RD admission trends (gender)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have girl, boy twins. Final apps for both are pending but my son has received admissions that his sister has not despite his grades not being as strong. Also true among their friends with average boys getting admitted over girls with perfect grades.

As a woman it makes me secretly very frustrated.

IKR.

I have two sons. I am wondering if it's too soon to say I am sending them to college to get their Mister degrees.

I'm hoping I at least get kickass daughter-in-laws.

Partial /s

[Anonymous]

The EO striking down DEI does not mean not looking at race/sex/etc. It means all non-white and all females are considered to be DEI...no matter their merit. So no DEI (in Trump's world) means less (or ideally for him, no) female or non-white. Only white males are considered to not be a DEI admit/hire.

Getting rid of DEI is a euphemism for getting women out of colleges/jobs, along with non-whites. "Female" is a forbidden word in research...so if someone is studying a disease that affects women, the word "women", "woman" or "female" means they have to scrub the research and likely lose funding too.

Don't kid yourselves into thinking getting rid of DEI will in and way help girls get into college...it's quite the opposite. Not being political - just explaining what some on the thread keep asking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting next year on advantage will go to full pay boys vs boys needing financial assistance. Just the reality of the situation.

Why do you think full pay boys will have an advantage next year?

Boys will continue to have an advantage as long as more girls apply and schools want to maintain some semblance of gender balance.

Full pay will add an advantage as schools get less federal research funding. Have to make up the money somehow.

By the same logic, won't full-pay girls have an advantage relative to girls needing financial aid?

[Anonymous]

The Executive Order starts: Longstanding Federal civil-rights laws protect individual Americans from discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. These civil-rights protections serve as a bedrock supporting equality of opportunity for all Americans.
It continues:
...institutions of higher education have adopted and actively use dangerous, demeaning, and immoral race- and sex-based preferences
...Hardworking Americans who deserve a shot at the American Dream should not be stigmatized, demeaned, or shut out of opportunities because of their race or sex.

Why should this not be applied to girls when they are stronger candidates? It you just read what is written - it seems clear to me that this is all about looking at applicants based on their individual merits. No where does it say that Universities can accept lower performing applicants to balance the class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Executive Order starts: Longstanding Federal civil-rights laws protect individual Americans from discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. These civil-rights protections serve as a bedrock supporting equality of opportunity for all Americans.
It continues:
...institutions of higher education have adopted and actively use dangerous, demeaning, and immoral race- and sex-based preferences
...Hardworking Americans who deserve a shot at the American Dream should not be stigmatized, demeaned, or shut out of opportunities because of their race or sex.

Why should this not be applied to girls when they are stronger candidates? It you just read what is written - it seems clear to me that this is all about looking at applicants based on their individual merits. No where does it say that Universities can accept lower performing applicants to balance the class.

This has already been answered. You are welcome to pursue litigation in the courts against a school you feel has discriminated against your daughter but you’ll need to prove she was not admitted because of her sex. Same way litigation arose against schools like Harvard for anti Asian discrimination.