Well, you have to wonder, because it's not been investigated.

how fucking deceving

because "MUH power politics" ^4

it's only a difference of $4000 yet it looks huge in the graph

Look at that huge differ... oh, where's the zero?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

basic graph manipulation

it's like that stunt nvida pulled

If you're going to remove 25000 just finish off the extra 4000 why dont you?

I don't know of a single journal/conference where this graph would be allowed.

Oh, right... gender studies...

hahahahah

another graph for you guys

would you look at that, the female faculty want to hire more male students

muh internal muhsoggyknees amirite?

OH AND LOOK AT THAT

The paper could just as easily be "female faculty discriminate more than male faculty".

The **MALE** faculty want to hire more females

IMAGINE MY SHOCK

wot

Such good research @méep

you fucking plonker

all this shows is that females are less likely to be good at jobs

IF YOU'RE OWN GROUP IS DISCRIMINATING AGAINST YOU, that tells you something

it's not that they're not good at office work, it's that they're cancerous to a productive environment

^

period

all men = all good

all women = all shit

>We recruited faculty participants from Biology, Chemistry, and
>Physics departments at three public and three private large, geographically
>diverse research-intensive universities in the United States

mixed = unproductive

So this is what I think makes the study weak.

3 departments across 6 universities.

I don't know, it could be true, women are less likely to be hired as lab manager.

At least on those 6 universities, on those 3 departments.

But there's also the other story, that women discriminate more, also told, by accident, on the same study.

It just doesn't convince me there's a systematic discrimination. I would also like to see a similar study on Psychology and Psychiatry departments. Heck, do it across all departments of all universities you can afford, break it down by department if needed.

Also, let's keep in mind, the scales go from 1 to 7. The resume wasn't that great to begin with.

Hireability below 4, honestly, would be a "don't hire" recommendation. At least for me.

So we're talking about a candidate that would be almost universally rejected, only arguing about who got a worse failing grade.

huh