Our thanks to Martin for this. Excerpts:
A Doctor of Veterinary Medicine student, who asked not to be named, said: “I was really surprised. I really thought that it was a mistake – some sort of clerical error. Sexism exists in our society but I thought the uni held itself to a higher standard.”
Gender balance in vet science as a profession has reversed in the past 20 years from male to female-dominated, but the student said this did not justify the scholarship’s terms.
“Female graduates of vet school are still paid less, from day one,” she said. “Professor Edwards was a lovely man who did a lot of fabulous work. This is not about hurting his reputation.
“I just think it shows very little thought into the causative agents of under-representation of women in STEM [Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths]. The barriers that prevent men from entering vet science are not the same barriers that prevent women from entering every single other academic area.”
Grant [Imogen Grant, the women’s officer on the Students’ Representative Council at the university, i.e. a feminist parasite] conceded there were women-only and indigenous-only scholarships offered at the university, “but what distinguishes those scholarships is they are in place to procure benefits for people who face structural barriers to receiving an education”.
“To have male-only scholarships is to continue male privilege within society,” she said…
She [a university spokeswoman] said women were still eligible to apply, and that academic excellence would be “prioritised”.
“Of this year’s graduate entry for the Doctor of Veterinary Medicine students, over 90 per cent of the intake is expected to be female. This is a trend seen over the past five years along with an increasing trend away from rural practice.”
The federal government’s latest Job Outlook data reports that of employed vets, 19 per cent are male (full time) and 3 per cent (part time) compared with females 48 per cent (full time) and 30 per cent (part time).
If everyone who read this gave us just £1 – or even better, £1 monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.
Justice for Men & Boys 
I don’t believe that MRAs should be supporting this. Firstly it would be hypocritical to condone male only scholarships while complaining about female only scholarships. Secondly it would be used by feminists to justify the huge number and value of female only scholarships. Scholarships should be awarded on merit only.
LikeLike
I’m ambivalent about this. The feminisation of professions can lead to appalling consequenecs as we see in the NHS, education, and other fields. You have to train two female doctors to get the same work output (hours over a career) as one male doctor. The experience in Oz of vets is predictable – as in the UK – the women don’t want to do the hard rural work, but gravitate towards the easier (and more suited to p/t working) urban work on cats, dogs etc. I can think of no rational arguments for advantageing women over men as potential students, and the Oz scholarship is useful at least in pointing out the hypocrisy of women-only scholarships.
LikeLike
I believe the answer to that is to let market forces of supply and demand address these issues.
If the rural work of vets was significantly better paid than urban work it would draw more people (probably men) into the profession willing to do that work. I wonder whether pay differentials have been eroded by the lobbying of female vets demanding that they should be paid the same for treating Harry the Hamster’s cold in their comfortable surgery, as a male vet being called out at 4 am to deal with a cow with life-threatening problems while calving.
Similarly, pay structures which are weighted to encourage full time work over part time work and disincentivise early retirement might be expected to address the issues in the NHS.
I don’t know about the situation with Vets but the problems we have with the NHS are a direct result of attempts to engineer the supply side based on ideology, rather than letting it respond to demand. It’s a failed approach and I suspect that it would fail however it was applied.
LikeLike
Thanks Paul. Dr Vernon Coleman was warning in his books 40+ years ago that the drive to increase the proportion of female doctors – which is with us to this day, 70% of medical students are women, as a result of women manipulating the recruitment process, not exam grades – would lead to a crisis, and he was right. That objective must be costing taxpayers many billions of pounds every year, for an ever woeful service. The GP service is on its knees because most GPs today are female. They prefer to work p/t and are disinclined to work unsocial hours, whether or not they have children. Plus many people must be attracted into becoming GPs bcause of the insanely high salaries – over £110,000 on average, even with all that p/t working. GPs aren’t fired for incompetence, only for killing many patients (e,g, Harold Shipman). The disconnect with reality is scandalous.
LikeLike
I suspect you are right about the pay differentials. Certainly in the cases of surgery and emergency medicine there is a shortage. I can’t prove it but I suspect there is a period of time where men gravitate to the hard stuff out of a belief that its more “manly” . However that “honeymoon” period clearly fades as the pay effect becomes more obvious. “Equal value” stuff simply never considers this sort of thing.
LikeLike
I was interested in this as it must mean that Oz has similar equality laws to the UK (in the form of the Equality Act here). This means that “proportionate” positive action can be taken. In an ideal world such stuff would not be necessary as one might expect a rational process by all which would probably result in an increase in male intake to work in the higher paid rural sectors. However of course there are so many interventions now ;from “STEM” programmes to “family friendly” contracts, “equivalent value” pay rates to women only business support etc. etc. One can see the situation has become critical in Australia, which depends on its producing industries including agriculture to a much greater extent than the UK. Though I believe much the same pattern and shortage is true in the UK.
