What is more important to you, equal opportunity or equal outcome?

Question

Lets say that 80% of MD's are men and the opportunity to enter medical school is equal (gender is not even looked at when considering an applicant). Should standards for women be lowered (and opportunity be increased for women/lowered for men) in order to equal out the ratio of men and women doctors? Or is it more important to make it so that gender is not even looked at when considering if somebody is eligible for medical school (so theres equal opportunity and only grades are considered)?

Answer 1

examine your assumption that judging on grades only means opportunity is equal (for genders or whatever).  The world is much bigger than that.  Some may have gone to schools that graded more easily.  rich kids may have had their way paid to school and not had to work, poor kids  may have been working full time while going to school.  women may have had more caregiving responsibilities.  men may have had more car repair responsiblitieis.  your idea of equality is a good start, but it's small.

Answer 2

Equal opportunity. Equal work. Equal outcomes. If the work portion of it varies, then the outcomes should vary as well.

I could wish that standards for women (fire-fighting for instance) of for men (the current college situation for instance) NOT be lowered, but I can only hope the policy makers have the bigger picture in mind - that of churning out eligible/capable workforce - rather than sending out people with a history of getting in because of lenient laws, for the sake of gender equality

Answer 3

Standards should never be lowered on the basis of gender. If there are special conditions attached, then there is no equality.    Grades should be the only criteria for entry into any course, otherwise the whole equal opportunity deal is a fake.    This answer is from a woman who, 45 years ago, entered a male-dominated profession - journalism.   I and others like me, trail-blazed for young women.   It was tough.  My CV lists several "first woman to....(edit a newspaper at the age of 29, cover crime stories etc.)  But I made it to the top - and if you try enough, dare enough, risk enough, you can do it too.

Answer 4

Equal opportunity.

Answer 5

Equal opportunity. Are we done here?

Answer 6

Equal oppurtunity.

Answer 7

I think equal opportunity will lead to equal outcomes.

Standards shouldn't be lowered in order to get women to practice medicine. However, women *should* be allowed the same opportunities as men in terms of promotions and such.

The medical industry is *beginning* to give women the credit they deserve, but female doctors continue to be disadvantaged, since they still have to work twice as hard as male doctors to get advancement in their careers.

When ones gender stops being a factor in whether or not one gets a promotion, and instead, individual merit is the deciding factor, the outcome will eventually become equal.

Answer 8

Cid, the answer comes down to the "importance" of the profession.  When a patient needs serious surgery, I genuinely doubt that they really worry about how much "special accommodation" was provided for the said surgeon.  My outcomes record speaks for itself (even though it's not public domain, but my colleagues are well familiar with it).  The bottom line is that in certain professions outcomes trump everything else.

Answer 9

Equal opportunity: outcomes require a mandate of law, quotas, strictures, restrictions (generally on males only) and so on.  Women are not under-represented in something if they generally opt out of that thing.  The trouble with modern academia is that males have higher standards to get in (at least where I am in Australia), but we are often significantly less than half of the students in many courses because felames are given priority.

There was a move to try this system to favour males in teaqching and a few other things, but it was shouted down as sexist (certainly this is hypocritical, but that is they way things are now).  

Gender must not be a factor in carreers such as medicine.  I want a doctor who is able treating me or my family, not one who got in under some sort of permissive quota or affirmative action system.  The police in my state have lowered their standards and have affirmative action for women (and active recruitment discrimination against men), and it has led to male officers being spread thinly and always at the beck and call of female officers who in no way should have qualified physically to do the job.  That is not sexist, it is just simple fact.

Answer 10

Actually as women are going to graduate schools in higher numbers than men, there is talk in the academic arena that acceptance standards for men should be lowered.  I'm happy for my son.

Answer 11

Opportunity, definately.  I am a very competative woman.  When I compete against men I want it to be on equal ground.

Answer 12

Manipulating opportunity to produce an equal outcome is called communism. Gender quota systems are an example of how advocating equality itself has gone terribly wrong. Yet at least they're consistent

Equal opportunity alone is fair regardless of the outcomes it produces. If it produces that desirable equal outcome all the better but generally it will be an unequal outcome yet still a fair one.

edit: well then sufi it can't be equal opportunity then can it? but the point is isn't that what we should be aiming for, not some equal outcome..

edit: good point oogabooga. That's why equality as a concept is such a loaded term. Everyone has their own ideas of what it should entail and they can use it to say well because we don't have equal outcomes there must be discrimination. Pathetic excuse for shortcomings..

