Being a male applicant.

[trojjanhorse]

This just hit me...

Being a male and applying to McMaster is statistically disadvantageous.

 

Class of 2015: 119 Females 59%, 84 Males 41% (delta 35)

Class of 2014: 122 Females 60%, 82 Males 40% (delta 40)

Class of 2013: 128 Females 63%, 76 Males 37% (delta 52)

 

Seems like the gap is closing in, but it is still statistically significant. All other schools have a much narrower gap. lol I want to get into Mac even more so now

[Big Bird]

Do you know what proportion of the applicants are female/male? Maybe they just give everyone a fair shot regardless of sex, and it happens that more girls apply.

[trojjanhorse]

Do you know what proportion of the applicants are female/male? Maybe they just give everyone a fair shot regardless of sex, and it happens that more girls apply.

 

Unfortunately I don't know the M:F ratio for the applicants and the interviewees. I admire that approach, giving a fair shot regardless of sex. AGHH, so many questions are precipitating to my mind regarding their admission algorithm.

[ralk]

Not too much different than med schools in Canada overall, however: http://www.afmc.ca/pdf/EnrolFirstYearTrend3-2010.pdf

 

It's also about the same as gender ratios in undergrad, and even less when you look primarily at health sciences: http://www.aucc.ca/_pdf/english/publications/trends-2011-vol1-enrolment-e.pdf

 

All of this suggests that there are more female competitive applicants to McMaster's med school than male competitive applicants, meaning that there wouldn't be a disadvantage to being male at all. I'd be very interested to see how many men vs women were invited to the interviews, though, since that would give a much better indication!

 

Edit: Ah, people are faster posters than me and already brought up the point - damn slow fingers!

[trojjanhorse]

Not too much different than med schools in Canada overall, however: http://www.afmc.ca/pdf/EnrolFirstYearTrend3-2010.pdf

 

It's also about the same as gender ratios in undergrad, and even less when you look primarily at health sciences: http://www.aucc.ca/_pdf/english/publications/trends-2011-vol1-enrolment-e.pdf

 

All of this suggests that there are more female competitive applicants to McMaster's med school than male competitive applicants, meaning that there wouldn't be a disadvantage to being male at all. I'd be very interested to see how many men vs women were invited to the interviews, though, since that would give a much better indication!

 

Edit: Ah, people are faster posters than me and already brought up the point - damn slow fingers!

 

That would certainly answer a lot. Looking at the PDF you linked, McMaster seems to be on the higher spectrum for 3 years running.

[thehumanmacbook]

My hypothesis: females perform comparatively better on CASPer for the years it was implemented (I forget when).

 

Maybe that explains a part of it? :S

[ralk]

That would certainly answer a lot. Looking at the PDF you linked, McMaster seems to be on the higher spectrum for 3 years running.

 

Yeah, you're right - McMaster's still on the female-oriented side of the average, despite the overall trend.

[Big Bird]

Not too much different than med schools in Canada overall, however: http://www.afmc.ca/pdf/EnrolFirstYearTrend3-2010.pdf

 

It's also about the same as gender ratios in undergrad, and even less when you look primarily at health sciences: http://www.aucc.ca/_pdf/english/publications/trends-2011-vol1-enrolment-e.pdf

 

All of this suggests that there are more female competitive applicants to McMaster's med school than male competitive applicants, meaning that there wouldn't be a disadvantage to being male at all. I'd be very interested to see how many men vs women were invited to the interviews, though, since that would give a much better indication!

 

Edit: Ah, people are faster posters than me and already brought up the point - damn slow fingers!

 

That's interesting! They used to have too few females, then raised the number too high up. Now it looks like it's dropping back again.

[capricorn]

trojjanhorse, do you understand the implications of your post? I want to believe that you posted this with the best intentions, but as a fellow premed applicant - and someone who completed casper - I find it very difficult to believe that you accidentally forgot how much more privileged men are in our society over women.

 

You immediately thought that being a male applicant was some how disadvantageous, NOT that perhaps more women were applying or were more competitive, NOT that sex is favoured. This strikes me as quite odd.

