Our very own UNC-Chapel Hill was highlighted in the NYT over the weekend discussing how the college gender gap affects more than just academia. The article, “The New Math on Campus,” looked into the social ramifications of a non-traditional male/female ratio, specifically how it effects college dating and relationships.
“University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, with a student body that is nearly 60 percent female, is just one of many large universities that at times feel eerily like women’s colleges.
Needless to say, this puts guys in a position to play the field, and tends to mean that even the ones willing to make a commitment come with storied romantic histories.”
The article sheds light on the overlooked situation most college men and women regularly face: there are more women than men in the classroom, the graduating class and now, the social scene.
According to a recent report by the American Council on Education, women have represented about 57 percent of enrollment in colleges since 2000. The increase of women on campuses is significant to note as women only began attending college in the late 19th Century. But today, women outnumber men and such a population change is sure to bring social ramifications. While understanding the full effect, if any, the lop-sided male/female ratio is having on the dating culture is far from conclusive. What we do know is women on gender-imbalanced campuses are sacrificing values for an encounter with the disappearing male- and these consequences should not be overlooked.
The Greensboro News-Record printed my letter to the editor on the dangers of Title IX. Check it out here:
The Dec. 9 article, “Rockingham schools accused of illegally favoring boys,” by Morgan Glover sheds light on the troubling issue: Title IX. The issue is not discrimination in schools but rather the over-application of feminist-invented and feminist-promoted Title IX legislation.
Title IX dictates that if 60 percent of students taking academic classes are female, then 60 percent of students playing on athletic teams must be female. The legislation ignores the possibility that more men than women actually want to participate in athletics. The result: more under-qualified women join the team’s roster while trophy-winning male teams are canceled. Women’s teams also suffer as untalented players join the roster for the sake of making quotas and a team loses its collective competitiveness.
Title IX may appear to help Reidsville High’s softball team become “equal” but will actually hurt male and female athletes in the long run. Title IX ignores the differences between men and women and demands a quota system that favors one group at the expense of another. It has eliminated equality of opportunity for both men and women, causing an even greater amount of inequality in our schools. North Carolina’s students deserve better.
I recently submitted a letter to the editor taking issue with this N&O article.
The Dec. 7 column, “Warming Woes and the World’s Women” argues that women are most affected by global climate change because women represent the highest percentage of people living below the poverty line and bear a “disproportionate burden” when natural disasters hit. The authors, Victor Flatt, Taft Professor at UNC’s School of Law and Donna Surge, associate professor at UNC, used loosely based research without considering the larger context surrounding the nations surveyed.
The study looks at developing areas of the world where the problems considered—lack of women’s rights embedded in a deeply patriarchal society—have not solely resulted from climate change. The study examines areas with little economic development that face the greatest problems. Logically the nation bears the greatest burden when a natural disaster hits, regardless of the amount of women in the society. What is more, women in these developed countries lack substantial women’s rights and would again, logically, have it “worse off” than men, regardless of natural disasters.
Instead, there should be global pressure to ensure that women everywhere are given equal opportunities. These nations deserve more than merely pointing out what everyone already knows: developing nations are still developing.