Gee Cornflower, how does the "gender war" put bread on tables?

Interesting commentary on women in science:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/07/060714174545.htm

Pynchme pretty much nailed it - - - - domestic male university numbers are NOT decreasing.

THEY ARE INCREASING.

That's right, INCREASING.

THUS, SJF's earlier point about making statistics lie, is a VERY salient point, and SAYS IT ALL!.

ANY dill can manipulate statistics to seemingly say what they "want" those statistics to say. The surge of enrolments of females is primarily due to the merging of previously non university colleges and courses (which were DRAMATICALLY dominated by females) - - - nursing is a good example. There's absolutely NOTHING to stop males entering these female dominated courses at university and REVERSING the current percentages trend. Males are NOT disadvantaged - - - they * *choose* * to NOT do these courses. Women are NOT taking these university places away from men! Men's university numbers are INCREASING!

The "menz collective" that we have here, would have us believe that at university men are disadvantaged, that their numbers are decreasing. While the truth is - - -

- - - - Domestic male enrolments at Australian universities are INCREASING, INCREASING, INCREASING! ! !

But the "menz collective" here, with all it's genderised thinking and PC "menz" language is convinced that because there's a percentage differentiation in gender numbers, that it follows that male students are disadvantaged. I seriously have my doubts that any of them got anywhere near a university enrolment in their lifetimes. The "menz collective" is just using all this stuff to further their agenda. They've been continuously discredited throughout this thread, but they enjoy coming back for more punishment.

We await the next installment from the tiny "menz collective" here. There's only a mere handful of them.

Pynchme, "Interesting commentary on women in science"

Ben Barnes (formerly Barbara, gender reassignment)claims that there was bias against him as a woman in science.

Barnes' personal impressions and a survey saying that people generally expect scientists to be men are interesting but prove nothing.

Honestly, is there anyone here who would argue that peer review in science is discriminatory against anything but poor research?

So you are right, it is interesting only at this stage - a fluff story.

Amidst the euphoria over the extraordinary outcomes
women are achieving in education
it may also be remembered
women are approaching parity overall.

"Between 1995 and 2005
the proportion of women (aged 25-64 years)
with a vocational or higher education qualification
increased from 40% to 54%.
For men, the proportion increased from 53% to 62%."

http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/cashome.NSF/4a256353001af3ed4b2562bb00121564/3fb63f67cd8ddd6bca257306002a6c5b!OpenDocument

there remains the disparity with men over remuneration
so education means something
which can only be resolved equitably
by agreement between women's and men's legislatures
since women and men value work differently.

thank you The Pied Piper :)

*by agreement between women's and men's legislatures
since women and men value work differently.*

We know Whistler, you want to turn the parliament into
an all girls knitting club. Rest assured, they don't exactly
do alot there all day, so I'm sure they won't mind you
bringing your knitting along, if the people elect you
to parliament.