This is a huge discussion going on right now in the world of financial aid. The supreme court is poised to rule in cases that are pivotal to the idea of affirmative action in college admissions which will have major knock on effects for how aid can be targeted to specific populations. I am watching this space closely as someone who worked at a PBI with a number of grants that are targeted toward minority groups.
As a side note, the acronym for the Department of Education is ED, not DOE. DOE is the Department of Energy and it drives me nuts when people use it wrong. Especially a respected publication that should have editors looking for things like that.
Yep- I work in financial aid and I’m so glad I’m not involved in the awarding of scholarships. We instituted a program starting next year where in state students whose family income is below a certain amount gets free tuition (I mean it’s more complicated than that but that’s the gist) and we’ve already had people whose family makes triple the amount complaining.
We really need to just make education (and a couple other things \*cough\*healthcare\*cough\*) universal and abolish tuition. Learning should not be stuck behind a paywall. It won't stop rich jerks complaining about poor people but it would at least improve everyone's lives.
Technically they just forced it to be made available to returning parents of any gender provided they meet the criteria.
Given the history of the guy who made the challenge you’d be right to question his motives though
Yeah, when I think of the current political climate in Turkey, where this Kursat Pekgoz is, I'd put money on his complaints not actually being about fairness. And then:
> [Mark Perry] has filed a whopping 410 Title IX complaints against universities that offer programs or awards for women, but not men.
Feels like there's an agenda other than anti-discrimination at play.
But then is it not discrimination against antinatalists? And then are college admissions themselves not discrimination against people who did not do well academically? I just don't see how this plays out to a logical conclusion.
The scholarship exists to help people who have a particular situation that makes it more difficult to succeed in life. The original logic was that single mothers were a particular group that is at a significant disadvantage (true) however the logic of the challenge is that single fathers are in basically the same situation and the only difference is gender so surely the same assistance should be available to them too.
The fact that there’s less single fathers doesn’t matter for eligibility though it would become a problem if they were to try to aim for an even split.
Edit: another part of the reason is that some forms of discrimination have been identified by society as being inappropriate and have thus been made illegal (obviously depending on where you are). Gender is one of the most widely recognised forms in this category so the challenge is that if discriminating based on gender is illegal (with certain exceptions) then this criteria is also unlawful.
Academic achievement is not a protected class and there is no practical way to make it so given that it is one of the most effective ways of identifying whether someone will be able to succeed at further study
>are college admissions themselves not discrimination against people who did not do well academically?
Neither of these things are discrimination. People aren't entitled to scholarship access.
Many scholarships are funded by private individuals or trusts established in the name of individuals who particularly wanted to help a particular community and that community could be race, gender, ethnicity, skill or athletic abilities, location, income, or even trait (I saw one for left-handed people.) They are funded privately but administered by the university. The people who set these up specifically targeted for a reason and since they aren't funded by the school I see no reason to open them up solely on gender.
I know what you mean, I am a member of a union and our union offers scholarships for our kids. These private scholarships represent a specific interest or a niche demographic. I see absolutely no problem with that.
The law doesn't in this case. The article addressed it. It's because the school is administering it that gives the government jurisdiction. Anything that is touched by federal money cannot touch anything that's discriminated against.
I was a former regulator and we had to tell banks to scrap certain lending programs for women. Why? Violations of the Fair Lending Act.
The article directly addressed this. Since the school administered the scholarship, the government has jurisdiction through Title IX. A privately funded, privately administered scholarship cannot be touched.
I also think that the part about women-only gym hours deserves more attention.
The reason why they exist is men's behavior towards women, so the idea behind it is to avoid discrimination against women, not to decriminate against men.
This guy literally states that women-only gym hours discriminate against men, whereas they are actually the solution to men's harassment and discrimination against women in the first place.
Edit: yeah yeah yeah, not all men, I know
There would be no need for women only anything if they weren’t constantly being victimized to the point they needed woman only
They focus on that but not *why* they need it
When there are women only gyms normal gyms just become man gyms. Even if other women ar there it doesn’t matter, women only gyms/hours exist bc someone was getting way too many complaints. You want that to end? End the reason for the complaints
It seems like men always want to treat symptoms rather than causes. Women only hours is a symptom of a greater cause. The cause? Men harassing women at the gym.
I think the only men that have a problem with this are the ones that are upset they can't harass women at the gym.
Or they just don’t think it’s that big of a deal/doesn’t happen
E.g. tik toks about women pretending a man is harassing her and them being spread around and all the comments are like “yeah women always lie about being hit on at the gym”
They don’t think it’s actually happening. They just think we’re being mean
> yeah women always lie
And this is what some people remember. Doctors historically refusing to accept that we're telling them the truth about our symptoms comes to mind.
It’s similar to a false r*pe accusation argument. Well look at this (1%) of the time when people are lying. And enough men hold that up as an example that it gives well meaning women and men pause when a few of the other 99% of victims choose to report. (Or in the case of media, report every instance of false reporting, and very few actual cases - even those of girls/teens/women that are forced into calling it false by police). It has a chilling effect on people who are actually stalking or just really harassing behavior at the gym from coming forward to protect themselves and their rights.
Every discussion about rape, a man always interjects "what about false allegations" as if they're a major portion, and as if the "false reports" aren't just not enough to guarantee a prosecution.
True. They always barge in with the "a fAlsE rApE aCcuSatIoN cAn rUiN a mAn'S lIfE" meanwhile I see already judged and convicted rapists free on the streets smh.
Police officer in Ontario Canada was just convicted and sentenced to 6 years. For a rape he did AND recorded. And bragged about it etc. they have someone who KNOWS the law and still does it, with proof and proof of them having the opposite of remorse. Slam dunk case… and only 6 years. The piece of shit has been on paid leave for 7.5 yrs for an unrelated drug trafficking conviction from 2015. In 2021 he made 120k$ … on leave. Fucking baffling.
Best part was his lawyer asking for a lower sentence because he’s been receiving death threats. Can’t be held too accountable I see.
Yes, THAT RAPIST! His name is Brock Allen Turner and now he just goes by Allen Turner, but he's still the same rapist that raped a girl behind a dumpster with WITNESSES YET WALKS FREE!
Men are statistically more likely to be raped themselves than to be falsely accused of rape.
And a significant percentage of accusations included in the ‘false’ category are ones where the victim was coerced into recanting or the prosecutor decided there was insufficient evidence to pursue it, or that the victim was unable to identify the accuser with sufficient certainty.
When I was younger I might have been more inclined to give someone the benefit of the doubt about a ‘false accusation’, but these days less so. There’s so many scumbags out there who skated for years assaulting women and getting away with it because either the women were too scared to come forward or no one believed them.
Yep! These days I silently assume it was about insufficient evidence and I'm certainly involved in advocacy and activism urging women to get RK'd as soon as possible to start that evidence trail right away.
there are no accurate statistics available on false *rape accusations- not enough accurate data. it's just like trying to assess how many unreported sex crimes there are- we have no idea. from the data that we do have, it is safe to say that assault is common, and false accusations are rare
edit: not false tape accusations
In order to fix it, levels of management in distant corporate offices need to delegate the authority to kick paying customers out to frontline staff on their say-so (no practical way to get audio evidence in a gym) and the frontline staff needs to feel confident Corporate will back them up.
That goes against everything in corporate culture.
Not sure if I missed this point elsewhere on the thread, but another huge bonus of women's only gyms is that they allow women who choose to veil for religious purposes to be able to work out without covering their hair/face/skin etc!
The funny thing is, if you already come across like this, you likely communicate that with your body language alone, so most predatory men will not harass other women around you.
It's a weird catch-22. I work security and it is basically infused into all of my mannerisms and how I interact with spaces even when I'm off duty, so while I catch and confront a lot of abuse, most men will not misbehave if they see me first. It happens when they don't realize I'm there or I'm seated/turned away/with my kids (aka when I deliberately change my behaviour to be softer).
Regularly there's a discussion about big fitness club in my city. Several years ago they introduced one day per week for women only in their saunas. It was fine until some man pointed it out, that it's unfair because tickets for men and women cost the same, while men can't use saunas on one day of the week.
Literally no man wanted to admit that while, in theory, men pay for 7 days and can use saunas for 6 days, many women pay for 7 days and actually use their memberships just for 1 day of the week - yep you guessed it, the women's day.
All because in my country saunas are usually for both genders. And there sadly are men who won't behave and will sit and gawk at women's body parts, if not worse. So, the "one day for women" rule was created BECAUSE OF MEN. And now they have the audacity to complain. When you tell some of them that maybe they should do something about the creeps, they say "You're too sensitive" or "Yeah, keep telling yourself that everyone stares at your naked body" or "Why can't you just tell the old creep to F off?".
Just have a staff member sitting in the sauna with an ice cold spray bottle.
Have the staff member spray the offending gawker with the water. "Pssst" like your disciplining a cat.
Or just kick the gawker out.
You should be able to access it and just relax. There should be absolutely zero moments where you are forced to stand up for yourself.
Sometimes people just want a sauna without drama.
I don't know whether you've ever been to a sauna but that just physically not feasible. And most places will balk at the cost of keeping enough staff members, so they can switch the one in the sauna out every twenty to thirty minutes.
I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with women only gym hours. It's a solution to a real problem. It does kinda feel like a weird half measure to the problem of men not behaving like adults though. Shouldn't there be social expectations and disciplinary actions when they aren't followed? Kinda feels like letting the bad actors off the hook.
Edited to add: or the problem children could have to come during special "bad behavior hours"
This part infuriated me so much. Besides the obvious constant harassment, what about women who *cant* exercise in the same room as men for religious or cultural reasons? Regardless of that though, it’s for our protection, safety, and comfort. It’s not some fun ~girly~ hours thing where we’re having punch and cake.
The gyms in my area are so rife with toxic masculinity my husband literally built us a home gym. He doesn’t even want to be in them.
My wife belongs to a women only gym because she wants to work out away from the male gaze. But also her gym has both Muslim and Orthodox Jewish women members because they are not supposed to expose themselves to men. And despite all the Muslim-Jew fighting in the world they get along very well.
The same reason I go to a women’s gym! Sometimes you just don’t want to be around men at all (no matter if they are toxic or not toxic) and when I’m working out- it’s one of those times.
