Sister act: is the academic sisterhood too good to be true?

I think this is a load of nonsense, unworthy of anyone at a university. It alleges male "advantage" at tertiary institutions (no evidence) and that women are "structurally disadvantaged in every aspect of society" (hyperbolic twaddle). It relies on self-assessment as to whether someone has been "treated less favourably because of their gender" and whether some woman has a "Queen bee" attitude, assessments that carry no credibility whatsoever because the fault for negative treatment might lie with the respondents themselves and their gender have nothing to do with the matter. Perhaps a clue is to be found in the 56% of women who say that other women have an "obligation" to support them, in other words the 56% expect and demand support. The claim of "male domination" is weak but we hear it all the time. Just face it. Women prefer some roles and men prefer others. We never hear about female domination in nursing, child-minding, teaching young children at school, being personal secretaries and so on. People at tertiary institutions need to be a bit more mature, accept that people get roles based on their ability and merits rather than gender and if they are going to bleat about gender bias they need to make absolutely certain that the supposed bias wasn't for something completely different. I wonder what some people will bleat about next if they get what they demand but it doesn't give them the utopia they expect.

johnDM... so you don't think it's a problem, therefore it's not a problem. Interesting *opinion*.