"A Terrible Day for Gender Equality"

The student union at my university recently held an election for the position of Women's Officer. Out of two candidates, one won with a clear majority, with better qualifications for the role and a clear determination to do their best at the job. The only problem, was that the candidate that won was a male. Within a few weeks, an online petition had amassed roughly 1000 signatures to have him removed and replaced by the less qualified female candidate.

What do you guys think about this issue? Does the Women's Officer have to be a woman (like expecting an advocate for ASD to be on the spectrum themselves)? Or do you think forcing this man to resign was a blatant act of gender discrimination?

I tend to side with the latter, but I have sourced articles looking from both perspectives.

http://www.dailylife.com.au/dl-people/dl-entertainment/man-quits-as-university-womens-officer-20150410-1mi0k6.html
http://www.aphramag.com/why-yesterday-was-a-terrible-day-for-gender-inequality-in-universities/

I agree with his statement upon deciding to resign, but also think it's fair for the position to have that requirement if it's a genuine factor in doing the job effectively.

I'd have given him a fair run at the job he was elected to, even if the voters didn't realize he was a guy from the ballot's.... and if they felt they needed to make a gender requirement subsequently then do it for the next one. It seem's very harsh on the guy who (seemingly) was just trying to help the cause to be bullied out for no other reason then that.

Differences in sex, gender, race, language, economic history,etc, create changes in experience and, therefore, perspective. I am a committed ally in any sphere of civil rights. What that means is that I speak with people with a different experience than my own. I do not speak for them.

I try to see all sides, but I should not be so arrogant as to assume that I understand the lives of people culturally different from myself better than they. I don't know what it's like for women. A little, I do. I know what is shared with me, what I understand of what I see, but not really. I see the experience. I do not have the experience. Nor do I have some special access to generic human experience.

There are things about living in the world I will not directly understand, and that has to be okay.

Also, and I'm certain you didn't mean it like that, but you compared being a woman to being autistic. Probably not where you were going with that. Just be careful, okay?

I think the worst thing about this whole situation is that this man wasn't forcefully put into the position, he submitted his application and was voted in by a majority vote. Over 900 more people signed the petition to have him removed than voted in the original ballot. Democratic voting only works if people go out of their way to actually vote, rather than just complain when the results come out. That man could have been the best Women's Officer the union has ever had, but now we'll never know, and the woman who replaced him will have to do her job knowing that the sole reason she got in was because she was female. I know I certainly wouldn't be very happy in her position.

Why not let the man keep his position when it was women who voted him in? I voted for him, because he was clearly the best candidate, with the most experience in that kind of leadership role. As a woman, and a feminist, I don't see anything wrong with being represented by a male, because I really don't think men and women are all that different.

I wouldn't expect a representative of schizophrenics to be schizophrenic themselves; only ask that they be well-versed in the interests and issues surrounding those who do identify as schizotypal. Well-rounded knowledge pips personal experience any day.

(n.b. I certainly wouldn't take offense to being autistic, so I wouldn't see why anyone else should either; it isn't a bad thing)

Sometimes women are simply more comfortable interacting with or being represented by other women when it comes to situations and issues involving or related to gender and gender identity. This situation is unfortunate, but understandable from a certain perspective.

See, and I was operating under the assumption that you are a man. I should have done my homework. I apologize. Sloppy of me.

That said, I will respectfully disagree. What one knows and the vantage point from which one sees the world are two very powerful variables. I do not regard them as interchangable, and would certainly prefer both to be present in a leader. That said, I would choose perspective over general knowledge if I wer forced to choose. General knowledge can be learned. A specific place in the social fabric is a more complex matter.

That said, I am not a memeber of the electorate at your university, so I know what my opinion is worth.

Fenton you have the number 900 that voted him out. Do you have the number of votes total . . for and against. Just curios?

its out of touch with reality for a man to run for a position of "womans representative officer" and not make it a point to be totally clear that he is a male wherever this might not be obvious

i have no concern if it is "fair" or not lol

fair is like for fairy tales because its all in our heads

i do think its an "issue" that people who didnt vote to begin with were allowed to change the results of the vote after the fact

all in all i think this event is great - the discourse/dialogue its opened has probably already done more for equality than he would have been able to accomplish with ten terms

i'm of the mind that the best candidate for the job should get the job....not because of their race,gender,gender identity,abilities or any other means of discriminating....but because they are the BEST CANDIDATE....

Best is subjective.
Did the voters know they were voting for a man? If not, then had they known they may have considered the woman the better choice.