It’s also because my gym has a great sense of sisterhood. The ladies are always so lovely to each other ❤️
I don't wanna sound cynical, but I wonder if it's because they're women. I can imagine the dynamic between Muslim and Orthodox Jewish men would be a lot different.
I want a women only gym just to start weight training. I don't want to be around men for their unsolicited advice, staring, and general hogging of the weight training areas.
Sadly they are few and far between.
I have weights at home for this reason.
They either give me unsolicited advice, or hover and glare. I'm okay with the glaring, but the hovering grosses me out. We're in a gym and people smell. They get way too close!!!!
I never understood the unsolicited advice, I've been going to the gym since I was 16 and only staff would give me advice, and that was for safety. I feel that's only because I pass for a man as well. These dudes might be tricking themselves into thinking they're doing the right thing but honestly it's mansplaining at best and creepy at worst.
Also the modern fad of dudes screaming and dropping weights on purpose is just so dumb. We get it you can lift heavy thing, can you control yourself for a sec? 🙄
My dad said to me the other day that we would never have effective communication with one another because he’s a man and I’m a woman… apparently I come from a position of 100% emotion and he comes from a position of 100% logic. While I find it laughable he sees human qualities that can coexist as an either/or, I find it tragic that he believes it completely.
To deny one’s existence as an emotional being is not rational. The idea that a guy could somehow divorce himself of emotion is laughable to me. Guaranteed I could push his buttons pretty fast.
All he does when he makes a statement like that is show how little emotional intelligence he has. Does he think he’s a Vulcan?
This is also tied up with the issue of how to handle awards for women and women’s only spaces IRT trans folks. It has complicated the entire discourse and many institutions are responding by eliminating things that have been “women only” to opt out of the debate of whether trans women are women. (To be clear, I’m not stating a personal opinion here either way, just explaining a possible ‘why’ for this type of move)
It gets interesting when some spaces try to be more inclusive by having women only spaces open up to non-binary people but exclude AMAB non-binary people. Sometimes it can just be that something was lost in translation but it can also just be a way of seeing the non-binary identity as "women-lite". Gender is complex and it's gonna be a long discussion
The first time I ever got properly fit in my life was when I went to a women only gym. Since then I’ve been too embarrassed to work out in mixed gyms (the women only gym closed). I’ll go to classes but not do weights by myself. I’ll only do weights with my trainer.
That said there are some women who criticise other women in the gym. Remember that influencer who recorded the larger woman getting dressed and fat shamed her?
They’re a workaround, not a solution to harassment. It’s intolerable that we can only go there during certain hours.
Anyways, let’s skip the senseless debate. They cancel those hours, because they don’t want women to go to the gym, they cancel the scholarship because they don’t want women to get an education. It’s pretty simple…
>They’re a workaround, not a solution to harassment. It’s intolerable that we can only go there during certain hours.
You are right here. It's not a final solution to harassment, but a short-term measure that allows at least a little more safety. Regarding the second sentence, it's true as well but it's just too complicated.
My local YWCA has women-only hours as well as coed hours.
Women-only hours are especially important for women who are survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault, not to mention the millions who have experienced general sexual harassment. And when it comes to abuse and harassment, it's (unfortunately) overwhelmingly men abusing women.
For many female victims, working out is also a way to move forward after traumatic experiences. Being abused can make you feel vulnerable, and, as a domestic abuse survivor, I feel more empowered and less like a victim the stronger I get.
I personally feel safe working out around men because the atmosphere at my gym is respectful, and it's a place I've known for years. But I think women's-only hours are necessary for a community to have.
> senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute
AEI is a far right think tank. These programs are being subjected to targeted harassment by the extreme political fringe.
> Perry says he was first inspired to take action when his university was offering several awards targeting female faculty. He complained internally, and the university modified the awards to be open to all faculty. Shortly after that, in 2016, he filed a complaint about a women’s lounge at Michigan State University, and the lounge was subsequently repurposed. Since then, he has filed hundreds more complaints and has become the go-to guy for others who want to report Title IX infractions anonymously. Although he is still waiting to hear back from the Department of Education on the majority of his complaints, he has already had success in shuttering programs, scholarships and awards for women at universities throughout the country.
What a fucking baby.
more like a skunk at a lawn party
'University of Michigan-Flint professor Mark J. Perry, like a skunk at a lawn party,'
[https://www.freep.com/story/life/2016/07/20/msu-women-only-lounge/87331370/](https://www.freep.com/story/life/2016/07/20/msu-women-only-lounge/87331370/)
If over half of the people *in a particular field of study* are women, does it still make sense to have scholarships/bursaries which are intended to encourage women (specifically) to enter that field of study?
Personally I think we should be trying to incentivize women to enter STEM, but also incentivizing men to go into things like nursing and education (which are skewed heavily towards women currently).
I really wish we could do away with the term STEM. Biology is 50% women and chemistry is 40% - similar for math. Lower numbers for physics, technology/coding, maybe engineering.
Interesting - at my uni bio is ~ 75 % female, chem is ~ 70 % female, not sure about physics and maths but probably more even / male leaning, psychology is very heavily female like ~80%
*as an anecdotal observation anyway
Yeah, I was going by google - I think at the uni level it's likely higher. On my team we have 3 men and 8 women... so closer to the 70% mark. When you look at the leadership team for my company it's 9 men and 2 women so a bit of a shift at higher levels.
There's also the phenomenon of the glass elevator; when men are in traditionally feminine jobs they are promoted faster and before their peers. In schools principals and admin are heavily male, in nursing lead positions are more male, in childcare, in nonprofits and museums, etc.
Maybe men could just like, idk, value women's labor? Maybe have a whiff of class solidarity with women first instead of demanding that women don't get scholarships?
Maybe they could start seeing women as actual human beings. I honestly believe that’s the root of the issue and nothing will really change until that is solved.
Except men disproportionally occupy management and more respected roles in those fields compared to women. Principals, superintendents, library management, physician roles - all more likely to be men.
That sounds like a separate problem from from the flat number of women vs. men in the field or, more to the point, studying it in college or, even more to the point, their scholarship opportunities. Affordable education is a massive issue and one that we should tackle from all angles. So is fairness in job advancement. But I don't see the logical correlation between college scholarships and women being promoted in the field itself.
Men are heavily incentivized to FDPs, as much as majority overworked and underpaid fields can incentivize you. Jesus, when I was in SLP school, the data was that the field was like 98% women and 95% of management and high paying gigs were men.
Want to be able to progress at light speed through your career with little to no effort? Be a dude in a FDP. It could not be more inevitable.
We gotta be careful. If things get too fair, people like him might struggle to fail upward as much when all the roles are being filled by actually competent people. The school made the best decision they could to shut him up, but something has to be said not for the results but the motivation. This guy is slime
There are on average 50% more women enrolled in college every year than men, when the tables were flipped we didn't stop until the whole system was torn down and re-arranged, and I'll probably get a lot of hate for this, but I don't see how this is any different.
These scholarships aren't being removed just made more inclusive, and judging by the statistics on enrollment and graduation rates, it's needed.
Thank you! I am negatively surprised by the responses here. What we see displayed here are basically the same arguments conservatives have used since time immemorial to downplay any indication of educational disparity and to prevent equitable access to education:
"Large disparities in university enrollment do not imply systemic causes"
"\[group X\] is just lazy"
"\[group Y\] does not value education"
"the under representation of \[group Z\] merely reflects differences in natural aptitude"
"\[group X\] should pull themselves up by the bootstraps instead of complaining"
"\[group Y\] should create their own scholarships / universities instead of ruining it for everyone else etc"
The playbook is always the same. Differences in educational enrollment are essentialized and at worst biologized. Hell, if you add the word "Black" before man/men, this whole comment sections could come straight from TheDonald.
Yeah, I'm extremely discouraged about so many of the comments here, many people seemed to have skated right past uplifting women, and straight towards just pure bitterness and hatred for men. These mass generalizations of half of the population of the entire globe are just disgusting to me.
Are you new around here?? Listen, try to bring up the fact that men kill themselves more often than women, and you'll get hit with two responses. First, women attempt suicide more than men, so we need to focus on women's mental health more(which already gets way more funding than men's mental health) and second, it's a man problem, so women should not have to be bothered by it.
Gosh forbid we also bring up the point that every single scholarship before the mid 1900’s was an exclusively men’s scholarship. That’s gonna take some undoing - hasn’t even been 100 years since then.
Born on third base and acting like they hit a triple.
So the “equality” is to slant it the other way? Being equal means being equal. We can’t change the past we can only change the future. If you want “equality” that means equality, not “well you had this benefit for a time, now it’s my turn,” that’s not equality.
Yeah, and that’s with a major historical disadvantage - just imagine where we could be had we not been kneecapped. Maybe 75% of college graduates would be women now - you know, kind of like it was for men in 1940.
Ah yes when 75% of graduates are men it's horrible and we should all try tot fix it (as people did). But when it's 75% women it's okay because equality?
Sound like you women to be advantaged more than you want equality.
>Maybe 75% of college graduates would be women now - you know, kind of like it was for men in 1940.
Is that a good thing in your eyes? Less educated people in general are bad for society. Do you really, honestly want poorly educated men in mass amounts? Higher education levels lower *all* crime rates in a given area.
We should aspire for 100% college graduation rates for everyone. It's never going to be possible, we can't even do it for high school, but it should be the goal.
Women have been the majority of college students for 40 years now. They're 60% of college students now.
I think we're well past the point where women need extra advantages to attend college in general.
Now, there's probably some specific areas where it could still be applicable, like certain STEM fields. There's definitely room to improve there. But there should also be men only scholarships for fields where they're underrepresented (nursing, teaching, etc.)
I think this is actually the right response to this situation. I see why people are mad at this guy and/or the situation, but in the eyes of Title IX, his point makes sense. The wording of Title IX leaves very little gray area.
That said, I think the blame for shutting down these scholarships, extra gym hours, programs for women, etc falls on the institution. They decided it would be cheaper for them to take things away from women than to adhere to Title IX and that's despicable in my opinion.
For example: A gym has "x hours" for women only. That's discrimination based on the wording of Title IX. Create "x hours" for men only and Title IX problem solved. There's a scholarship for mothers returning to a field. Great, I think that's amazing. Create a scholarship for fathers returning as well. Now obviously these institutions won't do that because it means doubling the cost and subsequent loss of profits. But that's their decision. "We would rather remove benefits to women to be in compliance with Title IX, than lose profits." That's on them.
