Gender diversity of veterinary school

[JollyBlueJay4]

Hi all,
First, congratulations on applying!!! Everyone is probably as relieved as myself having gotten that part of our lives over with (at least this year). 🙂

So give yourself a pat on the back, take some wine off the rack, and try to make it till December without a heart attack!

(I'm corny... Like, highschool-science-teacher corny... Sorry)

Anyway, I wanted to post this common thought on here to hear your expertly opinions in the matter of veterinary admissions. Is there a benefit toward being one of the few male applicants versus a female applicant? There seems to be a strong push toward diversity and I am curious what you all think about considering gender as diversity in the veterinary medicine education system.

Again, congrats on finishing, or almost finishing, the application process! I wish you all the best of luck!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[jtom]

I dont think gender has alot to do with admissions decisions but every vet I have talked to says it does. I personally think adcoms might remember a male candidate in interviews just because far fewer apply. I actually posted a thread about this awhile back. I think we decided while schools want a certain number of males, the ratio of males applying to males accepted is the same as females.

I do however think some adcoms might give males special attention when going through the stack of files. I think its just human nature if you see an so many females that you might give a male applicant more attention. What I can say is it doesnt hurt you to be a male applicant.

 

[EllieGirl89]

That's something my mentor has always told me. "You need to be extraordinary in all other aspects, because the one thing that's going to give you a hard time is that you're a girl." I suspect it does make a little bit of a difference because there are far fewer male applicants than female applicants, and the schools do look to increase their male enrollment.

 

[JollyBlueJay4]

I wouldn't like to think I, or other males, would have an unfair advantage over a better female applicant, so I hope this is not the case. I see where ratios of applied:accepted do come out pretty equal in terms of gender (a slight edge to males here). However, that's a good point jtom that I am sure admission committees cannot help but to give partial attention to a sparser applicant population.

Just thought this was an interesting topic regarding admissions and was wondering if anyone else had insight on it. That's a little unfair that your mentor Ellie would say your gender is a disadvantage to being accepted!

In either case, I'll need all the help I can get to get accepted somewhere, so maybe I shouldn't be complaining... And since I may be the only Rhode Island male applicant, maybe my application will shine with diversity! Yahoo!

 

[EllieGirl89]

I wouldn't like to think I, or other males, would have an unfair advantage over a better female applicant, so I hope this is not the case. I see where ratios of applied:accepted do come out pretty equal in terms of gender (a slight edge to males here). However, that's a good point jtom that I am sure admission committees cannot help but to give partial attention to a sparser applicant population.

Just thought this was an interesting topic regarding admissions and was wondering if anyone else had insight on it. That's a little unfair that your mentor Ellie would say your gender is a disadvantage to being accepted!

In either case, I'll need all the help I can get to get accepted somewhere, so maybe I shouldn't be complaining... And since I may be the only Rhode Island male applicant, maybe my application will shine with diversity! Yahoo!

Ahh, he wasn't being mean, just honest. He's very blunt and I wouldn't expect him to sugar coat things. He just meant that as a female I will definitely have to stand out from the hundreds and hundreds of other females who are applying.

And I don't think a male would be chosen over a female who was more qualified just because he was male, but I think it does give you a little extra edge to show any bit of something that you have that will add diversity to the class. Let your masculinity shine ;-) Good luck!

 

[bunnity]

Interested to see how the responses to this thread compare to "Should I Play This Card?" which is pretty similar.

Can we have a thread called Diversity in Vet School? 😛

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

I would hope not.

Fact of the matter is, many more females apply to vet school than males. So of course the student body is going to reflect that. To give men an edge would be essentially discriminatory.

