A number of Anderson faculty have written an email reply (and the discussion back and forth is proceeding as your truly types this post).
Email text:
The following message is being sent on behalf of the several faculty listed below.
Dear Bhagwan,
Thank
you for circulating your interesting thought experiment
suggesting that gender pay gaps may exist even without intentional
discrimination. While we appreciate the free exchange of ideas, many of
us are disappointed by the unintentional justification you provide for
not attempting to fix the real biases that do exist for women in both academia and corporate America.
Even though
you may personally be aware that many of the assumptions on which your
simplified island economy is based are false and that discrimination is
real, your post is likely to lead some
readers to think, “well, I guess pay discrimination is built into the
system without any bias, so there’s nothing we can do to fix it.”
Creating an artificial simulation where the pay gap persists, without
first acknowledging that its two fundamental assumptions
– 1) that women and men of equal quality receive equal pay, and 2) that
women and men of equal objective quality are equally likely to be
categorized and rewarded as “superstars” – are unfounded, seriously
undermines our attempts to make people appreciate
the importance of debiasing the system.
Your argument, at its essence, absolves everyone of personal responsibility for the current climate, and therefore prevents
us as a school from making any real progress on this important issue. The
hypothetical case you consider is an interesting exercise
for a student, but it has little to do with the reality of gendered pay
. We'd be happy to share with you some of the large body of research
that has been devoted to this issue, and look forward to continued
discussion of it on a school-wide basis.
Sincerely,
Corinne Bendersky
Aimee Drolet Rossi
Mariko Sakakibara
Carol Scott
Margaret Shi
Suzanne Shu
Maia Young
No comments:
Post a Comment