Hi all,

I agree that the discussion is not "off-topic" if the original subject was
relevant to the list, which it clearly was.  My statement was nothing to
do with conjecture, or my personal opinion:

I wasn't stating any moral viewpoint, as I am a firm believer that each
individual should be considered on their own merits.  Any attempt to
"balance" the male to female ratio must by definition discriminate, and as
the discrimination can be exacerbated by any other distinguishing factor,
e.g. an able-bodied woman and a physically handicapped man of equal
academic ability applying for the post.

My statement was based on the fact that it is illegal to state that any
job is more likely to be filled on the grounds of the sex of the
applicant.  Posting a job advertisement publicly which sexually
discriminates is in defiance of European law.

Read the following quote from a legal reference:

===Start Insert===
How the law defines discrimination:

Recruitment

recruitment procedures must be non-discriminatory

applicants must not be refused employment because of their sex or marital
status

where a job IS offered it must not be on terms less favourable than would
have been offered had the individual been of a different sex or marital
status.
===End Insert===

I had no intention of suggesting that women should be positively or
negatively discriminated against.   Your statement:  "The ad very clearly
states that if two male and female applicants are equally qualified, they
will prefer to hire the woman." implies that you would support the
practice of positive discrimination, thus negatively discriminating
against male applicants.  I appreciate that this practise is common the
U.S., and I am unaware of the legal situation in this regard, though I
would be surprised if it allowed this kind of statement in advertisements.

To be honest, I personally think that in certain circumstances positive
discrimination could be valid, but I didn't make my original statement as
an opinion, and I didn't intend to come across in any anti-anyone context.

Andrew

----- Original Message -----
From: "Laura Cahue" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: sexual discrimination


> In response to Dr. Andrew Tait's posting.
>
> Sexual discrimination should never be an "off-topic" to an academic and
> scientific community.
>
> We are not in a position to answer your question because we do not have
the
> pertinent data.  For example, we know not the ratio of male to female
> faculty at the University of Vienna, nor do we know the ratio of males
to
> females within the field of Microbial Ecology.
>
> The advertisement by the University of Vienna implies that the
University is
> either maintaining, or attempting to reach, a male to female ratio among
> their faculty members that reflects the male to female ratio among
qualified
> individuals in the country, and more specifically, within the field of
> Microbial Ecology at the level of the advertised position.
>
> The ad very clearly states that if two male and female applicants are
> equally qualified, they will prefer to hire the woman.  It DOES NOT SAY:
an
> unqualified woman will be hired over a qualified man; that would be
sexual
> discrimination, and women have felt the devastating effects of such
> practices for a very long time.
>
> To raise the suspicion of sexual discrimination without the necessary
> background information is irresponsible and dangerous because it
perpetuates
> the pernicious belief that women are undeservedly hired, granted
research
> money, and promoted to positions of power.
>
>
> Laura Cahue
> Department of Anthropology
> Michigan State University
> 354 Baker Hall
> East Lansing, MI 48824
>