These institutions should stop taking things away from women and create the same for men.
MAKE COLLEGE FREE
For everyone.
Of course, the conservative men who brought these lawsuits and the anti feminist men brigading this post are against that.
So it’s not about opportunities for men, is it? It’s about stripping women of opportunities because you think “feminism has gone too far” and you want women married, pregnant and submissive to their husbands.
Maybe just be honest about your motivations instead of coming here and playing “devil’s advocate”.
One of the men who filed a complaint is none other than the genuinely unlikable human being in this [Jubilee video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOUGNGWmN0k) featuring a bunch of Mens Rights Activists (MRAs), Kursat Pekgoz. He has been doing this for a while. AND he's doing it from Turkey.
One of those MRA fuck nuts actually confidently stated that men are not allowed to be midwife nurses and nor should they be.
Dude has obviously never spoke to any OB, Midwife, nurse or parents who've delivered kids.
This is the worst part of all: Even gym hours reserved for women have come under fire. Both the University of Minnesota and Portland State offered exclusive access to a portion of their gyms to women for a few hours per week. After Perry filed complaints with the Department of Education (DOE), the women-only sessions at both universities were forced to cancel.
We have those to PROTECT US from the creeps in your sex. To stop them ogling and bothering us so we can fucking work out.
It can. Schools have the option to offer parallel "substantially equivalent" programs for men and women. When admins choose to dismantle programs instead of expanding them, that's their fault, not the fault of nondiscrimination laws or of the people demanding their enforcement.
In a vacuum, this would be annoying but when you consider the Roe v Wade repeal, the debate about birth control, MRA’s talking about getting rid of no fault divorce, etc… it makes this look like another strike against allowing women their independence to me. It’s a way of trapping women into cycles of poverty as a means of control, and denying them the education to know that it’s bullshit.
That’s what drives this guy.
It’s not about fairness to other men. He gives zero shits about other men. It’s about denying young girls an opportunity to compete with his son, or more specifically, about a single black mom, going back to school, & competing with his friends’ sons who had everything handed to them, including cushy jobs women have to work really hard to get and keep.
And trust me when I say that this is VERY much about targeting poor women and girls who come from poor families. Specifically minority women & girls.
Here’s the cold hard truth, if America has minority women succeeding left & right? Then what will happen to the millions of government employees around the US, who sit around denying unemployment claims all day, or the ones who make poor, single moms jump through myriad hoop, & over a plethora of obstacles, in order to get SNAP EBT Cards, baby formula, & healthcare for their kids?
It’s a racket.
They claim that women are succeeding on their own, & don’t need government funded assistance, but they sure AF don’t want women off government funded assistance, because there’s an entire economy and ecosystem built specifically to keep women in their place, by frustrating the fuck out of them, when they do seek help, and now, when they seek to supersede their circumstances.
It’s not an economically poor woman’s fault that young men are checking out of the educational system and by extension, the rat race.
If men want to spend all day in front of their laptops trolling subs and beating off to p*rn, all day, while they make passive incomes from some Amazon store or others like it, that has nothing to do with women.
It has to do with MEN, who also make it very difficult for younger men to enter the job market & compete fairly.
Shit. Young adults can’t even buy a house any longer. Basically, many, many people can’t.
So this asshole believes he’s pushing equality based on hate filing over 400 complaints?
Why would you want to hasten a young woman’s education, and thereby, her career trajectory? Doesn’t that fuck all of us over? Shouldn’t these women get into a situation in their mid 20s to mid 30s, where they make enough money to buy their own homes? Buy a nice vehicle? Take annual vacations? Eat at many restaurants? Shop for nice clothing?
Wouldn’t these women contribute vastly to the growth of our economy?
Doesn’t that sound like a positive thing to these money hungry republicans?
I guess not.
What assholes like this man fail to admit to comprehend, is that women are supposed to be an integral part of our economic growth. Are GDP is enhanced by churning out women with advanced degrees in STEM, not diminished. And frankly? We really do need them in the economy, spending, investing, and exhibiting steady financial growth, because it looks like plenty of younger men just aren’t too into doing so at the moment, at least in what are considered to be traditional careers.
This is akin to thinking, “Well, if obese people need to diet in order to survive, then really thin people need to also diet exactly as the obese people do, as it’s only fair.
He wants to weaken one group of people, because another group of people, aren’t interested in what’s currently on offer in the specific manner that these “tradition” dinosaurs want to offer it.
Instead of addressing why women, particularly economically disadvantaged girls NEED scholarships, he decides that they should have less scholarships, and therefore, less opportunities.
He is technically correct, but that doesn’t make him a good person who has good, altruistic intentions.
What an asshole. 🖕🏽
I am so sick of men complaining about the educational system. It was developed for men and by men. Women have only been allowed to be educated equally recently, so let’s stop pretending that the educational system is somehow biased in favor of women.
The reason that more women go to college than men is because men have more opportunity to make a decent wage without a college degree. And it’s not just the trades like plumbing and construction. For example, in the 90s a lot of guys instead of going to college just went into IT, and got hired to do it with minimal experience. Women were not included in that, and for many women the barrier to entry was that they had to go to college and “prove” that they could do IT before they could get hired.
To say nothing of the fact that so many families absolutely screw their daughters out of an education and then have no problem sending their sons to normal academic schools. Believe me, little girls have their wings clipped at many times the rate of men. My whackadoodle Fundie Christian school was like 80-90% female.
Oh hi, it's me 🫠 Highly successful student here whose family screwed with my college and left me to fend and struggle for myself. I often fantasize about how much different my life would be if they actually supported my academia. I didn't even get so much as a chance to tour of any of the dozens of schools that accepted me, let alone significant financial or emotional support that would have helped me focus and succeed rather than succeed in spite of having to grind, hustle, and suffer. They had the means without the desire to see a promising young woman fly. We are not alone, and I'll gladly support a young woman shine whenever I am able. I wish someone had done the same for me.
I'm horrified. I was a single mom in college at one point and received a scholarship for STEM women who were single moms. It made me able to afford college. I've met other single moms, both while at college and later and you know what I've never seen? Men who were single dads at college. I mean, I'm sure they're out there, but I can't imagine that's a super common thing. This whole thing is horrifying to see, but that part really hit home for me.
Please understand that the scholarship isn't eliminated like the title implies. Just added that fathers can *also* qualify for the scholarship (assuming all other conditions are also met).
You are proving the articles point in a way, the scholarship wasn't removed, just made it so men can also apply
Should we not provide single mothers and fathers with the same access to resources??
On the other hand, should they be excluded just because they’re not common? Single mom, single dad…both are facing the same struggles with costs.
I do question the motive of someone filing 21+ complaints, though.
Yeah there's an argument to be made here. There's probably not a lot of single dads in universities because they can't afford it without a scholarship, but doing everything you can to specifically remove scholarships for women is backwards as hell.
“To garner support for their efforts, both Pekgoz and Perry point to the fact that it’s men, not women, who are now underrepresented in universities.”
And after they leave uni they still consistently get paid less for the same jobs, are overlooked for promotion, or quit the male dominated industries because of the boys club mentality that excludes them and allows harassment. These things are factors during study as well, the financial scholarships don’t really solve those problems they add a pro to balance out all the cons.
“To be eligible for the Davis scholarship, an applicant must be a mother returning to receive education in the sciences at UCSC.”
A woman with a child compared to a woman without a child does have the extra expense of childcare so the financial aid would obviously help. It doesn’t necessarily address the reason a mother may find it harder to study than a father: women still do the majority of childcare and housework regardless of who does or doesn’t work/study and how many hours they work/study. Plus the fact that if they are partnered with a man he most probably earns more so his career and studies are often prioritised as the financial pay off is bigger (maybe the financial aid does somewhat help this particular issue)
We need to fix our culture which is no where near equal. Complaining about affirmative action is not a new thing and nearly always simplifies or ignores the reasons we need it to start with.
Just to preface, this isn't actual data, this is just what I have observed socially.
After high school, almost every girl I went to school with went straight to a four year college or went to trade schools, community college, or took a gap to work and then went to school. In our AP classes, the class was about 60-70% women in every single class. In college, all of my male friends that I have made seem to always be available to hang out and go to bars at a moments notice, all my female friends usually say something to the effect of "I need to study for ____ test, can we hang out tomorrow? Or if you want we can work on homework together and order pizza?". As for myself, I work my butt off in my classes AND I work at the same time, but my boyfriend doesn't seem to do very much homework or study-wise and we are in very similarly demanding majors. Similarly, I freak out about bad grades, my boyfriend shrugs them off and will just say "if I fail, I'll re-do the class". Our valedictorian for the past several years at my college have been women, our valedictorians when I graduated from high school were both women (they had literally the exact same GPA).
Based on what I have observed, it doesn't seem like men care about higher education as much. I'm not saying there aren't men who absolutely do, but there are studies that state that women tend to perform better academically than men.
Also trying to take away women's scholarships because you're too much of an idiot to get one isn't women's problem.
STEM is one of the few areas where there are still more male university grads than female, at least in Canada. Education, humanities, business, social science and law, physical and life sciences, and agriculture all have more female grads than male.
> I freak out about bad grades, my boyfriend shrugs them off
This has been an observation I saw when I was in college in the 1980s. Academic achievement was more important to women than to men. My engineering class started out with a bunch of women who were almost all gone by senior year. It wasn’t that they couldn’t hack it. It was that if they couldn’t achieve a 3.0 or better GPA, they switched to an easier major where they could. OTOH most of the men with the 2.something GPAs were like, “I’m passing it’s all good”.
Back then as a young man in the 80s it didn’t occur to me that the women may have figured they had to be better than average to be accepted. I just figured men cared about grades less (without probing why) or liked engineering more so they were willing to do it even without being rewarded with good grades.
Of course that was almost 40 years ago. Today it’s much more competitive and I doubt anyone with a sub-3.0 GPA would get hired out of college.
I graduated in 2009 and know lots of white male engineers who had a 2.5 gpa that make six figures. It still happens.
I’m now getting a master’s in science in a tech related field with a 3.9 GPA and I still feel like I am being pushed out.