Same as how I don't understand preferencial racial acceptance (and don't flame, this is just my opinion)...for example, my undergrad racial and gender population was consistently in line with the national statistics of all genders and races, period (not just college people, I mean the whole overall shebang). But they made such a big deal about "increasing diversity"....its like dude wtf do you want, we're as diverse as the entire nation is, that's normal....I can't tell you the number of poor, white, male Virginia farm kids who couldn't get a scholarship because, guess what, they were white males and all the scholarships were for people with different skin color or genitalia (and yes, these are people I know....sorry I know scholarship are OT but its kind of related and irks me, ie preferential treatment just due to what you look like)

Acceptance should be based on performance, not gender.

The only "preferential treatment" I could see as acceptable in vet school is accepting more people dedicated to FA or public/corporate/research vet med, and simply because that area is severely lacking... Know what I mean? Anyway, my 2 cents.

 

[JollyBlueJay4]

I would hope not.

Fact of the matter is, many more females apply to vet school than males. So of course the student body is going to reflect that. To give men an edge would be essentially discriminatory.

Same as how I don't understand preferencial racial acceptance (and don't flame, this is just my opinion)...for example, my undergrad racial and gender population was consistently in line with the national statistics. But they made such a big deal about "increasing diversity"....its like dude wtf do you want, we're as diverse as the entire nation is, that's normal....I can't tell you the number of poor, white Virginia farm kids who couldn't get a scholarship because, guess what, they were white males and all the scholarships were for minorities (sorry I know schol. are OT but its kind of related and irks me)

Acceptance should be based on performance, not gender.

The only "preferential treatment" I could see as acceptable in vet school is accepting more people dedicated to FA or public/corporate/research vet med, and simply because that area is severely lacking...not due to presence or absence of genitalia or color of skin. Know what I mean?

Agreed! Although it's an imperfect system by far, minority scholarships due hold value to a limited extent. In an ideal world, they would be replaced / removed over time so as not to lend a crutch to a particular sub pop of individuals. But given the background of some people, these scholarships allow opportunities that wouldn't exist otherwise. But I totally agree that maybe offered specifically to minorities, the scholarships intention isn't fulfilled.

A little off topic, but warranted! So you're telling me there's no vet med scholarship for average male students to be given preferential treatment over higher-achieving females? Well there goes my way of affording vet school... 🙁

 

[New Foundland]

I would hope not.

Fact of the matter is, many more females apply to vet school than males. So of course the student body is going to reflect that. To give men an edge would be essentially discriminatory.

Same as how I don't understand preferencial racial acceptance (and don't flame, this is just my opinion)...for example, my undergrad racial and gender population was consistently in line with the national statistics. But they made such a big deal about "increasing diversity"....its like dude wtf do you want, we're as diverse as the entire nation is, that's normal....I can't tell you the number of poor, white, male Virginia farm kids who couldn't get a scholarship because, guess what, they were white males and all the scholarships were for minorities (and yes, these are people I know....sorry I know scholarship are OT but its kind of related and irks me, ie preferential treatment just due to what you look like)

Acceptance should be based on performance, not gender.

This type of favor bias, if it does exist in the vet app setting, is almost definitely a subconscious thing.
Talking about what "should" be the case is irrelevant, because the folks involved in the app process are surely doing their best to allow for equal opportunity for admission based on gender in 99% of cases at least.
What happens is that subconscious biases will factor in..

I.e. when somebody likes a male applicant, they aren't consciously thinking "ohh and he's a male too, we get so few of those so he's gotta get admitted"
Rather they like the applicant a fraction more than they would have if the same applicant were in a female body, but they don't have any idea that they are influenced by this..

I could tell you what I hope too.. but I don't see how it contributes to the debate, aside from reiterating a widespread moral standard...

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

But given the background of some people, these scholarships allow opportunities that wouldn't exist otherwise.🙁

Yup yup I agree. But like I said.....poor urban minority kids? Of course they have lived a hard life, encourage them. Absolutely!! But its a matter of economics and opportunity, not race!n But again, so many white male rural kids, no opportunity, with no college fund and spent their whole life doing 4-h etc....they get nothin (or at least have opportunities markedly reduced) cause of their gender and skin color....its sad. Bleh. sorry, veering OT a bit again. Had a conversation with some current students regarding this so its on the brain.

