3 ms·

Are fewer males applying as well? If only 40% of applicants are male, then I'd say the ratio of college entrants is just right. Otherwise, I don't see a probl

by fnid 17y ago

Are fewer males applying as well? If only 40% of applicants are male, then I'd say the ratio of college entrants is just right. Otherwise, I don't see a problem. I don't really see a problem anyway. I never saw a need to have exact demographic representation in all fields. The only time exact demographic representation seems to be an issue (outside this article) is when white males are overrepresented. So white males are underrepresented in college. The world won't end. It may actually be better in the long run, so I'm not sure what the fuss is.

docmach 17y ago
Why would it be better in the long run?
mdasen 17y ago
Just to provide the other perspective: One could argue that fewer males applying could be a problem. It's easier to make the argument with a minority group that has been discriminated against so I'm going to go the easier route. If fewer African Americans apply to college, it could be because they have less money and assume they can't afford it, or feel that large institutions (no matter how liberal) are stacked against them, or that they weren't given the tools to get in as easily and so don't even bother applying. Those are all troubling reasons for someone not doing something. Now, people can and do prefer different things, but sometimes we shape our preferences to what we see as attainable or what we're encouraged toward. So, if only 40% of applicants are male, the question is "why". If it's because they just genuinely aren't interested, that's fine. But society is very complex. Sometimes someone wants something and just gives up on it because it seems like it wasn't meant for them. It definitely happened to me and golf - when it seems like an institution (or parts) aren't so enthusiastic about you, you can start avoiding it. You're totally right that the world won't end. If there's no underlying cause, it doesn't matter. However, it might be symptomatic of something. It's worth figuring out what's going on since it does stick out. And I haven't heard really any arguments about why it's happening. Part of this gets down to the question of free will. Let's say that more males prefer to go into trade craft (plumbers, carpenters, etc.) and that's an area you can make a lot of money in and college isn't needed. OK, that explains the discrepancy, but go down another level and is our culture pushing men to trades and women to college - even in slight ways that would cause that effect on the numbers? If it is, is it a problem? The world needs trades people. The world needs college educated people. I guess on the last part, I do see it as a problem because let's say that males and females have the same average aptitude for things - an IQ of 100 for academia and an IQ of 100 for trades so to speak. If culture is pushing females to college and males to trades, we aren't getting an efficient system - it means that there are some females that have an inherent talent for trades that have been pushed into academia. Here's an example: Matt - 110 academic; 90 trade. Bill - 100 trade; 100 academic. Robin - 90 academic; 110 trade. Julia - 100 trade; 100 academic. Now, from those hypothetical inherent talents, Matt should go to college, Robin should go to trade school, and the other two are a coin flip. But, if Robin is pushed towards academia and Matt towards trade, they might end up with scores that are the reverse of what their inherent talent is (let's say admissions scores of 200 for Robin and 180 for Matt). Robin was encouraged to apply herself in the things that show up on an academic score, but really Matt is the one in that example that has better talent. At that point, Robin should be the one admitted - she's become smarter and is better prepared. However, Matt's lacking might have simply been his upbringing. It really gets into the nitty-gritty of free will and will drive you nuts if you think about it too much. Your attitude might be the right one to take since my head is hurting just thinking about this.
hga 17y ago
The social dynamics can get really ugly when the m/f ration hits a tipping point, generally thought to be around 60%. The focus on white males is because the system does everything it can to get "males of color" into college (well, everything but competently teach them the 3Rs, at least in the US with Dick and Jane and Their Running Dog Spot (Whole Word nonsense, phrase coined by Jerry Pournelle, who's wife's career was teaching the hardest cases how to read)).
- ardit33 17y ago
  I went to a 62%/38% female/male ratio, and social dynamics were alright. A lot of girls kept their hometown bf. (they had to), lots of parties, and getting laid was easier. Now I had a close friend that went to a 70%/30% guys/girls school, and the atmosphere was definetly different. Things were more boring, nobody was getting laid, and the few women that where there were acting like they were walking over water. People were more concentrated in studying than having fun (parties with only dudes, get boring pretty fast). I know I am overgeneralizing, but things were ok. Now if the ratio gets even worse, then who knows. Girls/women will have to date somebody that makes less then them or that has lower education level. To a certain degree, that is what currently educated black females are facing.
anamax 17y ago
> Are fewer males applying as well? If only 40% of applicants are male, then I'd say the ratio of college entrants is just right. > Otherwise, I don't see a problem. I don't really see a problem anyway. That reasoning wasn't acceptable when other groups were under-represented, so why is it acceptable now?
- fnid 17y ago
  I think it was acceptable then too.
  - anamax 17y ago
    That may be, but a lot of folks didn't think that it was acceptable then. If they think that it's different when white males are involved, I'd like to hear why.
yequalsx 17y ago
Having large numbers of males with a feeling of being left out tends to lead to societal distress. It's why people are concerned about the male/female imbalance in China and India. There will soon be millions of men in both countries with few prospects of getting laid and this generally has bad consequences for neighboring nations.