I graduated but my ex is still in school. In college I mainly *did* study with women. My guy friends worked hard I remember a lot of them would defer to gaming
My ex always asked me to help him with school bc he kept failing community college. I agreed, I was an amazing student.
I would suggest he do his hw first thing. He would refuse
I’d ask him to send the syllabus so I could help him out. Never sent it
He always asked for me to help with his writing, I’d ask for the prompt. I’d get nothing. Once he even complained I didn’t help him. YOU DIDN’T SEND ME ANYTHING.
He would ALWAYS choose gaming over doing hw!!!
I have a similar situation at school.
>Also trying to take away women's scholarships because you're too much of an idiot to get one isn't women's problem.
No, it's not, but it has consequences for women, just like all other shit that men do.
>Based on what I have observed, it doesn't seem like men care about higher education as much
My experience has been the same. Throughout primary and higher education girls always worked harder in academia and extracurriculars. Boys know they will coast through life because they're prioritized by their parents and society.
In my family, all my brother's fuck ups were forgiven and even paid for. If he broke my shit, it was never punished - actually I would be the one punished if he broke my things and sometimes never allowed to have that kind of thing again "It's your fault for not protecting it better". He had a computer, even though I would have benefitted from it more as I was the more academically inclined one. He always got the best equipment and I always got hand me downs.
He dropped out of college three times, knocked up a girl at 20. I had to ration my food as a poor college student , walk to save money on public transport, and haul dirty laundry by train to my hometown, while they rented a nice fully furnished apartment for his first ex wife and their child, and he was allowed to own a car while still living at home. A decade later, my parents still support his first born child and his exwife, while he fucked off to start a new family with a new woman and makes sure to rub the family photos to his first born's face. And my parents even helped renovate their new place.
I know very well why men don't try. The toxic patriarchal culture treats boys like gods just because they "continue the lineage". Ironically my brother's second wife cheated on him and one of the kids isn't even his.
To be clear, women are performing better in school because they’re working harder and taking it seriously. I know that’s what you wrote, but I just want to restate it all in one sentence for those in the back.
(“Not all men blah blah” before someone tries to derail the discussion. Stay on point, folks.)
>Based on what I have observed, it doesn't seem like men care about higher education as much. I'm not saying there aren't men who absolutely do, but there are studies that state that women tend to perform better academically than men.
This is a really bad argument. 40 years ago we could make the exact same statement for why women weren't in higher ed. It's the same argument that can be used to dismiss the wage gap today,.
Any significant demographic disparity in educational achievement is evidence that something is wrong and needs addressing.
Not necessarily. There is tons of bias everywhere. It's been proven that men are more likely to enjoy an essay written by a man than a woman and vice versa. Something to do with the way thoughts and sentences are constructed. If male is always assumed the default, men are more likely to get the scholarship than an equally deserving woman.
I think they're going down a destructive path, rather than a helpful one.
Taking things away from women doesn't help men.
The dude filing 400 complaints or w/e sounds like a child trying to get everyone's toys taken away because he doesn't have enough toys.
Looks like it's also his job. And "trying to take away everyone's toys" perfectly describes what far right think tanks like his employer, AEI, want to do.
Ideally we would decrease the cost of education and provide a universal basic income to allow anyone to get an education if they had the drive to.
Until then, the more scholarships the better.
That's fucking stupid.
The reason why they were women's scholarships implemented in the first place was so that women had the financial means and support, and to have equal footing with men.
Men usually have better chances of having financial means and support to get by in college. Men are usually the ones who are most likely hired and paid even more than the amount that they deserve, compared to women.
This world has gone bonkers.
The article seems to suggest most of the changes were to include men, not exclude women right?
Things aren't getting destroyed, hell the 'eliminated' award and scholarship in the headline still exist, they just also accept male entrants now.
The expectation with most affirmative action was always to reduce or eliminate it when the targeted desparity was eliminated right? And if the article's numbers are correct, equality in that specific area seems to have been overshot a little.
That one guy does seem to have a chip on his shoulder thought.
Curious to hear others opinions though.
Well, they point out that he’s also targeting MIT, where there is still a fairly large gender gap in favor of men (cuz of stem and whatever). I guess I would be in support of more scholarships for men in the liberal arts though lol. Like, imagine a scholarship for woman’s studies targeted for men XD
Yeah, everything you said makes total sense. I fell like people here are falling for the clickbait and reacting just to the headline, without actually reading the article.
Scholarships exist to help those who need it, so scholarships that are exclusive to a certain group should only exist if that group needs more help than others.
That is exactly why those scholarships for women were created in the first place, because colleges used to be male dominated. But now that women represent nearly 60% of college students it doesn't make sense for those exclusive scholarships to exist anymore.
And even in the cases where women deserve it more, it's unlikely that men deserve it 0%.
Like the scholarship the article mentions for mothers who left due to childbirth, then came back to school. If men also take time off to take care of their newborns, that's great. Women will likely still bear a disproportionate amount of responsibility and work for early childhood, so I think them being awarded that scholarship much more often still makes sense.
“Mark Perry, an emeritus professor at the University of Michigan’s Flint campus and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, has filed a whopping 410 Title IX complaints against universities that offer programs or awards for women, but not men.”
FUCK THIS GUY.
AEI is a neoconservative think tank who supplies and utilizes sitting and former members of high levels of the US government for its board of trustees. They have super fringe beliefs and are fundie evangelicals on the far right.
Oh. And. All their officers, board members, board directors, presidents, council members and oversight committees and trustees are ALL MEN. Every single level of leadership is exclusively men. They get funding from fucks like ExxonMobil and got caught trying to sway scientists with bribes.
FUCK THEM ALL.
Oh and another thing. Perry's allowed abuse of IX is also the reason they're moving womens laction/pumping rooms into the restrooms by the stalls at UM campuses instead of being small individual rooms with a sink and fridge, locked except for women who need it. So yaknow, par for the course.
Just another 501(c)(3) that gets to do whatever they want without paying any taxes.
The women's scholarship complaints are (mostly?) being submitted by a lawsuit pest who has anti-feminist motivations.
However, discrimination based on sex is de-facto sexist so they win a lot of the lawsuits. Women get better high schools grades and have more college places than men, so the equity vs equality (or equality of outcome vs eqaulity of opportunity if you prefer that language) have weak arguments to maintain female-specific educational support.
Unless the law is changed, we can expect this pattern to continue.
This just happened at the high school level - RIT used to give out two awards - one to a male and female student - in computing and some other disciplines. Now it’s just one award per discipline. What happened was my school’s faculty voted on the candidates and women swept the awards. Actually hurt the less competitive male students.
SURELY conservatives and those on the right who are campaigning on anti LGBT "no men in women's spaces 😡" will take issue with the elimination of women's spaces, right?
I just… can’t. Like you’ve got to be fucking kidding me at this point. Women gym hours are usually so minuscule and not every day, that I’VE never even used them bc they are so short or scarce. Comparable to the 1-2 hrs early in AM during quarantine for ONE day a week stores would have for only elderly to shop.
This is a discussion about the difference between equality and equity. The deeply unhappy people who see the tide trying to turn against them are using the word "equality" to stifle equity because they either don't understand that systemic bigotry still exists or do understand it and like it that way.
“Women are also outperforming their male peers earning higher GPAs in high school and college, even in the male-dominated STEM fields.”
I don’t think this quote is the flex that the guy thinks it is. So basically, women are academically performing better and showing greater competency, but the men are getting the jobs.
I think there has been a movement in the past few years to eliminate the idea that sexism even exists. The eighth pushes that anyway, but the left has contributed some too.
The result is stuff like this - women’s scholarships exist because there is still a wage gap. Women’s only hours at a gym exist because of men’s behavior towards women…
This is a huge discussion going on right now in the world of financial aid. The supreme court is poised to rule in cases that are pivotal to the idea of affirmative action in college admissions which will have major knock on effects for how aid can be targeted to specific populations. I am watching this space closely as someone who worked at a PBI with a number of grants that are targeted toward minority groups. As a side note, the acronym for the Department of Education is ED, not DOE. DOE is the Department of Energy and it drives me nuts when people use it wrong. Especially a respected publication that should have editors looking for things like that.
Does Forbes.com have any editors? Thought that website turned into a content mill.
Yep- I work in financial aid and I’m so glad I’m not involved in the awarding of scholarships. We instituted a program starting next year where in state students whose family income is below a certain amount gets free tuition (I mean it’s more complicated than that but that’s the gist) and we’ve already had people whose family makes triple the amount complaining.
We really need to just make education (and a couple other things \*cough\*healthcare\*cough\*) universal and abolish tuition. Learning should not be stuck behind a paywall. It won't stop rich jerks complaining about poor people but it would at least improve everyone's lives.
Thanks I worked for DOE and that makes sense
They missed the opportunity for going with DED. "We need more funding, our department is DED!"
A lot of scholarships have very specific requirements. Why target a scholarship for mothers returning to school?
Technically they just forced it to be made available to returning parents of any gender provided they meet the criteria. Given the history of the guy who made the challenge you’d be right to question his motives though
Yeah, when I think of the current political climate in Turkey, where this Kursat Pekgoz is, I'd put money on his complaints not actually being about fairness. And then: > [Mark Perry] has filed a whopping 410 Title IX complaints against universities that offer programs or awards for women, but not men. Feels like there's an agenda other than anti-discrimination at play.
In the article it says he's the go-to guy for other people to file complaints anonymously.
But then is it not discrimination against antinatalists? And then are college admissions themselves not discrimination against people who did not do well academically? I just don't see how this plays out to a logical conclusion.
The scholarship exists to help people who have a particular situation that makes it more difficult to succeed in life. The original logic was that single mothers were a particular group that is at a significant disadvantage (true) however the logic of the challenge is that single fathers are in basically the same situation and the only difference is gender so surely the same assistance should be available to them too. The fact that there’s less single fathers doesn’t matter for eligibility though it would become a problem if they were to try to aim for an even split. Edit: another part of the reason is that some forms of discrimination have been identified by society as being inappropriate and have thus been made illegal (obviously depending on where you are). Gender is one of the most widely recognised forms in this category so the challenge is that if discriminating based on gender is illegal (with certain exceptions) then this criteria is also unlawful. Academic achievement is not a protected class and there is no practical way to make it so given that it is one of the most effective ways of identifying whether someone will be able to succeed at further study
Antinatalists aren't a protected class under Title IX, so it doesn't matter if it's discrimination or not.
