"Paul S. Brookes." wrote:
> (snip)
>> Well, I don't know what the post-doc's are like in your place, but
> right here, right now, I've yet to meet a single male post-doc who's
> p'eed off at the number of women being employed. In fact I'd even go
> so far as to say male post-doc's encourage their boss to employ
> females - to make the lab a more balanced place to work in.
> (snip)
Not too long ago I sat at a table in a faculty lunch room while another
faculty member explained that in a search with 100 applicants (of which
20 are women) if you hire a woman, it is unlikely that you hired the
best candidate. His argument was that if only 20% of the sample is
female the probability is much smaller that the best candidate will be
female than that the best candidate will be male. He was trying to
explain why so many searches in math and science hire men. (Nearly 100%
of the searches I have seen in the last 5 years.)
Needless to say, I pointed out the ramifications of his argument if
taken to the next logical point. He had no problem with the implication
that most women hired in science and math are not the best ones for the
jobs. He didn't say they weren't good, mind you, but they were probably
not the best.
The attitude is out there and it's not confined to men old enough to be
my father. This guy is in his early 40's.
Karen