Answer 13

I honestly believe that if someone works hard enough to earn something; they achieve what they set out to achieve their labours should not be over looked no matter who they are.

I don't think anyone should just be given something; work hard and the fruit of your labour will taste even sweeter than if it were handed to you on a silver platter.

I think it should go on credentials and knowledge of said job; rather than the gender or ethnic background. The best person for the job; that is how people should look at it.

Answer 14

Well, I want a doctor that knows what they are doing so I wouldn't want them to lower the standards to get into medical school.

By the way my doctor is female.

Answer 15

Opportunity is everything, outcome means nothing, except for rationale for discrimination.

Answer 16

It's like when feminists complain about no women presidents when only one woman has ever run.

Answer 17

Equal opportunity.  I want the best doctor I can get.

I've also had the unpleasant experience of getting hired to do a job that I wasn't physically capable of doing well because of my lack of upper body strength.  I told them when I came in for the interview that I could lift about 40 pounds repeatedly, but if the job required lifting more than that,  I would have a problem.  I asked if that would be okay.  They said no problem and hired me.  

The next thing I know, they're asking me and another 100 pound woman to wrestle huge rolls of wet carpet into a dumpster and carry painfully heavy boxes up stairs.   If what they needed was a man or a female body-builder, I really wish they'd told me flat out that I wouldn't be able to handle the lifting, instead of letting me find that out AFTER quitting my other job (which I was good at) and going to work for them.  Nobody likes to feel incompetent and useless.  

What I want is simply to have the same opportunities that a man with the same capability would have, not for people to pretend I can do things I can't.  That's not even in my interests, let alone anyone else's.

Answer 18

How ironic.  I just spent last month listening to men on several boards of international companies who are operating from reality and highly advanced commercial research who asked the same question related to their dissatisfaction with long-term outcomes / cost disadvantages of hiring U.S. male college grads over U.S. female college grads.  Thanks to the views on this site, I ceased defending the U.S. male in these meetings about two months ago.  There's still too much Male Bigot Factor out there working against women. It still isn't 100% "equal opportunity" for women and yet their outcomes match or surpass males in great numbers and in ever increasing academic scores differences, in-house testing results, and outcomes, short-term and long-term.  That extra effort or whatever is not missed in the slightest by large employers.

The research being conducted around the world is about to dump a ton of bricks on U.S. males, most sexistly in my opinion, but understandable because these companies have a right NOT to lower their standards by hiring U.S. male college grads in general in favor of females, because their research does indicate that all around it behooves companies to favor hires of only female college grads from the U.S..  I have come to agree completely.  And, I am most happy for young women who have proved they have what it takes in the toughest competitions, especially considering the traditional "chivalrous" anti-woman sexist hiring discriminations and Good Old Boy bigot factor that has held so many struggling women down for so long in lack of "equal opportunity".

What I offer these companies is an in-house post-hire remedial curriculum aimed at giving U.S. males equal opportunity.  But it ain't selling anymore.  I believe strongly in equal opportunity.  But "equal outcome" is up to the individual and in that regard U.S. recent college grad males aren't cutting the mustard in cost effective outcomes.  Many U.S. based companies are now strongly favoring foreign male and female applicant hires because they are multi-lingual, as opposed to "English Only", and work MUCH harder and productively than do U.S. young males, in general, among numerous other reasons.  U.S. males need to study harder and pay attention more to reality and the global job market than to whiny Warren Farrell and Rush Limbaugh types, that's for sure. ( Did you know that 85% of U.S. male high school grads cannot write an acceptable college application essay and standards are being lowered drastically for them?)

Answer 19

I agree that equal opportunity is the most important factor, but you have to remember, that despite the happy face we put on so-called gender equality and what most people, men especially would like to believe, we're still living in a supremely unequal society. A little objective thoguht about how the world works and how we are socialized will show you just how prevalent misogyny still is. So unless there actually IS such a thing as equal opportunity (which is going to be impossible for quite a while) maybe it's not so bad to make alternate arrangements, considering men still have many distinct advantages in the career world.

Answer 20

It would be nice to have both but equal opportunity is better.

For example if you live in a poor neighborhood but you are smart the government should come to you "not the other way around" and give you money to go to school. You know even the playing field a bit right

Answer 21

Opportunity.

I want to earn my MD... I don't want it handed to me because I have a v****a.

Answer 22

Equality of opportunity is important, equality of outcome is an impossibility.  Standards for women should never, ever be lowered.

Answer 23

Equal opportunity of course.  Expecting equal outcome is very much in line with Communism.