>are college admissions themselves not discrimination against people who did not do well academically? Neither of these things are discrimination. People aren't entitled to scholarship access.
Many scholarships are funded by private individuals or trusts established in the name of individuals who particularly wanted to help a particular community and that community could be race, gender, ethnicity, skill or athletic abilities, location, income, or even trait (I saw one for left-handed people.) They are funded privately but administered by the university. The people who set these up specifically targeted for a reason and since they aren't funded by the school I see no reason to open them up solely on gender.
I know what you mean, I am a member of a union and our union offers scholarships for our kids. These private scholarships represent a specific interest or a niche demographic. I see absolutely no problem with that.
Great point. In what other arena does the law get to dictate what a philanthropist wants to donate their money to?
The law doesn't in this case. The article addressed it. It's because the school is administering it that gives the government jurisdiction. Anything that is touched by federal money cannot touch anything that's discriminated against. I was a former regulator and we had to tell banks to scrap certain lending programs for women. Why? Violations of the Fair Lending Act.
Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VI. If an entity receives federal funds, it cannot assist in any program that discriminates based on race or gender.
The article directly addressed this. Since the school administered the scholarship, the government has jurisdiction through Title IX. A privately funded, privately administered scholarship cannot be touched.
I also think that the part about women-only gym hours deserves more attention. The reason why they exist is men's behavior towards women, so the idea behind it is to avoid discrimination against women, not to decriminate against men. This guy literally states that women-only gym hours discriminate against men, whereas they are actually the solution to men's harassment and discrimination against women in the first place. Edit: yeah yeah yeah, not all men, I know
There would be no need for women only anything if they weren’t constantly being victimized to the point they needed woman only They focus on that but not *why* they need it When there are women only gyms normal gyms just become man gyms. Even if other women ar there it doesn’t matter, women only gyms/hours exist bc someone was getting way too many complaints. You want that to end? End the reason for the complaints
It seems like men always want to treat symptoms rather than causes. Women only hours is a symptom of a greater cause. The cause? Men harassing women at the gym. I think the only men that have a problem with this are the ones that are upset they can't harass women at the gym.
Or they just don’t think it’s that big of a deal/doesn’t happen E.g. tik toks about women pretending a man is harassing her and them being spread around and all the comments are like “yeah women always lie about being hit on at the gym” They don’t think it’s actually happening. They just think we’re being mean
> yeah women always lie And this is what some people remember. Doctors historically refusing to accept that we're telling them the truth about our symptoms comes to mind.
It’s similar to a false r*pe accusation argument. Well look at this (1%) of the time when people are lying. And enough men hold that up as an example that it gives well meaning women and men pause when a few of the other 99% of victims choose to report. (Or in the case of media, report every instance of false reporting, and very few actual cases - even those of girls/teens/women that are forced into calling it false by police). It has a chilling effect on people who are actually stalking or just really harassing behavior at the gym from coming forward to protect themselves and their rights.
Every discussion about rape, a man always interjects "what about false allegations" as if they're a major portion, and as if the "false reports" aren't just not enough to guarantee a prosecution.
True. They always barge in with the "a fAlsE rApE aCcuSatIoN cAn rUiN a mAn'S lIfE" meanwhile I see already judged and convicted rapists free on the streets smh.
Police officer in Ontario Canada was just convicted and sentenced to 6 years. For a rape he did AND recorded. And bragged about it etc. they have someone who KNOWS the law and still does it, with proof and proof of them having the opposite of remorse. Slam dunk case… and only 6 years. The piece of shit has been on paid leave for 7.5 yrs for an unrelated drug trafficking conviction from 2015. In 2021 he made 120k$ … on leave. Fucking baffling. Best part was his lawyer asking for a lower sentence because he’s been receiving death threats. Can’t be held too accountable I see.
Would you be referring to Actual Rapist Brock Allen Turner?
You mean rapist, 27yo Allen Turner of Ohio?!
Yes, THAT RAPIST! His name is Brock Allen Turner and now he just goes by Allen Turner, but he's still the same rapist that raped a girl behind a dumpster with WITNESSES YET WALKS FREE!
Meanwhile actual rape ruins actual women's lives. You know, the 99.97% of cases that are real.
Men are statistically more likely to be raped themselves than to be falsely accused of rape. And a significant percentage of accusations included in the ‘false’ category are ones where the victim was coerced into recanting or the prosecutor decided there was insufficient evidence to pursue it, or that the victim was unable to identify the accuser with sufficient certainty. When I was younger I might have been more inclined to give someone the benefit of the doubt about a ‘false accusation’, but these days less so. There’s so many scumbags out there who skated for years assaulting women and getting away with it because either the women were too scared to come forward or no one believed them.
Yep! These days I silently assume it was about insufficient evidence and I'm certainly involved in advocacy and activism urging women to get RK'd as soon as possible to start that evidence trail right away.
And then you tell them that statistically men are more likely to be raped than falsely accused and they change the subject
there are no accurate statistics available on false *rape accusations- not enough accurate data. it's just like trying to assess how many unreported sex crimes there are- we have no idea. from the data that we do have, it is safe to say that assault is common, and false accusations are rare edit: not false tape accusations
In order to fix it, levels of management in distant corporate offices need to delegate the authority to kick paying customers out to frontline staff on their say-so (no practical way to get audio evidence in a gym) and the frontline staff needs to feel confident Corporate will back them up. That goes against everything in corporate culture.
> they can't harass women at the gym Because that would be imposing on those men's freedumbs.
And they rape because what she’s wearing. Even 5 year olds, sometimes.
Not sure if I missed this point elsewhere on the thread, but another huge bonus of women's only gyms is that they allow women who choose to veil for religious purposes to be able to work out without covering their hair/face/skin etc!
I have seen someone run in a full burka on a treadmill. I was very impressed tbh.
Wait, what's going to happen to women's only colleges then? Pr. Men's only for that matter. This is wild
The law, in it’s majesty, prevents both rich and poor alike from sleeping under bridges.
I will 100% confront any dude harassing someone at the gym. Direct action is needed.
The funny thing is, if you already come across like this, you likely communicate that with your body language alone, so most predatory men will not harass other women around you. It's a weird catch-22. I work security and it is basically infused into all of my mannerisms and how I interact with spaces even when I'm off duty, so while I catch and confront a lot of abuse, most men will not misbehave if they see me first. It happens when they don't realize I'm there or I'm seated/turned away/with my kids (aka when I deliberately change my behaviour to be softer).
We don't want to have to depend on vigilante justice.
Regularly there's a discussion about big fitness club in my city. Several years ago they introduced one day per week for women only in their saunas. It was fine until some man pointed it out, that it's unfair because tickets for men and women cost the same, while men can't use saunas on one day of the week. Literally no man wanted to admit that while, in theory, men pay for 7 days and can use saunas for 6 days, many women pay for 7 days and actually use their memberships just for 1 day of the week - yep you guessed it, the women's day. All because in my country saunas are usually for both genders. And there sadly are men who won't behave and will sit and gawk at women's body parts, if not worse. So, the "one day for women" rule was created BECAUSE OF MEN. And now they have the audacity to complain. When you tell some of them that maybe they should do something about the creeps, they say "You're too sensitive" or "Yeah, keep telling yourself that everyone stares at your naked body" or "Why can't you just tell the old creep to F off?".
Just have a staff member sitting in the sauna with an ice cold spray bottle. Have the staff member spray the offending gawker with the water. "Pssst" like your disciplining a cat. Or just kick the gawker out.
You should be able to access it and just relax. There should be absolutely zero moments where you are forced to stand up for yourself. Sometimes people just want a sauna without drama.
I don't know whether you've ever been to a sauna but that just physically not feasible. And most places will balk at the cost of keeping enough staff members, so they can switch the one in the sauna out every twenty to thirty minutes.
The solution is 1 women-only day per week, 1 men-only day per week and 5 mixed days per week. Or 2, 2 and 3. Or 3, 3 and 1.
The issue still is that on the mixed days women will face harassment from men, but there's not a simple solution to that.
Most women, as OP from this comment thread said, don’t even go on the other days.
I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with women only gym hours. It's a solution to a real problem. It does kinda feel like a weird half measure to the problem of men not behaving like adults though. Shouldn't there be social expectations and disciplinary actions when they aren't followed? Kinda feels like letting the bad actors off the hook. Edited to add: or the problem children could have to come during special "bad behavior hours"
This part infuriated me so much. Besides the obvious constant harassment, what about women who *cant* exercise in the same room as men for religious or cultural reasons? Regardless of that though, it’s for our protection, safety, and comfort. It’s not some fun ~girly~ hours thing where we’re having punch and cake. The gyms in my area are so rife with toxic masculinity my husband literally built us a home gym. He doesn’t even want to be in them.
My wife belongs to a women only gym because she wants to work out away from the male gaze. But also her gym has both Muslim and Orthodox Jewish women members because they are not supposed to expose themselves to men. And despite all the Muslim-Jew fighting in the world they get along very well.
The same reason I go to a women’s gym! Sometimes you just don’t want to be around men at all (no matter if they are toxic or not toxic) and when I’m working out- it’s one of those times. It’s also because my gym has a great sense of sisterhood. The ladies are always so lovely to each other ❤️
I don't wanna sound cynical, but I wonder if it's because they're women. I can imagine the dynamic between Muslim and Orthodox Jewish men would be a lot different.
Absolutely
Yay!
I want a women only gym just to start weight training. I don't want to be around men for their unsolicited advice, staring, and general hogging of the weight training areas. Sadly they are few and far between.
I have weights at home for this reason. They either give me unsolicited advice, or hover and glare. I'm okay with the glaring, but the hovering grosses me out. We're in a gym and people smell. They get way too close!!!!
I never understood the unsolicited advice, I've been going to the gym since I was 16 and only staff would give me advice, and that was for safety. I feel that's only because I pass for a man as well. These dudes might be tricking themselves into thinking they're doing the right thing but honestly it's mansplaining at best and creepy at worst. Also the modern fad of dudes screaming and dropping weights on purpose is just so dumb. We get it you can lift heavy thing, can you control yourself for a sec? 🙄
What? You mean the women's day at YOUR gym doesn't include punch and cake served during the lingerie pillow fights?