 

And again, as someone who has completed McMaster, I would think that you are aware of the barriers in place to women in science? To becoming a physician? I have female friends who are still told by professors that they cannot be a doctor because "girls are afraid of blood". Honestly, this post of yours trivializes actual barriers that women face.

 

How do you think Mac assessors would view you if they saw that you posted this?

[thehumanmacbook]

[capricorn]

I doubt that other people with backgrounds in sociology or who are sensitive to social issues would not also question what the hell is up with OP's post.

[TO Docta]

Its hard being a guy nowadays trying to make it in the professional world. I feel you, Trojjanhorse. Guys need to unite and get our fair share.

 

This reeks of sexism unless they actively do something (such as change the way MMI or CASPer works) to make it 50:50.

[m1428]

trojjanhorse, do you understand the implications of your post? I want to believe that you posted this with the best intentions, but as a fellow premed applicant - and someone who completed casper - I find it very difficult to believe that you accidentally forgot how much more privileged men are in our society over women.

 

You immediately thought that being a male applicant was some how disadvantageous, NOT that perhaps more women were applying or were more competitive, NOT that sex is favoured. This strikes me as quite odd.

 

And again, as someone who has completed McMaster, I would think that you are aware of the barriers in place to women in science? To becoming a physician? I have female friends who are still told by professors that they cannot be a doctor because "girls are afraid of blood". Honestly, this post of yours trivializes actual barriers that women face.

 

How do you think Mac assessors would view you if they saw that you posted this?

 

I doubt that other people with backgrounds in sociology or who are sensitive to social issues would not also question what the hell is up with OP's post.

 

The OP and other posters are just looking at an interesting trend... which simply suggests that females tend to perform better on CASPer and MMIs. I really don't see how your rant is relevant at all. No need to get so damned serious.

 

[Lunasly]

trojjanhorse, do you understand the implications of your post? I want to believe that you posted this with the best intentions, but as a fellow premed applicant - and someone who completed casper - I find it very difficult to believe that you accidentally forgot how much more privileged men are in our society over women.

 

You immediately thought that being a male applicant was some how disadvantageous, NOT that perhaps more women were applying or were more competitive, NOT that sex is favoured. This strikes me as quite odd.

 

And again, as someone who has completed McMaster, I would think that you are aware of the barriers in place to women in science? To becoming a physician? I have female friends who are still told by professors that they cannot be a doctor because "girls are afraid of blood". Honestly, this post of yours trivializes actual barriers that women face.

 

How do you think Mac assessors would view you if they saw that you posted this?

 

For the sake of this thread, please shut the ... front door.

[tb123]

trojjanhorse, do you understand the implications of your post? I want to believe that you posted this with the best intentions, but as a fellow premed applicant - and someone who completed casper - I find it very difficult to believe that you accidentally forgot how much more privileged men are in our society over women.

 

You immediately thought that being a male applicant was some how disadvantageous, NOT that perhaps more women were applying or were more competitive, NOT that sex is favoured. This strikes me as quite odd.

 

And again, as someone who has completed McMaster, I would think that you are aware of the barriers in place to women in science? To becoming a physician? I have female friends who are still told by professors that they cannot be a doctor because "girls are afraid of blood". Honestly, this post of yours trivializes actual barriers that women face.

 

How do you think Mac assessors would view you if they saw that you posted this?

 

I'm pretty sure Mac would attempt to find out the reason the same way TrojanHorse is, seeing as how the stats do indicate there may be an internal bias and all schools are constantly evaluating their processes. That's backed up by the fact that Mac's ratio is coming back towards 50:50. It may be some of the other reasons mentioned above, or there may be a bias. The question can be asked without someone screaming SEXISM.

 

Its fairly difficult to argue that there are more barriers to women in medicine specifically when the national entering classes have been >54% female since 2001.

[ralk]

trojjanhorse, do you understand the implications of your post? I want to believe that you posted this with the best intentions, but as a fellow premed applicant - and someone who completed casper - I find it very difficult to believe that you accidentally forgot how much more privileged men are in our society over women.

 

You immediately thought that being a male applicant was some how disadvantageous, NOT that perhaps more women were applying or were more competitive, NOT that sex is favoured. This strikes me as quite odd.

