommodation and utilities (one bedroom in a good area that I share with my partner), and I cook most of my meals at home, though do go out with friends for lunch and also buy tea once or twice a week. Public transport is also $1,500 a year. I live in a major city where the cost of living is extremely high compared to the US.  
Even though I save most of my stipend, before that we also manage to be able to go away every now and then (we're staying in a cheap airbnb in the countryside soon), and I think since I accepted my PhD offer we've become more in tune with free and low cost leisure activities. I choose not to go to the gym because the cost is so high though. I also have large medical bills despite socialised healthcare here, which sucks but I still feel I can afford it. 
My partner does earn a solid salary, but we split our bills 50/50 (though sometimes he takes me out to dinner) and I haven't felt it dig into my salary. We are both very careful with money on the whole, though, and never buy more than we can afford. This means that we earn some interest on our savings accounts. 
Based on my experience and the numbers above, I think I would also be able to live comfortably on the standard $27,500 stipend with enough money left over to save or to go on an overseas trip once a year. None of the stipends here force you to TA, but I do that on the side and it pays well on top of my stipend. 
I think things would be much tougher if we had kids or a mortgage. We have neither though, which does help. We don't get help from our parents (I feel like we're too old for that) but they've said they can lend us a lifeline if things get dire. 

My university considers PhD students as employees. We have the same annual leave as administrators and professors, our email structure doesn't trigger student discounts, we are invited to all staff events and are allocated office space alongside postdocs. 
When I leave in the morning, I tell my partner that I'm going to work. When people ask me what I do, I tell them that I teach and research at a university, and that I'm working on my PhD at the moment. 
I spent a few years in the workforce and the PhD feels similar in many respects. It feels more like a professional job than an undergraduate program. 

Got a research gate account and found out I'm coauthor on a conference paper I never got told about. It was from an REU five years ago and they never let me know. It's not in my current field at all but I'm not complaining!! 

Got a research gate account and found out I'm coauthor on a conference paper I never got told about. It was from an REU five years ago and they never let me know. It's not in my current field at all but I'm not complaining!! 

Got a research gate account and found out I'm coauthor on a conference paper I never got told about. It was from an REU five years ago and they never let me know. It's not in my current field at all but I'm not complaining!! 

I have been in a long term relationship with my partner for quite a while now and we got our master's together and now in the fall we will be starting our PhDs together. Since we are both in academia our situation is a little different since we both have times when we are absolutely swamped, so it's really easy to understand that and just let the other person catch up with everything they need to do. But I'm gonna try and give some advice as best I can into how we make it all work.
I think one of the biggest things for us is us trying to make sure we are on the same wake-up and bedtime routine because then that means the times surrounding those times of the day are spent together. Also we really try to make sure we spend time not working after we wake up or before we go to bed and instead enjoy our breakfast and coffee together or enjoy winding down for the night after dinner. I really think if you have the ability to be on a similar schedule as your partner then that allows you to see each other much more frequently through the day. If you aren't on the same schedule you can easily end up just barely missing the opportunity to spend a little time with your partner. I usually wake up when he does (5:30 a.m. )for his 8 a.m. classes even though I don't absolutely need to wake up at that time and I'm totally not a morning person. But this allows us to spend all that time together before we need to leave the house. Also when we are really on top of things that wake up time allows us to work out together in the mornings/meal prep (chop veggies) for that evenings dinner.
I think one of the things that helps us a lot is even if one of us is working at home we try to be in the same room as the other person (unless we do need absolute solitude) so we can still chit chat when the person working needs a break or someone's brain to pick about something. Also while chores aren't fun we try to do them together when we can so we can have the time to catch up during that. We also almost always try to cook dinner together or at the very least eat dinner at the same time. I guess all of my advice so far is to just try and spend time together, even if it is just day-to-day stuff, but I would imagine that doesn't work for those who need a break from their partner now and then (I guess my partner and I do tend to be attached at the hip a bit...) But I do recognize that doing non day-to-day stuff also really helps keep relationships thriving.
For you to be able to do bigger things outside the day-to-day activities together during grad school I think the most important thing is time management. It took me a looooong time to figure out time management during my masters, but once I did, my partner and I were definitely better for it. It did allow us to do non-day-to-day activities more frequently (i.e. going out to eat or to the movies, going fishing or hiking or other things that we enjoy doing together). I find that the best way for us to do these fun activities together was for us to plan on X date to do whatever it was we wanted to do. This allowed me to figure out what I needed to do before that date and usually meant I was very productive in getting things done so I could feel deserved in taking the break with my partner. Basically we had to prioritize spending time together and I think that is maybe one of the most important things we learned during out master's. Of course setting aside a certain date isn't exactly spontaneous and sometimes spontaneity is great for relationships. So at times we would just shirk our responsibilities (when we knew we could get away with it for a day or weekend) and just do whatever the heck we wanted to do besides work even if it just meant a day of Netflix together.
It is absolutely OKAY to not constantly be working during grad school (take some weekends off!) and it's OKAY to take unplanned breaks to have some fun! If you want to go on a vacation with your partner then make those plans and do it! While during grad school you of course have to be productive and get things done in a timely fashion, sometimes you just need to make time for other things because that will ultimately make you a more productive student. When I realized that it was okay to not work all the time, I started to treat my grad school responsibilities as more of a 9 to 5 job (I mean more realistically I was working from ~8 to 6 or 6:30 with a lunch break) and became much more productive. It meant that I needed to make the most of those hours I set aside for work and I did. It meant that I had so much more downtime to look forward and wasn't as likely to goof off at school as I was before. It meant my partner were so much happier because we had made the point to prioritize our life in addition to prioritizing our responsibilities to grad school.
I know this went a bit long but as I was writing it I came to the realization of just how much better off my partner and I were when we better managed our time and prioritized us. I think prioritizing your partner and relationship is one of the biggest things for a relationship to remain on solid ground. It allows your bond to remain strong and by making time for your partner that shows how much you care for them. I know I went a bit stream-of-conscious-y so feel free to ask me to clarify something if its unclear.
 