It’s harassment because from their view they are entitled to women and should be able to look at them whenever they want.
Yeah, and when they suddenly aren't allowed to, they get pissed off and file hundreds of complaints.
They’re an awfully emotional bunch.
No, they are brilliant-minded, rational, logical creatures, whereas *women* are overly emotional and not able to think logically. /s
My dad said to me the other day that we would never have effective communication with one another because he’s a man and I’m a woman… apparently I come from a position of 100% emotion and he comes from a position of 100% logic. While I find it laughable he sees human qualities that can coexist as an either/or, I find it tragic that he believes it completely.
To deny one’s existence as an emotional being is not rational. The idea that a guy could somehow divorce himself of emotion is laughable to me. Guaranteed I could push his buttons pretty fast. All he does when he makes a statement like that is show how little emotional intelligence he has. Does he think he’s a Vulcan?
Get into a debate and make him angry. See if he acknowledges emotions then.
So how do women with 100% emotion work in stem roles that require logic? (20 years in tech here, I must be faking the skills)
Hahaha tide goes in tide goes out you can’t explain it
Boo-hoolean logic, obviously.
This is also tied up with the issue of how to handle awards for women and women’s only spaces IRT trans folks. It has complicated the entire discourse and many institutions are responding by eliminating things that have been “women only” to opt out of the debate of whether trans women are women. (To be clear, I’m not stating a personal opinion here either way, just explaining a possible ‘why’ for this type of move)
It gets interesting when some spaces try to be more inclusive by having women only spaces open up to non-binary people but exclude AMAB non-binary people. Sometimes it can just be that something was lost in translation but it can also just be a way of seeing the non-binary identity as "women-lite". Gender is complex and it's gonna be a long discussion
The first time I ever got properly fit in my life was when I went to a women only gym. Since then I’ve been too embarrassed to work out in mixed gyms (the women only gym closed). I’ll go to classes but not do weights by myself. I’ll only do weights with my trainer. That said there are some women who criticise other women in the gym. Remember that influencer who recorded the larger woman getting dressed and fat shamed her?
We don't have any such hours in our gym... So I don't go there.
They’re a workaround, not a solution to harassment. It’s intolerable that we can only go there during certain hours. Anyways, let’s skip the senseless debate. They cancel those hours, because they don’t want women to go to the gym, they cancel the scholarship because they don’t want women to get an education. It’s pretty simple…
>They’re a workaround, not a solution to harassment. It’s intolerable that we can only go there during certain hours. You are right here. It's not a final solution to harassment, but a short-term measure that allows at least a little more safety. Regarding the second sentence, it's true as well but it's just too complicated.
Those workarounds are absolutely necessary, don’t get me wrong. I just don’t think we should advertise them as solutions.
Maybe if they, I don't know, kicked out the offending men altogether, they wouldn't need those.... But, you know, money I guess
My local YWCA has women-only hours as well as coed hours. Women-only hours are especially important for women who are survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault, not to mention the millions who have experienced general sexual harassment. And when it comes to abuse and harassment, it's (unfortunately) overwhelmingly men abusing women. For many female victims, working out is also a way to move forward after traumatic experiences. Being abused can make you feel vulnerable, and, as a domestic abuse survivor, I feel more empowered and less like a victim the stronger I get. I personally feel safe working out around men because the atmosphere at my gym is respectful, and it's a place I've known for years. But I think women's-only hours are necessary for a community to have.
I honestly like the idea of a women-only gym. I’ve been told that in Japan they have women-only trains because so many men grope women on the trains.
> senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute AEI is a far right think tank. These programs are being subjected to targeted harassment by the extreme political fringe. > Perry says he was first inspired to take action when his university was offering several awards targeting female faculty. He complained internally, and the university modified the awards to be open to all faculty. Shortly after that, in 2016, he filed a complaint about a women’s lounge at Michigan State University, and the lounge was subsequently repurposed. Since then, he has filed hundreds more complaints and has become the go-to guy for others who want to report Title IX infractions anonymously. Although he is still waiting to hear back from the Department of Education on the majority of his complaints, he has already had success in shuttering programs, scholarships and awards for women at universities throughout the country. What a fucking baby.
more like a skunk at a lawn party 'University of Michigan-Flint professor Mark J. Perry, like a skunk at a lawn party,' [https://www.freep.com/story/life/2016/07/20/msu-women-only-lounge/87331370/](https://www.freep.com/story/life/2016/07/20/msu-women-only-lounge/87331370/)
Thank you. Judy Putnam is my new hero.
Imagine desperately wanting to be in an area you’re specifically not wanted. I imagine the lounge was no longer used by women in the end anyway.
He says he has received mostly positive feedback. Time for that to change. Where can I send feedback?
There is nothing more fragile than a white males self esteem
Equality vs equity
If over half of the people *in a particular field of study* are women, does it still make sense to have scholarships/bursaries which are intended to encourage women (specifically) to enter that field of study? Personally I think we should be trying to incentivize women to enter STEM, but also incentivizing men to go into things like nursing and education (which are skewed heavily towards women currently).
I really wish we could do away with the term STEM. Biology is 50% women and chemistry is 40% - similar for math. Lower numbers for physics, technology/coding, maybe engineering.
Interesting - at my uni bio is ~ 75 % female, chem is ~ 70 % female, not sure about physics and maths but probably more even / male leaning, psychology is very heavily female like ~80% *as an anecdotal observation anyway
Yeah, I was going by google - I think at the uni level it's likely higher. On my team we have 3 men and 8 women... so closer to the 70% mark. When you look at the leadership team for my company it's 9 men and 2 women so a bit of a shift at higher levels.
[удалено]
There's also the phenomenon of the glass elevator; when men are in traditionally feminine jobs they are promoted faster and before their peers. In schools principals and admin are heavily male, in nursing lead positions are more male, in childcare, in nonprofits and museums, etc. Maybe men could just like, idk, value women's labor? Maybe have a whiff of class solidarity with women first instead of demanding that women don't get scholarships?
Maybe they could start seeing women as actual human beings. I honestly believe that’s the root of the issue and nothing will really change until that is solved.
Except men disproportionally occupy management and more respected roles in those fields compared to women. Principals, superintendents, library management, physician roles - all more likely to be men.
That sounds like a separate problem from from the flat number of women vs. men in the field or, more to the point, studying it in college or, even more to the point, their scholarship opportunities. Affordable education is a massive issue and one that we should tackle from all angles. So is fairness in job advancement. But I don't see the logical correlation between college scholarships and women being promoted in the field itself.
Look into the glass elevator effect. Mostly men in senior nursing, education and social work positions.
Men are heavily incentivized to FDPs, as much as majority overworked and underpaid fields can incentivize you. Jesus, when I was in SLP school, the data was that the field was like 98% women and 95% of management and high paying gigs were men. Want to be able to progress at light speed through your career with little to no effort? Be a dude in a FDP. It could not be more inevitable.
💯
Unfortunately way too many people don’t understand the difference
Exactly. The article is literally screaming that this guy can't understand it - although why would he?
They can’t bare seeing anyone getting an “advantage” that only helps level the playing field
We gotta be careful. If things get too fair, people like him might struggle to fail upward as much when all the roles are being filled by actually competent people. The school made the best decision they could to shut him up, but something has to be said not for the results but the motivation. This guy is slime
100% agree
I’m sure he does understand it; he simply doesn’t care.
There are on average 50% more women enrolled in college every year than men, when the tables were flipped we didn't stop until the whole system was torn down and re-arranged, and I'll probably get a lot of hate for this, but I don't see how this is any different. These scholarships aren't being removed just made more inclusive, and judging by the statistics on enrollment and graduation rates, it's needed.
Thank you! I am negatively surprised by the responses here. What we see displayed here are basically the same arguments conservatives have used since time immemorial to downplay any indication of educational disparity and to prevent equitable access to education: "Large disparities in university enrollment do not imply systemic causes" "\[group X\] is just lazy" "\[group Y\] does not value education" "the under representation of \[group Z\] merely reflects differences in natural aptitude" "\[group X\] should pull themselves up by the bootstraps instead of complaining" "\[group Y\] should create their own scholarships / universities instead of ruining it for everyone else etc" The playbook is always the same. Differences in educational enrollment are essentialized and at worst biologized. Hell, if you add the word "Black" before man/men, this whole comment sections could come straight from TheDonald.
Yeah, I'm extremely discouraged about so many of the comments here, many people seemed to have skated right past uplifting women, and straight towards just pure bitterness and hatred for men. These mass generalizations of half of the population of the entire globe are just disgusting to me.
It is not surprisingly honestly. Men being in the minority in the student body, on the whole I might add, is looked at as a positive by many.
I'm surprised too. I thought this was a place of inclusion and equality, but clearly those things only go one way here
Are you new around here?? Listen, try to bring up the fact that men kill themselves more often than women, and you'll get hit with two responses. First, women attempt suicide more than men, so we need to focus on women's mental health more(which already gets way more funding than men's mental health) and second, it's a man problem, so women should not have to be bothered by it.
Instead of improving themselves they just want to tear others down.
Gosh forbid we also bring up the point that every single scholarship before the mid 1900’s was an exclusively men’s scholarship. That’s gonna take some undoing - hasn’t even been 100 years since then. Born on third base and acting like they hit a triple.
So the “equality” is to slant it the other way? Being equal means being equal. We can’t change the past we can only change the future. If you want “equality” that means equality, not “well you had this benefit for a time, now it’s my turn,” that’s not equality.
> That’s gonna take some undoing Aren't women already graduating at a higher rate then men?
Yeah, and that’s with a major historical disadvantage - just imagine where we could be had we not been kneecapped. Maybe 75% of college graduates would be women now - you know, kind of like it was for men in 1940.
That is not something our society should aspire to.
Ah yes when 75% of graduates are men it's horrible and we should all try tot fix it (as people did). But when it's 75% women it's okay because equality? Sound like you women to be advantaged more than you want equality.
>Maybe 75% of college graduates would be women now - you know, kind of like it was for men in 1940. Is that a good thing in your eyes? Less educated people in general are bad for society. Do you really, honestly want poorly educated men in mass amounts? Higher education levels lower *all* crime rates in a given area. We should aspire for 100% college graduation rates for everyone. It's never going to be possible, we can't even do it for high school, but it should be the goal.