 

And again, as someone who has completed McMaster, I would think that you are aware of the barriers in place to women in science? To becoming a physician? I have female friends who are still told by professors that they cannot be a doctor because "girls are afraid of blood". Honestly, this post of yours trivializes actual barriers that women face.

 

How do you think Mac assessors would view you if they saw that you posted this?

 

Ok, this could spiral downwards quickly, but let's walk down this path a bit...

 

Like you, I believe that the disparity in genders at McMaster likely has more to do with the gender ratio and quality of applicants rather than any implicit gender favouritism in their selection policies.

 

However, you've talked more about gender barriers that exist more generally, outside of the specific example of McMaster's admissions process. Given that women are now more represented than men at Canadian med schools in general, to me that leaves only three possibilities:

 

1) Admissions policies are, indeed, not gender-neutral

2) On the whole, men face even greater barriers or disincentives to attending med school than women

3) Men are naturally worse applicants than women

 

I'd be interested to hear which of these options, or which combination of them, you believe leads to the current gender disparity in med students. Or, if there is another explanation that I may have missed, I'd love to hear that position as well.

 

As many of us in this thread may be future colleagues at McMaster next year, I see no reason why we can't, or shouldn't have a productive and civil discussion about gender inequality in medicine - which is, as you indicate, an important subject.

[froston]

This just hit me...

Being a male and applying to McMaster is statistically disadvantageous.

 

Class of 2015: 119 Females 59%, 84 Males 41% (delta 35)

Class of 2014: 122 Females 60%, 82 Males 40% (delta 40)

Class of 2013: 128 Females 63%, 76 Males 37% (delta 52)

 

Seems like the gap is closing in, but it is still statistically significant. All other schools have a much narrower gap. lol I want to get into Mac even more so now

 

Actually it could very well be advantageous to be a male.

 

Class of 2015: 197 Non-aboriginals 97%, 6 declared aboriginals 3%

 

Is it disadvantageous to apply as a declared aboriginal? Obviously, the answer is no.

 

I don't think the applicant sex ratio is available anywhere so there is no way of telling if the process has a sex bias (not that a sex bias would be necessarily bad - females could make better doctors in general for all I know). Our default position with the available info has to be that the admitted sex ratio is just a microcosm of the applicant sex ratio.

[lwu018]

I don't think the applicant sex ratio is available anywhere .......

 

For 07 / 08 there were 1930 men and 2917 women

http://www.afmc.ca/pdf/CMES2009.pdf (Table 87)

 

For 08 / 09 there were 1944 men and 2789 women

http://www.afmc.ca/pdf/Cmes-2010_ShrinkMay2011.pdf (Table 88)

 

Don't know if more recent data is available, but I think that gives a decent picture

[Exocytosis]

1) Admissions policies are, indeed, not gender-neutral

2) On the whole, men face even greater barriers or disincentives to attending med school than women

3) Men are naturally worse applicants than women.

 

Or possibly,

 

4) More women are interested in becoming physicians than men.

 

It's entirely possible that the gender disparity in medicine (or anywhere) is due (at least in part) to a difference in interest, not aptitude or opportunity. I can't say for sure that's the case here, but it's feasible that both men and women could be a) equally suited to medicine, equally incentivized, and c) equally favored by admission criteria and still apply in different numbers (assuming the gender ratio of applicants matches the gender ratio of accepted students).

[ralk]

Or possibly,

 

4) More women are interested in becoming physicians than men.

 

It's entirely possible that the gender disparity in medicine (or anywhere) is due (at least in part) to a difference in interest, not aptitude or opportunity. I can't say for sure that's the case here, but it's feasible that both men and women could be a) equally suited to medicine, equally incentivized, and c) equally favored by admission criteria and still apply in different numbers (assuming the gender ratio of applicants matches the gender ratio of accepted students).

 

Yes, absolutely! I somewhat include that in 2) and 3), simply because it's tough to tease out the effect of interest from other barriers/incentives or aptitudes.