To be honest, however.....I think there IS a subconscious thing for slight male preference, sort of what New Foundland alluded to.

 

[twelvetigers]

sorry, veering OTC a bit again

...over the counter?

Off topic... ?

Haha.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

...over the counter?

Off topic... ?

Haha.

Fixed😛

 

[that redhead]

I don't think that being male will give you any sort of edge, although at times I wish I were a male applicant so that I wasn't just another white female applying 😛 In my undergraduate essays that asked essentially how I was diverse, I explained that as a redhead, I make up a scant 2% of the world's population. As I told my friend, I'm the whitest of the white (ancestors over on the Mayflower) and I really don't have much going for me in the diversity category! I have to stretch myself a bit for those questions and it can be frustrating at times.

Anyway, I'm a firm believer that those accepted should be the best candidates for the positions and not just the most diverse. While I do appreciate diversity in a class (and wouldn't want to be in a class only of other white females), I don't think that should be the decision point. And I know its not, only a factor, so I'm not upset about it 🙂

 

[Mama070609]

Gender in veterinary medicine is always interesting to me, because I grew up in an area where males dominated veterinary medicine. It was a rural area, and a lot of the older men had poor opinions of women's ability to handle livestock. Not long before I left the area, a female vet moved in to one of the neighboring towns and opened up a practice. I heard a few derogatory comments regarding her gender and how she wasn't going to be successful because the men weren't going to let her touch their cattle and horses. And this was in 2001, so it wasn't that long ago. I still thought of veterinary medicine as a male dominated field until I was most of the way through my undergraduate years and started looking a little more closely. Part of me does still feel like I need to prove myself as a female and show my ability to handle animals and livestock...but I think that must be partially a deeply ingrained thing from my childhood. That, and I worked in biomedical research after college, which is still a male dominated field.

As for my thoughts on how gender might affect adcom's opinions of applicants, I have to believe that it varies...I'm sure there are some who don't allow gender to have any influence at all, and there are others who subconsciously bias their opinions based upon gender. It's possible that there are those who purposefully desire one gender over the other, but that sort of thing is something we all hope doesn't actually exist.

 

[KaibabVet]

The point of affirmative action is to neutralize unearned advantages by whites. Gender preference is a similar idea, and both are very abstract and debatable. It seems like socio/economic preference may be the beneficial in America today, but this issue is separate from race/gender discrimination.

It is thought that if an individual man's career is temporarily set back because of preference given to women, the odds are good that this same man has benefitted in the past or will benefit in the future from sexist discrimination against women. Conversely, if women receive apparently unearned preference, it is likely that these same women have suffered in the past and will suffer in the future from sexist attitudes.

I'm not saying I whole-heartedly agree with gender/racial preference, but I wanted to clarify that preference is only supposed to be given to a disadvantaged group, not simply the minority. Vet school applicants are unique in the fact that men make up the minority but do not fall into a disadvantaged group. Because of this, they will most definitely not be given any kind of preference (other than subconscious).

 

[that redhead]

Gender in veterinary medicine is always interesting to me, because I grew up in an area where males dominated veterinary medicine. It was a rural area, and a lot of the older men had poor opinions of women's ability to handle livestock. Not long before I left the area, a female vet moved in to one of the neighboring towns and opened up a practice. I heard a few derogatory comments regarding her gender and how she wasn't going to be successful because the men weren't going to let her touch their cattle and horses. And this was in 2001, so it wasn't that long ago. I still thought of veterinary medicine as a male dominated field until I was most of the way through my undergraduate years and started looking a little more closely. Part of me does still feel like I need to prove myself as a female and show my ability to handle animals and livestock...but I think that must be partially a deeply ingrained thing from my childhood. That, and I worked in biomedical research after college, which is still a male dominated field.