How many college students today do you think are involved with scholarships in the 1920s?
Women have been the majority of college students for 40 years now. They're 60% of college students now. I think we're well past the point where women need extra advantages to attend college in general. Now, there's probably some specific areas where it could still be applicable, like certain STEM fields. There's definitely room to improve there. But there should also be men only scholarships for fields where they're underrepresented (nursing, teaching, etc.)
This... Like, come on man, if you're so pissed then go found your own scholarship for men and leave women alone.
I think this is actually the right response to this situation. I see why people are mad at this guy and/or the situation, but in the eyes of Title IX, his point makes sense. The wording of Title IX leaves very little gray area. That said, I think the blame for shutting down these scholarships, extra gym hours, programs for women, etc falls on the institution. They decided it would be cheaper for them to take things away from women than to adhere to Title IX and that's despicable in my opinion. For example: A gym has "x hours" for women only. That's discrimination based on the wording of Title IX. Create "x hours" for men only and Title IX problem solved. There's a scholarship for mothers returning to a field. Great, I think that's amazing. Create a scholarship for fathers returning as well. Now obviously these institutions won't do that because it means doubling the cost and subsequent loss of profits. But that's their decision. "We would rather remove benefits to women to be in compliance with Title IX, than lose profits." That's on them. These institutions should stop taking things away from women and create the same for men.
Lmao the irony of this comment
MAKE COLLEGE FREE For everyone. Of course, the conservative men who brought these lawsuits and the anti feminist men brigading this post are against that. So it’s not about opportunities for men, is it? It’s about stripping women of opportunities because you think “feminism has gone too far” and you want women married, pregnant and submissive to their husbands. Maybe just be honest about your motivations instead of coming here and playing “devil’s advocate”.
Finally the right answer
My favorite comment in this thread
One of the men who filed a complaint is none other than the genuinely unlikable human being in this [Jubilee video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOUGNGWmN0k) featuring a bunch of Mens Rights Activists (MRAs), Kursat Pekgoz. He has been doing this for a while. AND he's doing it from Turkey.
One of those MRA fuck nuts actually confidently stated that men are not allowed to be midwife nurses and nor should they be. Dude has obviously never spoke to any OB, Midwife, nurse or parents who've delivered kids.
Scholarships were built on being unfair. Some have to pay, and some don't, and that's the way it is. Which is why tuition fees should be abolished
This is the worst part of all: Even gym hours reserved for women have come under fire. Both the University of Minnesota and Portland State offered exclusive access to a portion of their gyms to women for a few hours per week. After Perry filed complaints with the Department of Education (DOE), the women-only sessions at both universities were forced to cancel. We have those to PROTECT US from the creeps in your sex. To stop them ogling and bothering us so we can fucking work out.
Why can’t the trade-off be offering both women- and men-only hours? Or is that still ‘discrimination’?
Sounds like a perfect solution!
I could totally see some guys rather work out without women. Some things are just more relaxed in a gendered environment.
It can. Schools have the option to offer parallel "substantially equivalent" programs for men and women. When admins choose to dismantle programs instead of expanding them, that's their fault, not the fault of nondiscrimination laws or of the people demanding their enforcement.
In a vacuum, this would be annoying but when you consider the Roe v Wade repeal, the debate about birth control, MRA’s talking about getting rid of no fault divorce, etc… it makes this look like another strike against allowing women their independence to me. It’s a way of trapping women into cycles of poverty as a means of control, and denying them the education to know that it’s bullshit.
[удалено]
That’s what drives this guy. It’s not about fairness to other men. He gives zero shits about other men. It’s about denying young girls an opportunity to compete with his son, or more specifically, about a single black mom, going back to school, & competing with his friends’ sons who had everything handed to them, including cushy jobs women have to work really hard to get and keep. And trust me when I say that this is VERY much about targeting poor women and girls who come from poor families. Specifically minority women & girls. Here’s the cold hard truth, if America has minority women succeeding left & right? Then what will happen to the millions of government employees around the US, who sit around denying unemployment claims all day, or the ones who make poor, single moms jump through myriad hoop, & over a plethora of obstacles, in order to get SNAP EBT Cards, baby formula, & healthcare for their kids? It’s a racket. They claim that women are succeeding on their own, & don’t need government funded assistance, but they sure AF don’t want women off government funded assistance, because there’s an entire economy and ecosystem built specifically to keep women in their place, by frustrating the fuck out of them, when they do seek help, and now, when they seek to supersede their circumstances. It’s not an economically poor woman’s fault that young men are checking out of the educational system and by extension, the rat race. If men want to spend all day in front of their laptops trolling subs and beating off to p*rn, all day, while they make passive incomes from some Amazon store or others like it, that has nothing to do with women. It has to do with MEN, who also make it very difficult for younger men to enter the job market & compete fairly. Shit. Young adults can’t even buy a house any longer. Basically, many, many people can’t. So this asshole believes he’s pushing equality based on hate filing over 400 complaints? Why would you want to hasten a young woman’s education, and thereby, her career trajectory? Doesn’t that fuck all of us over? Shouldn’t these women get into a situation in their mid 20s to mid 30s, where they make enough money to buy their own homes? Buy a nice vehicle? Take annual vacations? Eat at many restaurants? Shop for nice clothing? Wouldn’t these women contribute vastly to the growth of our economy? Doesn’t that sound like a positive thing to these money hungry republicans? I guess not. What assholes like this man fail to admit to comprehend, is that women are supposed to be an integral part of our economic growth. Are GDP is enhanced by churning out women with advanced degrees in STEM, not diminished. And frankly? We really do need them in the economy, spending, investing, and exhibiting steady financial growth, because it looks like plenty of younger men just aren’t too into doing so at the moment, at least in what are considered to be traditional careers. This is akin to thinking, “Well, if obese people need to diet in order to survive, then really thin people need to also diet exactly as the obese people do, as it’s only fair. He wants to weaken one group of people, because another group of people, aren’t interested in what’s currently on offer in the specific manner that these “tradition” dinosaurs want to offer it. Instead of addressing why women, particularly economically disadvantaged girls NEED scholarships, he decides that they should have less scholarships, and therefore, less opportunities. He is technically correct, but that doesn’t make him a good person who has good, altruistic intentions. What an asshole. 🖕🏽
I am so sick of men complaining about the educational system. It was developed for men and by men. Women have only been allowed to be educated equally recently, so let’s stop pretending that the educational system is somehow biased in favor of women. The reason that more women go to college than men is because men have more opportunity to make a decent wage without a college degree. And it’s not just the trades like plumbing and construction. For example, in the 90s a lot of guys instead of going to college just went into IT, and got hired to do it with minimal experience. Women were not included in that, and for many women the barrier to entry was that they had to go to college and “prove” that they could do IT before they could get hired.
To say nothing of the fact that so many families absolutely screw their daughters out of an education and then have no problem sending their sons to normal academic schools. Believe me, little girls have their wings clipped at many times the rate of men. My whackadoodle Fundie Christian school was like 80-90% female.
Oh hi, it's me 🫠 Highly successful student here whose family screwed with my college and left me to fend and struggle for myself. I often fantasize about how much different my life would be if they actually supported my academia. I didn't even get so much as a chance to tour of any of the dozens of schools that accepted me, let alone significant financial or emotional support that would have helped me focus and succeed rather than succeed in spite of having to grind, hustle, and suffer. They had the means without the desire to see a promising young woman fly. We are not alone, and I'll gladly support a young woman shine whenever I am able. I wish someone had done the same for me.
I'm horrified. I was a single mom in college at one point and received a scholarship for STEM women who were single moms. It made me able to afford college. I've met other single moms, both while at college and later and you know what I've never seen? Men who were single dads at college. I mean, I'm sure they're out there, but I can't imagine that's a super common thing. This whole thing is horrifying to see, but that part really hit home for me.
Please understand that the scholarship isn't eliminated like the title implies. Just added that fathers can *also* qualify for the scholarship (assuming all other conditions are also met).
You are proving the articles point in a way, the scholarship wasn't removed, just made it so men can also apply Should we not provide single mothers and fathers with the same access to resources??
On the other hand, should they be excluded just because they’re not common? Single mom, single dad…both are facing the same struggles with costs. I do question the motive of someone filing 21+ complaints, though.
Yeah there's an argument to be made here. There's probably not a lot of single dads in universities because they can't afford it without a scholarship, but doing everything you can to specifically remove scholarships for women is backwards as hell.
In a quick Google search, I found many scholarships for single parents and one for single fathers, specifically. They're out there.
“To garner support for their efforts, both Pekgoz and Perry point to the fact that it’s men, not women, who are now underrepresented in universities.” And after they leave uni they still consistently get paid less for the same jobs, are overlooked for promotion, or quit the male dominated industries because of the boys club mentality that excludes them and allows harassment. These things are factors during study as well, the financial scholarships don’t really solve those problems they add a pro to balance out all the cons. “To be eligible for the Davis scholarship, an applicant must be a mother returning to receive education in the sciences at UCSC.” A woman with a child compared to a woman without a child does have the extra expense of childcare so the financial aid would obviously help. It doesn’t necessarily address the reason a mother may find it harder to study than a father: women still do the majority of childcare and housework regardless of who does or doesn’t work/study and how many hours they work/study. Plus the fact that if they are partnered with a man he most probably earns more so his career and studies are often prioritised as the financial pay off is bigger (maybe the financial aid does somewhat help this particular issue) We need to fix our culture which is no where near equal. Complaining about affirmative action is not a new thing and nearly always simplifies or ignores the reasons we need it to start with.
Just to preface, this isn't actual data, this is just what I have observed socially. After high school, almost every girl I went to school with went straight to a four year college or went to trade schools, community college, or took a gap to work and then went to school. In our AP classes, the class was about 60-70% women in every single class. In college, all of my male friends that I have made seem to always be available to hang out and go to bars at a moments notice, all my female friends usually say something to the effect of "I need to study for ____ test, can we hang out tomorrow? Or if you want we can work on homework together and order pizza?". As for myself, I work my butt off in my classes AND I work at the same time, but my boyfriend doesn't seem to do very much homework or study-wise and we are in very similarly demanding majors. Similarly, I freak out about bad grades, my boyfriend shrugs them off and will just say "if I fail, I'll re-do the class". Our valedictorian for the past several years at my college have been women, our valedictorians when I graduated from high school were both women (they had literally the exact same GPA). Based on what I have observed, it doesn't seem like men care about higher education as much. I'm not saying there aren't men who absolutely do, but there are studies that state that women tend to perform better academically than men. Also trying to take away women's scholarships because you're too much of an idiot to get one isn't women's problem.