by fnid 17y ago

docmach 17y ago

Why would it be better in the long run?

mdasen 17y ago

Just to provide the other perspective: One could argue that fewer males applying could be a problem. It's easier to make the argument with a minority group that has been discriminated against so I'm going to go the easier route. If fewer African Americans apply to college, it could be because they have less money and assume they can't afford it, or feel that large institutions (no matter how liberal) are stacked against them, or that they weren't given the tools to get in as easily and so don't even bother applying. Those are all troubling reasons for someone not doing something. Now, people can and do prefer different things, but sometimes we shape our preferences to what we see as attainable or what we're encouraged toward. So, if only 40% of applicants are male, the question is "why". If it's because they just genuinely aren't interested, that's fine. But society is very complex. Sometimes someone wants something and just gives up on it because it seems like it wasn't meant for them. It definitely happened to me and golf - when it seems like an institution (or parts) aren't so enthusiastic about you, you can start avoiding it. You're totally right that the world won't end. If there's no underlying cause, it doesn't matter. However, it might be symptomatic of something. It's worth figuring out what's going on since it does stick out. And I haven't heard really any arguments about why it's happening. Part of this gets down to the question of free will. Let's say that more males prefer to go into trade craft (plumbers, carpenters, etc.) and that's an area you can make a lot of money in and college isn't needed. OK, that explains the discrepancy, but go down another level and is our culture pushing men to trades and women to college - even in slight ways that would cause that effect on the numbers? If it is, is it a problem? The world needs trades people. The world needs college educated people. I guess on the last part, I do see it as a problem because let's say that males and females have the same average aptitude for things - an IQ of 100 for academia and an IQ of 100 for trades so to speak. If culture is pushing females to college and males to trades, we aren't getting an efficient system - it means that there are some females that have an inherent talent for trades that have been pushed into academia. Here's an example: Matt - 110 academic; 90 trade. Bill - 100 trade; 100 academic. Robin - 90 academic; 110 trade. Julia - 100 trade; 100 academic. Now, from those hypothetical inherent talents, Matt should go to college, Robin should go to trade school, and the other two are a coin flip. But, if Robin is pushed towards academia and Matt towards trade, they might end up with scores that are the reverse of what their inherent talent is (let's say admissions scores of 200 for Robin and 180 for Matt). Robin was encouraged to apply herself in the things that show up on an academic score, but really Matt is the one in that example that has better talent. At that point, Robin should be the one admitted - she's become smarter and is better prepared. However, Matt's lacking might have simply been his upbringing. It really gets into the nitty-gritty of free will and will drive you nuts if you think about it too much. Your attitude might be the right one to take since my head is hurting just thinking about this.

hga 17y ago

The social dynamics can get really ugly when the m/f ration hits a tipping point, generally thought to be around 60%. The focus on white males is because the system does everything it can to get "males of color" into college (well, everything but competently teach them the 3Rs, at least in the US with Dick and Jane and Their Running Dog Spot (Whole Word nonsense, phrase coined by Jerry Pournelle, who's wife's career was teaching the hardest cases how to read)).

ardit33 17y ago
I went to a 62%/38% female/male ratio, and social dynamics were alright. A lot of girls kept their hometown bf. (they had to), lots of parties, and getting laid was easier. Now I had a close friend that went to a 70%/30% guys/girls school, and the atmosphere was definetly different. Things were more boring, nobody was getting laid, and the few women that where there were acting like they were walking over water. People were more concentrated in studying than having fun (parties with only dudes, get boring pretty fast). I know I am overgeneralizing, but things were ok. Now if the ratio gets even worse, then who knows. Girls/women will have to date somebody that makes less then them or that has lower education level. To a certain degree, that is what currently educated black females are facing.

anamax 17y ago

> Are fewer males applying as well? If only 40% of applicants are male, then I'd say the ratio of college entrants is just right. > Otherwise, I don't see a problem. I don't really see a problem anyway. That reasoning wasn't acceptable when other groups were under-represented, so why is it acceptable now?

fnid 17y ago
I think it was acceptable then too.
- anamax 17y ago
  That may be, but a lot of folks didn't think that it was acceptable then. If they think that it's different when white males are involved, I'd like to hear why.

yequalsx 17y ago

Having large numbers of males with a feeling of being left out tends to lead to societal distress. It's why people are concerned about the male/female imbalance in China and India. There will soon be millions of men in both countries with few prospects of getting laid and this generally has bad consequences for neighboring nations.