I'm a guy - there's little hope I'll get into Mac

[Guest cradlecrotch]

Let's face it. I sent off my application, but there's little chance that I'll get in, purely based on the fact that I'm not female. 77% of this year's class is female...that's gotta be a record....for any med school.

 

I'm not saying that this is wrong, and I'm not saying it's right (or maybe I am). It's just a statistical fact that, no matter which way you cut it, doesn't bode well for me or any other of my Y chromosome-laden brethren.

 

I understand the program at Mac very well. I have some idea of why females are more likely to gain admission. And it's not because females are "more mature" as Claude Nahmias, Director of Admissions likes to respond when asked...that explanation is entirely inadequate and even laughable. I have spoken with Mr. Nahmias at length. He seems like a nice man, but he doesn't seem to know why certain phenomena exist in his department...instead he offers up half-baked responses that don't satisfy anyone except perhaps himself.

 

It's scary, because it shows that Mr. Nahmias doesn't have a firm grasp on the realities of his own department. Not everyone can have all the answers to everything - and that's fine...sometimes one honestly doesn't know...and if that's the case one must recognize that fact, and then try to search for answers. Instead he satisfies himself with nonsensical reasoning and foolish assumptions like "females are more mature than males". When the median age of Mac applicants is probably somewhere around 23-24 (educated guess), such a statement is borderline discriminatory.

 

So if females are far more likely to be accepted, then we must assume that females are more likely to be successful in the program (which is the natural logical conclusion)...if this is the case then perhaps what it boils down to is that McMaster, plain and simple, is not really meant for men. The program is structured in such a way that men are at a natural disadvantage.

 

Somehow this state of affairs offends my sensibilities. It would be equally wrong to have a med school where being male would confer the applicant with a natural advantage. I would expect an uproar from any number of civil liberties groups if such a school existed.

 

Am I wrong about my interpretations? Is anyone else curious why this situation is allowed to persist? I love the program at Mac...I would do almost anything to get in (short of a sex change). I just feel that the hurdles (besides the high grades, submission scores and rigourous interview) are too high for me to realistally hold much hope of getting in. Somebody, please share your insights.

[Guest Ian Wong]

We beat this topic to death a while back. Here's a representative thread, and you will likely find others if you poke around further:

 

pub125.ezboard.com/fpremed101frm9.showMessage?topicID=81.topic

 

For a little bit of background, my own med class here at UBC has 45 men, and 75 women in it. When I was applying, I was told stories that it'd be tough to get in as a science major. Other people heard stories that white males, since they were so "typical", would need to be superstars in order to stand out and get accepted. The girls that I talked to were all concerned that they wouldn't be taken as seriously as the men, especially if they happened to get interviewed by crusty, "old school", male physicians.

 

I guess if I had only one piece of advice, it would be to envision yourself as any other age, race, or gender in the application process, and realise that there's probably some form of rumoured discrimination that would affect your chosen demographic.

 

At the end of the day, therefore, the best and only approach you can really take is to do some real introspective thinking about what appeals to you about McMaster, and why you would be a great contributor to the program, and sell yourself at every opportunity; autobiography, references, and interview. Everything from that point on is out of your control, and therefore not worth wasting your time worrying about. : This probably won't reassure you any, but this is part of the admissions game, and certainly there are many applicants each year who would make great doctors, but get rejected because there simply aren't enough available spots.

 

Ian

UBC, Med 4

[Guest MDWannabe]

Hey Cradlecrotch,

 

There may be a lot of women in the program, but more than a few men still did make it in (I'm one of them - no sex change required).

 

You might be interested to know that pretty much everyone I've met in the past 5 or so weeks has been talking about his/her individual weaknesses and deficiencies coming into the program. Not enough clinical experience. Too old. Too young. Not enough sciences. Education not well rounded enough. The list is endless. I'm sure I fell short in a number of categories too. But we're all here. The key point in this respect seems to be that the successful applicant is someone who is keenly aware of his/her strengths and weaknesses. Someone who will know what to do in order to deal with the weaknesses and build strengths.

 

Anyway, I'm not too sure, despite the numbers, that being a man is a disadvantage. I looked at this attribute as a chance to stand out against the crowd. If you can show yourself as a person who understands and empathizes with others, I don't think you will be at a disadvantage against female applicants.

 

You're a man. Accept it, move on, and get that application in!

 

Good luck

[Guest cradlecrotch]

Well MDWannabe, I congratulate you on your acceptance. I appreciate your and Ian's attempts to reassure me, and trust me when I tell you that I'm not freaking out over this issue, but I believe my point still stands.

 

Honestly, I don't think there's anything wrong with having a program that requires certain skills that females are more likely to possess. But let's not kid ourselves. I'm at a disadvantage. It's much easier for you to say something along the lines of "anyway, I'm not too sure, despite the numbers, that being a man is a disadvantage" after you've already been accepted.