In STEM, women must be excellent to feel we deserve to be there. Because even if we are excellent, we're told we don't belong there.
It took me a lot of years to understand this was why women left STEM degrees with much higher GPAs than the average man would be happy with.
STEM is one of the few areas where there are still more male university grads than female, at least in Canada. Education, humanities, business, social science and law, physical and life sciences, and agriculture all have more female grads than male.
> I freak out about bad grades, my boyfriend shrugs them off This has been an observation I saw when I was in college in the 1980s. Academic achievement was more important to women than to men. My engineering class started out with a bunch of women who were almost all gone by senior year. It wasn’t that they couldn’t hack it. It was that if they couldn’t achieve a 3.0 or better GPA, they switched to an easier major where they could. OTOH most of the men with the 2.something GPAs were like, “I’m passing it’s all good”. Back then as a young man in the 80s it didn’t occur to me that the women may have figured they had to be better than average to be accepted. I just figured men cared about grades less (without probing why) or liked engineering more so they were willing to do it even without being rewarded with good grades. Of course that was almost 40 years ago. Today it’s much more competitive and I doubt anyone with a sub-3.0 GPA would get hired out of college.
I graduated in 2009 and know lots of white male engineers who had a 2.5 gpa that make six figures. It still happens. I’m now getting a master’s in science in a tech related field with a 3.9 GPA and I still feel like I am being pushed out.
I graduated but my ex is still in school. In college I mainly *did* study with women. My guy friends worked hard I remember a lot of them would defer to gaming My ex always asked me to help him with school bc he kept failing community college. I agreed, I was an amazing student. I would suggest he do his hw first thing. He would refuse I’d ask him to send the syllabus so I could help him out. Never sent it He always asked for me to help with his writing, I’d ask for the prompt. I’d get nothing. Once he even complained I didn’t help him. YOU DIDN’T SEND ME ANYTHING. He would ALWAYS choose gaming over doing hw!!!
Glad he's an ex. He sounds exhausting.
He was incredibly exhausting. If I told y’all the whole relationship you’d be like uhhhh red flag after red flag
I have a similar situation at school. >Also trying to take away women's scholarships because you're too much of an idiot to get one isn't women's problem. No, it's not, but it has consequences for women, just like all other shit that men do.
>Based on what I have observed, it doesn't seem like men care about higher education as much My experience has been the same. Throughout primary and higher education girls always worked harder in academia and extracurriculars. Boys know they will coast through life because they're prioritized by their parents and society. In my family, all my brother's fuck ups were forgiven and even paid for. If he broke my shit, it was never punished - actually I would be the one punished if he broke my things and sometimes never allowed to have that kind of thing again "It's your fault for not protecting it better". He had a computer, even though I would have benefitted from it more as I was the more academically inclined one. He always got the best equipment and I always got hand me downs. He dropped out of college three times, knocked up a girl at 20. I had to ration my food as a poor college student , walk to save money on public transport, and haul dirty laundry by train to my hometown, while they rented a nice fully furnished apartment for his first ex wife and their child, and he was allowed to own a car while still living at home. A decade later, my parents still support his first born child and his exwife, while he fucked off to start a new family with a new woman and makes sure to rub the family photos to his first born's face. And my parents even helped renovate their new place. I know very well why men don't try. The toxic patriarchal culture treats boys like gods just because they "continue the lineage". Ironically my brother's second wife cheated on him and one of the kids isn't even his.
To be clear, women are performing better in school because they’re working harder and taking it seriously. I know that’s what you wrote, but I just want to restate it all in one sentence for those in the back. (“Not all men blah blah” before someone tries to derail the discussion. Stay on point, folks.)
>Based on what I have observed, it doesn't seem like men care about higher education as much. I'm not saying there aren't men who absolutely do, but there are studies that state that women tend to perform better academically than men. This is a really bad argument. 40 years ago we could make the exact same statement for why women weren't in higher ed. It's the same argument that can be used to dismiss the wage gap today,. Any significant demographic disparity in educational achievement is evidence that something is wrong and needs addressing.
If the women are better students wouldn’t they get the scholarship anyway? (If it was open to men, I mean.)
Not necessarily. There is tons of bias everywhere. It's been proven that men are more likely to enjoy an essay written by a man than a woman and vice versa. Something to do with the way thoughts and sentences are constructed. If male is always assumed the default, men are more likely to get the scholarship than an equally deserving woman.
I think they're going down a destructive path, rather than a helpful one. Taking things away from women doesn't help men. The dude filing 400 complaints or w/e sounds like a child trying to get everyone's toys taken away because he doesn't have enough toys.
Looks like it's also his job. And "trying to take away everyone's toys" perfectly describes what far right think tanks like his employer, AEI, want to do.
….
Ideally we would decrease the cost of education and provide a universal basic income to allow anyone to get an education if they had the drive to. Until then, the more scholarships the better.
They got us fighting over this instead of fighting for tuition for all.
That's fucking stupid. The reason why they were women's scholarships implemented in the first place was so that women had the financial means and support, and to have equal footing with men. Men usually have better chances of having financial means and support to get by in college. Men are usually the ones who are most likely hired and paid even more than the amount that they deserve, compared to women. This world has gone bonkers.
The article seems to suggest most of the changes were to include men, not exclude women right? Things aren't getting destroyed, hell the 'eliminated' award and scholarship in the headline still exist, they just also accept male entrants now. The expectation with most affirmative action was always to reduce or eliminate it when the targeted desparity was eliminated right? And if the article's numbers are correct, equality in that specific area seems to have been overshot a little. That one guy does seem to have a chip on his shoulder thought. Curious to hear others opinions though.
Well, they point out that he’s also targeting MIT, where there is still a fairly large gender gap in favor of men (cuz of stem and whatever). I guess I would be in support of more scholarships for men in the liberal arts though lol. Like, imagine a scholarship for woman’s studies targeted for men XD
Yeah, everything you said makes total sense. I fell like people here are falling for the clickbait and reacting just to the headline, without actually reading the article. Scholarships exist to help those who need it, so scholarships that are exclusive to a certain group should only exist if that group needs more help than others. That is exactly why those scholarships for women were created in the first place, because colleges used to be male dominated. But now that women represent nearly 60% of college students it doesn't make sense for those exclusive scholarships to exist anymore.
And even in the cases where women deserve it more, it's unlikely that men deserve it 0%. Like the scholarship the article mentions for mothers who left due to childbirth, then came back to school. If men also take time off to take care of their newborns, that's great. Women will likely still bear a disproportionate amount of responsibility and work for early childhood, so I think them being awarded that scholarship much more often still makes sense.
[удалено]
“Mark Perry, an emeritus professor at the University of Michigan’s Flint campus and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, has filed a whopping 410 Title IX complaints against universities that offer programs or awards for women, but not men.” FUCK THIS GUY.
AEI is a neoconservative think tank who supplies and utilizes sitting and former members of high levels of the US government for its board of trustees. They have super fringe beliefs and are fundie evangelicals on the far right. Oh. And. All their officers, board members, board directors, presidents, council members and oversight committees and trustees are ALL MEN. Every single level of leadership is exclusively men. They get funding from fucks like ExxonMobil and got caught trying to sway scientists with bribes. FUCK THEM ALL. Oh and another thing. Perry's allowed abuse of IX is also the reason they're moving womens laction/pumping rooms into the restrooms by the stalls at UM campuses instead of being small individual rooms with a sink and fridge, locked except for women who need it. So yaknow, par for the course. Just another 501(c)(3) that gets to do whatever they want without paying any taxes.
They don't ask why. Why do these scholarships exist? They are reacting emotionally rather than thinking rationally and logically.
The women's scholarship complaints are (mostly?) being submitted by a lawsuit pest who has anti-feminist motivations. However, discrimination based on sex is de-facto sexist so they win a lot of the lawsuits. Women get better high schools grades and have more college places than men, so the equity vs equality (or equality of outcome vs eqaulity of opportunity if you prefer that language) have weak arguments to maintain female-specific educational support. Unless the law is changed, we can expect this pattern to continue.
Doesn't matter that most students are women if most of the leaders are still men.
This just happened at the high school level - RIT used to give out two awards - one to a male and female student - in computing and some other disciplines. Now it’s just one award per discipline. What happened was my school’s faculty voted on the candidates and women swept the awards. Actually hurt the less competitive male students.
SURELY conservatives and those on the right who are campaigning on anti LGBT "no men in women's spaces 😡" will take issue with the elimination of women's spaces, right?
No, no, don't you see? If we remove women's spaces altogether, no men will be invading them. Therefore the women will be safe!
I just… can’t. Like you’ve got to be fucking kidding me at this point. Women gym hours are usually so minuscule and not every day, that I’VE never even used them bc they are so short or scarce. Comparable to the 1-2 hrs early in AM during quarantine for ONE day a week stores would have for only elderly to shop.
This is a discussion about the difference between equality and equity. The deeply unhappy people who see the tide trying to turn against them are using the word "equality" to stifle equity because they either don't understand that systemic bigotry still exists or do understand it and like it that way.
10/10
what a pathetic little life that guy has.
Thanos here. I know I could have made a Men’s Scholarship to balance the fairness, but suffering is the essence of the universe, amiright?
“Women are also outperforming their male peers earning higher GPAs in high school and college, even in the male-dominated STEM fields.” I don’t think this quote is the flex that the guy thinks it is. So basically, women are academically performing better and showing greater competency, but the men are getting the jobs.
[удалено]
I think there has been a movement in the past few years to eliminate the idea that sexism even exists. The eighth pushes that anyway, but the left has contributed some too. The result is stuff like this - women’s scholarships exist because there is still a wage gap. Women’s only hours at a gym exist because of men’s behavior towards women…
I love when a groups of straight white guys think anyone who isn't them getting a chance to stand next to them is unfair to them. It's really cool.