Let me be very clear: anyone who suggests that there is pervasive anti-woman bias in any particular field of academic study, and cites statistical disparity as “proof,” is a flaming hypocrite. The definitive test is to ask such a person whether or not the overwhelming majority of women in other academic fields serves as proof of misandry. Considering the recent politician “concern” over a lack of women in certain hard sciences, paired with a brazen joy that men have fallen behind in educational achievement, one is forced to the conclusion that most “feminists” have no concept of true justice whatsoever, and what they call “social justice” is just a cover for selfish power-grabbing. Here, let us have the government meddle in yet another part of your life! It’s for Teh Poor Oppressed Womynz! Too many of them are going into medicine instead of engineering!
Let me ask a question: if it’s bad to have a negative expectation of a certain group of people (“Women are bad at math, so don’t bother trying at all”), and also bad to have a positive expectation of a certain group of people (“Women should be feminine”), how can having an expectation of “You’re a woman who’s good at math, so you just have to go into engineering!” be appropriate? It’s not okay to push women in some directions, but it’s A-OK to put pressure on them in others? I don’t think so. If the feminists think it’s okay to put social pressure on women to seek careers in male-dominated fields instead of following their own desires, then there can be no blanket condemnation of using social pressure to attain ideologically motivated goals. Which means that social conservatives get to use it too, for their purposes. But, as is well known by anyone paying attention, feminists are hypocrites.
How about this: we use the anti-discrimination laws that we already have, and accept that different people have different priorities, even if the aggregate result of individual choice results in (gasp!) a statistical disparity.
I realize that will never fly among the Marxist feminist set, because a fundamental part of their dogma is that there are no innate differences between males and females, and all observed differences in behavior are a result of socialization. Never mind that the “blank slate” theory of human nature fails every time it’s tested, and the tests themselves usually have a body count.
(H/T: Amy Alkon)