Gender ratios at NDSU mean nothing
In the last issue of The Spectrum, there was an article about how few tenured female professors NDSU employs in comparison to the number of tenured male professors.
President Chapman was quoted as saying the university needed to improve the percentage of female faculty members. The article went on to say the university is taking steps to attract more female faculty.
It seems to me whenever any organization, field of work, major or anything else has significantly fewer women than men, people take it as a sign of a problem that needs to be solved.
“We need to elect more women to government positions.” “We need to encourage more women to pursue careers in science and mathematics.” “There aren’t enough females in upper management in businesses.” I hear this stuff all the time.
I frankly don’t see what the big deal is. Equality is about giving everyone the same opportunities, not about making sure every workplace has a set number of men, women, blacks, whites, Asians, Hispanics, gays, lesbians, straight people and whatever other category of people we need for a diverse environment. As long as NDSU isn’t denying a qualified individual employment just because the person belongs to a certain demographic, the university isn’t doing anything wrong.
Only 13 percent of tenured faculty is female. So what? NDSU should not be asking, “How can we get more female professors?” Instead, the question should be, “How are these women being treated in comparison to the men doing the same job?” Are they judged by the same standards? Are they paid the same salary for the same quality of work? Are we offering them an environment that does not demean or insult them?
If NDSU can honestly answer yes to those questions, it doesn’t matter if the women are outnumbered by their male colleagues.
To me, the gender equality movement is about allowing both genders to do what they want in life and not be held back just because of gender.
When we go around trying to persuade more women to take up certain professions just for the sake of having more women in a particular field, it’s kind of like saying, “We need you to do this job because you are a woman, and we need more female representation in this field.” That seems a little strange to me. I, for one, am not going to get a job in science just because the field needs more women. I’ll do what I enjoy, thank you, and that’s the arts. I’m not doing my gender a disservice by doing so.
I don’t hear many people saying we need more men to work as nurses, elementary school teachers and other professions that are typically female-dominated. That is a discriminatory attitude.
By dividing professions into male and female dominated, encouraging women to be involved in the male dominated fields, but not encouraging men to be involved in female dominated fields, we are essentially making a value judgment, saying men and their work are superior, and women need to climb up to that level. That’s a little sexist, if you ask me. It’s sexism disguised as an attempt at equality.
I see nothing wrong with encouraging people of both genders to choose a profession they enjoy and can do well even if it’s traditionally considered a job for the opposite gender.
But we need to get the message across in a non-threatening, non-discriminatory way.
Columnists' opinions do not necessarily reflect the views of The Spectrum