The difficulty is of course that the more the situation is “managed” through a plethora of interventions the less the rational result is likely without other measures dealing with “side effects”.
So I’d really support the use of the Equality Act to address such inequalities, partly because the opposition as in this case exposes the whole enterprise as ultimately doomed.
As a side issue if (as appears to be the case in Oz from this article) STEM includes the medical disciplines then women aren’t “underrepresented” in STEM subjects at all, its just they are mainly in the Biological Sciences. So Swan Athena isn’t proportionate at all.
I suspect if many more men were aware of the Equality Act and used its provisions to address their issues, well it would soon be repealed.
LikeLike
It seems to me that the rationale (though reason has precious little to do with it) for ‘proportionate positive action’ is where the problem lies.
The gender ideologues will see any situation in which men are in the majority in prestigious well remunerated roles as a rationale for such intervention.
This creates the disaster that we see in the UK NHS where the majority of the medical profession are now women, and they don’t want to do the difficult stuff like A&E or out of hours general practice, and this has led to the current crisis.
Likewise we have a majority of vets in Australia who are female, no doubt due to similar ideologically driven ‘positive action’ and these women don’t want to do the economically vital work in agriculture and this will no doubt do great harm to that sector of the economy.
The efforts to get more women into engineering, computer science etc. just because men are in a majority and that is ‘duh unequal’, will undoubtedly have the same destructive effect on those sectors.
The equality act needs to be amended so that any ‘positive action’ is in response to a societal or economic need, and is not ideologically driven by idiots who haven’t thought through the consequences.
LikeLike
Interesting you described her as “a parasite”, I thought.
For they are particularly found on weakened organisms…
LikeLike
Feminists’ insatiable appetites put them in the class of parasite that eventually kills their hosts, if not themselves removed from the body of their hosts. Maybe cancer is a better metaphor after all.
LikeLike
No, I think you got it right first time if I may say so.
Cancer perhaps suffers from over use now, at least in some situations.
I like the critical “grab” of ‘parasite!
LikeLike
“Let us be clear, the removal of fathers from the lives of their children is … public … policy“. -Robert Franklin ICMI-14 https://youtu.be/PlkGeu3OO8U
“Men’s rights activists must wake up and realize that the time for trying to counter the hypocrisy with rationality – with essentially male arguments, using facts and truth, in the hope that sense will prevail – is not going to make any difference to the relentless feminist long march on men” -Herbert Purdy ICMI-16 https://youtu.be/PjAnRar9p4M
“Everywhere you look—everywhere you look!–there are feminists pushing their way to the front of the line demanding women’s “fair share” of all of the goodies, the good stuff, the loot, the booty, the cookies. Even if women don’t need it. Even if women don’t deserve it. And even if somebody else needs it and deserves it more.
And they get it, because we give it to them”. -Karen Straughn (GirlWritesWhat)
There are many persons ready to do what is right because in their hearts they know it is right. But they hesitate, waiting for the other fellow to make the make the first move – and he, in turn, waits for you. -Marian Anderson
For many years now, we’ve known two important things about “deadbeat dads.” First, they’re not deadbeats and second, they’re not always dads. -Robert Franklin
“Mens rights are human rights. If that sounds radical, you might ask yourself why you don’t cinsider men human”? -Hannah Wallen
LikeLike
The hypocrisy of feminism has no boundaries or shame. They complain when In a profession so under-represented by male students/workers,, boys get a scholarship offer.
While there are numerous women only scholarships across the board. What male privilege are they talking about anyways? is it that nearly all the soldiers drafted are male? or is it that most miners are male? or is it that most who commit suicide are male? or is it that most parents who lose custody of kids in divorce are males? I want to hear women explain what male privilege they are talking about. all I see around me is female privilege and male disadvantage. The fact men are better in sports, science, chess, etc, is not and can not be called privilege. it is called better ability and stronger determination.
LikeLike
‘Of this year’s graduate entry for the Doctor of Veterinary Medicine
students, over 90 per cent of the intake is expected to be female. This
is a trend seen over the past five years along with an increasing trend
away from rural practice.‘
The long term consequences of this are firstly that women will effectively price themselves out of the small animal veterinary market, because of a surfeit of supply, leading to lower earnings for female small animal vets compared to their male large animal counterparts and so prompting complaints of a gender pay gap in veterinary medicine, and secondly, and far more importantly, the corresponding dearth of large animal vets is going to affect adversely testing for animal diseases in the human food chain.
Reason is unlikely to prevail until those in authority have the sense and the courage to talk openly about the elephant in the room.
LikeLike