 

Mainly I'm thinking about an important parallel of low numbers of women in physical sciences and math, where this argument has been made repeatedly. It may simply be the case that women are naturally less inclined to study math, but it's difficult to demonstrate. Namely, it could become a self-fulfilling prophecy - saying women are less inclined to study math may make women less likely to study math.

 

Same for men and medicine. What you suggest is more than feasible - the only reason I didn't include it explicitly is that I don't know any way to separate that factor from the other factors. Any thoughts on resolving that conundrum?

[froston]

For 07 / 08 there were 1930 men and 2917 women

http://www.afmc.ca/pdf/CMES2009.pdf (Table 87)

 

For 08 / 09 there were 1944 men and 2789 women

http://www.afmc.ca/pdf/Cmes-2010_ShrinkMay2011.pdf (Table 88)

 

Don't know if more recent data is available, but I think that gives a decent picture

 

Thanks!

 

40% male applicants across those 2 years. The Mac admitted sex ratio just seems like a fair dip into the applicant pool, unless the applicant sex ratio has changed significantly in the last 4 or 5 years.

[lwu018]

Thanks!

 

40% male applicants across those 2 years. The Mac admitted sex ratio just seems like a fair dip into the applicant pool, unless the applicant sex ratio has changed significantly in the last 4 or 5 years.

 

You're most welcome I was searching those numbers up last night for another post, so it was easy for me to recall where to find the stats.

[ralk]

For 07 / 08 there were 1930 men and 2917 women

http://www.afmc.ca/pdf/CMES2009.pdf (Table 87)

 

For 08 / 09 there were 1944 men and 2789 women

http://www.afmc.ca/pdf/Cmes-2010_ShrinkMay2011.pdf (Table 88)

 

Don't know if more recent data is available, but I think that gives a decent picture

 

Ooh, good stats - they even calculate the success rates for each gender for us. Thank you for sharing this, lwu018!

[r-bot]

I'm with Capricorn, I think the OP is problematic (not necessarily the poster's fault, IMO), and telling anyone calling out privileged behaviour to "not be so serious" is classic dismissal in these circumstances; also (accidentally, I'm sure) problematic.

 

That said, I'm also reasonably comfortable engaging with the discussion, so I'll throw in my perspective.

 

Western medicine has been historically white male-dominated. Thankfully in Canada, we seem to have gotten to a point where we can see some of the issues with past paradigms of (patriarchal) health provision (paternalism, lack of informed consent, non-truth telling to patients, excluding women from research etc.) and we've started addressing these issues.

 

Mac addressed some of these issues by adjusting the admissions process to benefit those with strong "soft" skills - communication, team-playing, respect etc.

 

These "soft" skills are traditionally taught to girls and expected in women in our society more than they are for boys and men, because they are seen as traditionally feminine (read: gendered, not related to sex).

 

In order to compete for positions of power in our society (including roles in politics, business, academia), I think women have adopted traits that have traditionally been considered masculine (like assertiveness, competition, decision-making, intellectualism/linear thinking) which is great. There are med schools in Canada that still emphasize these traits disproportionally, and still accept more men than women. I think these schools are also continuing to pump out the types of medical practitioners that might fit better with past paradigms of health.

 

To correct the current sex gap at Mac men will need to adopt traits that have traditionally been considered feminine, a tough transition because femininity typically affords individuals less power in our society, but I ultimately beneficial to provision of health care (and society at large, smash the gender binary and sex/gender essentialism!)

[aaronjw]

meh. Gonna take the high road on this.

 

trojjanhorse, do you understand the implications of your post? I want to believe that you posted this with the best intentions, but as a fellow premed applicant - and someone who completed casper - I find it very difficult to believe that you accidentally forgot how much more privileged men are in our society over women.

 

You immediately thought that being a male applicant was some how disadvantageous, NOT that perhaps more women were applying or were more competitive, NOT that sex is favoured. This strikes me as quite odd.

 

And again, as someone who has completed McMaster, I would think that you are aware of the barriers in place to women in science? To becoming a physician? I have female friends who are still told by professors that they cannot be a doctor because "girls are afraid of blood". Honestly, this post of yours trivializes actual barriers that women face.

 

How do you think Mac assessors would view you if they saw that you posted this?