justwonderin

Thank you for speaking on the topic I actually asked about. I appreciate hearing your thoughts! (I do kind of regret that you seem to think I had suggested it was "surprising or egregious" that a program would intentionally choose a woman over an identical man, as I never implied either one.)

Nice one!! By the way, I never said she was "accepted above her abilities," and I think she probably wasn't.

Thank you for offering your psychoanalysis?... Most of the points you raise I actually *do* know about -- for instance, we have very similar mathematical interests; it was not just one more school she got into, but a handful on the next tier; there were no interviews; the "person who brought her on board" is a man. You're right that I don't know for sure about SOP and LOR, but the information I have suggests they were likely of quite comparable quality. And most importantly, as I've said now many times, this was just one example of this kind; I have observed a consistent pattern. Moreover, several other people who pay attention to this whom I've discussed this topic with agree that gender discrimination is happening. And as I've also said several times, even if you choose not to believe that my observations are accurate, that does not prevent you from commenting on the question this post was (supposed to be) about -- is gender discrimination of this kind justified?

I've been clear about the discussion I'm interested in having -- whether or not people think gender discrimination is justified for grad school admissions -- and the one that I think is no longer productive (if it ever was) -- whether or not other people have been aware of gender discrimination in their field, including in entirely different setting to grad admissions. I have stated that I am not able to provide rigorous evidence of the existence of gender discrimination in math grad admissions; I am sorry that I do not have the capacity to conduct a study on this topic. But I also believe that hard evidence that it is happening is wholly unnecessary to have a discussion about whether or not it *should* be happening. Also... did you actually not detect any sarcasm when I asked the other guy to cite sources for all of his claims?....

Lol at this absurdly high standard of evidence to have a discussion about something. Fine, it is my "conjecture"....

Hey. My sample size is far greater than 1, dunno where you got that from. And "magically opens all doors for a candidate" is an obvious exaggeration -- you know it is. I have said that, from what I have observed, in math, it allows you to get into a handful of grad schools that an identical male applicant would not get into.

"it exists but doesn't play a major role"? "It is very rare to find someone with even a 'similar' application"? "the issue is not sensitive"? "nobody is strongly opposed on a moral level"? Can you please provide evidence for these assertions you have made? I cannot begin to react to anything you said without having verifiable proof of the premises first.

"Math being so very different" was very much not the focus of my post.... I'm just not assuming it is the same as all other STEM fields in every respect.

It seems like I should add more context to my original post. In my experience, there is a substantial amount of sexism against women in math, and without the artificial barriers that have unfairly stood in their way, there would be a lot more women in the field (especially at the top of the field) than there are today. I think that this is true not just in STEM academic fields, but in tech and finance too. I think many people today believe that this is an injustice and wish to break down those barriers and work towards equity in the future. Towards this goal, I believe that many/most math grad programs are actively trying to recruit female students and absolutely would take a female applicant over a very similar male one, and often a somewhat more qualified male one. (Perhaps I shouldn't have originally stated this impression with so much confidence; it seems like a clear pattern in my experience, but you may have a different opinion if you wish. I will suggest though that if you are not familiar with *math*, you should be careful about assuming that it is the same as your field.) For instance, when I was applying to math grad schools a year ago, there were two women in my undergrad department, whose mathematical backgrounds I was very familiar with, applying too. One of them was extremely similar to me on paper -- we joked about how we had basically the same application. The other one was still quite good, but was significantly less qualified on paper. Not by a ton, but it was consistent across different metrics -- in my judgment, there's virtually no argument that does not involve gender for why she would be as strong a candidate as me. As you've probably guessed, the first woman was quite a bit more successful than me at getting into grad schools, while the second one ended up at a school of a very similar caliber to mine. I think this admissions strategy has been borne out of very good intentions (eradicating longstanding barriers against women). I think it's complicated though and I have mixed feelings about doing it. (And for sure, my own experience has partially shaped my views on this issue.) I can see the argument that it is a legitimate tool to combat structural inequities. On the other hand, I wonder if it's not both unfair to the male candidates and even the female ones. I wonder if admitting less qualified women, on average, than men to a program, could be setting women up to be less successful -- again, on average -- than their male peers in the program. If so, then that's not going to help women's confidence levels, which are unfairly low already because of historic and ongoing unconscious discrimination. Nor would this situation help undo people's cognitive biases about women not being as good at math as men. I guess it was naive to me to think that I could just ask my question straight-up since this is (understandably) quite a sensitive subject. I imagine some people are still strongly opposed to what I've been saying, but at least you now have more context for your disagreement.

Yes, exactly. This is why TakeruK's "clear empirical evidence to the contrary" is nonsense. I clearly specified that I was talking about a male applicant versus a female applicant *with an otherwise identical application*. As a result, no, of course I cannot provide clear evidence that grad programs are doing this as that would require access to specific applications. As I said before, anyone who is familiar with math grad admissions (i.e. is on an admissions committee or, as an applicant, has closely monitored applications of numerous other people that they know well) would not deny that this is happening! I was really just wondering if people think it is justified.

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.

What do people think of the (often obvious) gender discrimination that STEM graduate programs routinely do? Why does nobody ever discuss this? It seems like a pretty important -- and debatable -- structural issue.