First year PhD student and really enjoying it so far, but I've been surprised by how busy its been. I had a high workload for my undergrad, and I also spent the first part of my career in a job which required 80-120 hours a week, so I think I can manage my workload on a day-to-day basis. 
However, I was wondering if anyone had advice about nurturing a long-term relationship whilst juggling research and teaching duties? This is something I was warned about by academics before starting, but I guess it's become more real now that I'm enrolled. My partner and I live together and are considered legally married, and he did see me through the crazy hours early in my career, but I'm worried about giving him the attention and care that he should get. I'm really conscious that the PhD is my decision, and I don't want it to infringe on his wellbeing, even though he is 100% supportive. My supervisor has had students get divorced and I would hate for us to be in that statistic. 
Does anyone have any tips about managing the work/home boundary, and what to do when you have to take work home regularly? Or even any things you can do to make someone feel valued when you're short on both money and time? 

Even though I am yet to defend my PhD, I have pretty much gone through the whole journey. I too saw and heard a lot of horror stories, like two of my friends started PhD with great passion, but then their research did not go well and they quit with a master. They are those who were very outstanding in undergrad. Another friend also had an eventful journey before he got his PhD. His marks were good enough to be accepted straight into PhD after undergrad, but he did not do well enough in the first semester that he was made to finish a master before reentering a PhD program. Somehow he chose the wrong advisor when he finished his master, and that professor was caught with academic misconduct. He had to switch to another advisor to finish his PhD dissertation. His defend was not any smoother either, in which he needed another 8 months for major revision. I was quite taken aback by these mishaps at first, but felt relieved when seeing that all students from my advisor's group got their PhDs successfully. The biggest advice here is to choose an advisor who is helpful, and has a good record of getting their students graduated. 
My background is different from you. Almost all my family members and relatives received higher education, and there are a few PhDs and professors, so I too have a pressure to succeed. I was not made to do a PhD, and I was given a lot of insights on how doing a PhD would be like. You would think that I knew what to expect in a PhD program, but my experience was totally different from anyone else in my family. Basically, you will never know what you will encounter until you get into PhD yourself!
I totally agree with checking in with a therapist regularly. I don't have any mental illnesses myself, but I have a rather strong family history of depression, so I have been seeing a psychologist for the past 10 years. My psychologist is a PhD graduate herself. I went to her before I started my PhD for some advice. She asked me to reflect on what skills I have learnt over the course of my education, which would help with my PhD studies. That has helped me put things into perspective, so you can give it a go too. Although I was terribly stressed out during the write-up period, I am glad that I progressively got better by not doing anything related to my project for 2 months. Another advice would be to take regular breaks during your studies. I can't stress the importance of annual leaves. I made the mistake of writing my dissertation over the Christmas holiday, and I was backfired with a whole year of high stress!
Note: Some advisors are as mean as my advisor, who does not like students taking long breaks. He made me come in to do volunteer work while I was waiting for my defend, which I kindly refused. Of course, I had the support of my other advisor, who asked me to take a long break after finishing my PhD dissertation, and he would hopefully be my boss for the next few years (fingers crossed). Again, it is very important to choose the right advisor!