 

I understand that females don't have a monopoly on these "Mac traits", and that if I possess them then I have a fair shot. What I'm saying is this: females are more likely to have the traits than guys. I'm a guy, so I'm more likely to NOT have them. That is why I'm at a disadvantage.

 

MDWannabe, are people at Mac prepared to come out and admit to the relative disadvantage that being a male presents? Are you? I guarantee Claude Nahmias isn't. Not very PC, is it.

 

I've gone through a rigourous MBA program where groupwork was also extensively employed. Did that not also require the ability to communicate effectively, encourage others when necessary, provide feedback, etc.? How is Mac's groupwork materially different? Why don't business schools screen applicants for these abilities? If they did, would we also see a proponderance of females being accepted? I don't know the answers to these questions.

 

It's just a shame because McMaster represents an opportunity for people with alternative backgrounds and rich experiences (such as myself) to attend medical school, when they wouldn't be accepted anywhere else...either due to age or lower marks or what have you. What the Mac is telling me is this: we love people with rich and unique experiences, and it's okay that you don't have the highest marks, so you've got a decent chance with us...but not if you're a dude.

 

And that's another thing, probably the biggest thing: there is a grand irony in all of this. On the one hand Mac goes out of it's way to encourage a diverse student body. Yet 78% of the class is female! By almost anyone's standards, the first step in establishing diversity is a fair representation of the sexes. It's *the* most basic difference within all peoples.

 

In your class, if tutorial groups are randomly assigned, no doubt some groups would be comprised of all females. MDWannabe, is this actually the case? If so, aren't male perspectives grossly underrepresented in group discussions, and what does that say about diversity at Mac? If, on the other hand, a conscious effort is made to distribute the guys amongst all the groups, doesn't this demonstrate the importance of having greater equality in numbers of males and females? I mean, Mac doesn't do this in regards to any other aspect of the students (such as age, educational background, etc), do they? This indicates a certain level of hypocrisy in the philosophy of the program.

 

I've thrown a lot of questions at you, I know. I wouldn't mind anyone to attempt at answering them. There seems to be a legion of Mac supporters out there, now's the time to speak up.

[Guest MDWannabe]

Hi Cradlecrotch,

To be 100% honest with you, I can't be positive that there is or is not any gender bias in the program. I've spoken to some women in the program who believe there is; and some men who believe otherwise. There are so many people involved in the decision making process, it's hard to point to a particular person who would really know for sure.

 

I was certainly aware of the male/female split when I applied. I also had the "disadvantage" of being one of the older applicants, with a complete lack of science background. Oh, and I also did an MBA. So some would say there are a few strikes against me too. In fact, I spent some time during the interview convincing others that I could handle the science element with virtually none in my background. So here's another area we can talk about. Mac appears to make it clear that lack of science background makes no difference in considering you for the program (legend has it that this factor might be a benefit), but there are clearly many decision makers who believe otherwise. If one of them had been reviewing my application, I might not have been here today. Or maybe I could have convinced them that the hurdle would be surmounted - just another obstacle. If the person reviewing my application thought, from personal experience, that my age would hinder me, again I could have been SOL.

 

The point I was making in my last post is that virtually all of us have attributes that make us something less than perfectly suited to the Mac program. We have to be able to address those issues candidly and constructively, and hopefully we can surmount the obstacles. The other point to make is that on the Mac end, your application reviewers and interviewers will have their own life experiences and biases. Maybe some of them will think you'd be better as a woman candidate, but I suspect that, based on the people I've met so far, their decisions will be based on something more substantive than that.

 

On the issue of having done an MBA, again from personal experience, I wouldn't immediately assert that your group experience is analogous. Yes, the MBA is rigorous and intense - but I'd assert that the dynamic you had there is not likely to be as emotionally intense as what you will experience at Mac. The Mac experience can be much more personal and raw. People reveal themselves in a much shorter time here, and more personally. I say this after having had 3 people from my MBA program stand at my wedding. To make it here, you'll have to show that you can show somewhat different skills, as you can imagine.

 

You can complain about the application process, the interview process and the criteria. Many do. I'm sure I did when I was sitting where you are now. The end result does seem to speak for itself though. They do a pretty good job at picking talented, interesting people, who I think will make tremendous doctors. This is a pretty amazing place, and for the most part, the people are a pleasure to spend time with. It's one of those rare experiences where reality actually met my expectations. So, again, make your application the best it can be, and give it a shot. If I can get in, you can get in!

 

I leave you with that MBA school thought about the three kinds of people out there:

 

The people who make things happen;

 

The people who watch things happen; and

 

The people who say, "what happened?"