Comments on: Gender Discrimination at George Washington University

By: Triumph

Triumph — Tue, 28 Nov 2006 13:52:38 +0000

While I’m qualified to teach in the fields and the campus is just down the road from me, I get the idea that I’m not quite what they’re looking for.

Did you actually apply for the job? It seems premature to be making accusations of discrimination before the position has even been filled.

By: just me

just me — Tue, 28 Nov 2006 11:47:23 +0000

I agree with James. Grammar in the name of gender neutralism shouldn't be tossed out the window. I honestly prefer the male gender terms over a mixture of both, and while I understand the s/he thing, reading just flows better without it.

I have noticed the tendancy in parenting magazines to almost always refer to babies as "she" even when the story doesn't indicate a gender.

By: floyd

floyd — Mon, 27 Nov 2006 22:59:31 +0000

Is the program only to teach them to lead women? If not they should have to deal with the discomfort of mixed genders in context of leadership. More likely we are looking at a vision of the hypocritical feminist brave new world.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Mon, 27 Nov 2006 22:47:34 +0000

Tano: That practice is as confusing as it is ungrammatical. In this particular context, however, I don't know how a male scholar would read it and get the impression that he had any shot at the gig.

By: Tano

Tano — Mon, 27 Nov 2006 21:47:16 +0000

I disagree James. I know many people, some in institutional roles (academic), who avoid the stilted neutral constructions, and use the male and the female relatively randomly (not in the same paragraph though), with both being assumed to be gender-neutral.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Mon, 27 Nov 2006 19:45:36 +0000

Tano:

Historically, the use of male gender terms were understood to be gender-inclusive unless the context implied otherwise. The reverse has never been true.

In recent years, institutions have gone out of their way to be gender neutral, opting to write in the third person or the use of such awkward constructions as s/he.

There is no way to construe this ad as aimed at male and female candidates alike.

By: Tano

Tano — Mon, 27 Nov 2006 19:27:03 +0000

Are you not missing the obvious here James? After decades or centuries of using the male form as the default, without any implication of discrimination (of course), you now assume that using the female form implies discrimination. Given the lack of neutral forms in our language, what is one to do? Use both interchangably in the same paragraph? That would be confusing.

Quite interesting to see the reaction of your commenters too. The great existential need to be a victim plays out - once again, using the female form one time out of a million means that the poor males are now officially second class citizens. Pathetic.

By: yetanotherjohn

yetanotherjohn — Mon, 27 Nov 2006 17:51:26 +0000

“Special preference will be given to applicants who demonstrate experience in . . . mentoring of undergraduate, female students.”

Of course, it could be the faculty search committee is made up of perverts who are looking for someone who likes to get a bit of nookie from the 18 year old female students, you know, so the new Prof would fit in with the old profs.

By: Richard Gardner

Richard Gardner — Mon, 27 Nov 2006 17:48:03 +0000

You have an available option should you want the job, gender reassignment surgery (or whatever they are calling a sex change these days). Discrimination against the Transgendered is prohibited at the school (so you might only have to become a cross-dresser). At the University of Washington, there was controversy over the selection of a man as the Chair of Women Studies in Aug 2005. I believe he is still the only one.

By: LJD

LJD — Mon, 27 Nov 2006 17:33:41 +0000

I guess you didn't get the message...

...no such thing as job discrimination against white males.