Have you heard about the sexism in science? There were tons of signs at the big march in Washington a week and a half ago. In case you’re out of the loop, the far left is once again doubling down on their narrative of sexism and discrimination to galvanize supporters.
In this instance, they’re attacking the integrity of science, saying that men and women favor male scientists and that the unfairness is detrimental to society. As usual, this is an obfuscation of the truth. Let’s learn the dirty details of gender bias in Science Technology Engineering and Math (STEM) fields.
There is a ridiculous wealth of studies on the topic of gender bias in America. The most famous studies are often portrayed in the mainstream, and they show that STEM fields favor men over women. The chief of these studies shows that recommendations in particular tend to favor men. What this and a few other of the most popular studies fail to address is the overwhelming majority of men who make up the bulk of STEM fields.
Regardless of why, more than 75 percent of STEM participants are still male. For that reason, any study that simply measures success rates will show favoritism towards men, even if bias isn’t the cause. This is just the simple propagation of statistics.
More careful studies are far more revealing, and they all agree. Gender bias does exist in STEM, but it doesn’t favor men. A sweeping review of studies since 2010 show that more than 90 percent of the research backs the findings that senior members in hiring positions for STEM jobs overwhelmingly favor female applicants.
Here’s an easy one to understand. In 2016, 15 percent of all Civil Engineering graduates were female. Despite that, 30 percent of all job offers were given to women first. That’s a two-to-one favoritism, and it holds steady across STEM fields.
According to surveys, women are twice as likely to exhibit gender bias when rating competency, and they are twice as likely to believe claims of gender bias regardless of evidence. Finally, the culmination of research shows that in over 90 percent of cases, there is no quantifiable gender bias in non-academic STEM research and peer review. Take note of the keyword: non-academic. We’ll be revisiting that little detail.
Biology is a big field that includes genetics, medicine and zoology as just the tip of the iceberg. With so many subfields in question, you would expect inevitable diversity, but that is not the case. High-level research and tenured positions are tilted towards females at a rate of two-to-one (the recurrence of this ratio almost suggests a systemic issue).
Last year, 873 high-end research jobs were available across America’s academic institutions. Applications were almost evenly split between men and women (less than a five-percent difference). Yet, more than 650 of those positions were granted to females.
This disparity is less apparent in other branches of STEM primarily because male applicants dramatically outnumber their female counterparts. When you adjust for participation rates, the two-to-one ratio holds true in every STEM field except economics. The bias in academia is clear, but it should come as no surprise that the bias is actually favorable to females.
Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) is the posterchild issue for liberal anti-science. The railings against GMO foods are largely ridiculous, but a surprising result of investigating the movement discovered deeply layered sexism. The primary proponents of the movement are as unscientific as you would assume, but one of the biggest organizations involved is Moms Across America (MAA).
This group, as you might guess, is predominantly female, and they provide the bulk of funding for false research and propaganda campaigns. So far these problems aren’t tied to sexism, but a recent exposure of their conversations behind closed doors are. They were caught discriminating against both genders.
First, they displayed their ad campaign, and it was incredibly misogynist. Assuming that women are always the primary caregiver, it played on traditional gender roles and fear tactics to push mothers toward non-GMO products.
On the other end, they tried to flip the script and discredit GMO researchers by accusing them of sexist behavior. The slogan “no uterus, no opinion” should tell you everything you need to know about this group.
There is rampant sexism in science today. It is nowhere near as bad in the private sector, and in many instances men and women can work together in harmony. Academia is its own mess and the purveyor of the problem.
While individual cases of bias will always exist in a free society, the systemic problem is easy to miss. The issue isn’t women or men discriminating against each other. Its liberals exploiting sexism-based sympathy to further corrupt the integrity of America’s colleges.
~ American Liberty Report