As for my thoughts on how gender might affect adcom's opinions of applicants, I have to believe that it varies...I'm sure there are some who don't allow gender to have any influence at all, and there are others who subconsciously bias their opinions based upon gender. It's possible that there are those who purposefully desire one gender over the other, but that sort of thing is something we all hope doesn't actually exist.

I have a strong desire to "prove myself" in respect to large animal medicine, too. I think that female vets in large animal practice most certainly face this kind of bias, which is unfortunate. I also remember calling up a (race)track veterinarian and asking about shadowing. He was really nice but said I might prefer to work with the female vet he knew (also at the track) so that I could gain a female's perspective in that environment. He specifically told me about sexual harassment, gender bias, etc and I really valued his honesty. The equine practioner I rode with (male) also spoke to me about how he thinks equine medicine (or any medicine that requires long and unpredictable hours, moreso than SA, for example) is difficult for women to remain in because of the time constraints + desire to start a family. I'm fortunate that the person I plan to spend the rest of my life with WANTS to be a stay-at-home dad, so if the need arose we could handle it, but its a very real potential deterrent.

 

[sunnyshine]

I have a real problem with the cultural & gender preferences that many schools and employers have. To give one person preference over another simply because of the color of their skin or the contents of their underpants is discrimination plain and simple. The people who should be offered acceptances to schools and positions with employers are the candidates who are the most qualified for those positions. If the best applicants to a certain veterinary school are all African American females then all of the acceptances should be offered to African American females . I know that some people will say that affirmative action and other such policies exist to help the disadvantaged, but that's a load of horse manure. People of all cultures and all genders are disadvantaged.

 

[lailanni]

Gender in veterinary medicine is always interesting to me, because I grew up in an area where males dominated veterinary medicine. It was a rural area, and a lot of the older men had poor opinions of women's ability to handle livestock. Not long before I left the area, a female vet moved in to one of the neighboring towns and opened up a practice. I heard a few derogatory comments regarding her gender and how she wasn't going to be successful because the men weren't going to let her touch their cattle and horses.

The large animal gender bias has always been so silly to me. When you're working with an animal that is *hundreds* of pounds, is it really going to matter if you're 50 pounds heavier and a few inches taller? I personally don't think so.

You can be a huge strapping guy and still suck at handling large animals.

The smallest person in our class (also female) is interested in large animals. I say power to anyone who wants to do it!

 

[BlacKAT33]

we have 28 guys in our class...wow, thats the biggest number i think ive heard before! 22.5%!

from what ive heard, guys have a slight advantage...of course, they STILL need to be competitive (good stats, eLORs, PS) but since there are so few guys...if you possess all of these things you most likely will get accepted whereas for girls, there are so many with the same stats so it is hard to stand out. But, id like to repeat they still need to be competitive too so it's not like a walk in the park for them.

One thing that i have heard from EVERY vet i talk to is that men do have a HUGE advantage when it comes to jobs. ALL clinics want to hire males because there are so few of them. Of course, they can't be very vocal about this. My friend who just graduated said he had a line of places that wanted him to work for them after he graduated. lucky!! he was able to choose the area and clinic HE wanted to work in lol sweet!

 

[New Foundland]

The large animal gender bias has always been so silly to me. When you're working with an animal that is *hundreds* of pounds, is it really going to matter if you're 50 pounds heavier and a few inches taller? I personally don't think so.

You can be a huge strapping guy and still suck at handling large animals.

True. But it surely matters psychologically.. Many people may be afraid and intimidated by the thought of having to mess around with huge animals...
Whether they are above the human average of weight/size and physical strength makes a whole lot of difference in terms of confidence when dealing with a large animal..

The smallest person in our class (also female) is interested in large animals

Is anyone really surprised that there is a small female obsessed with equine med in a vet class? 😀

 

[nyanko]

True. But it surely matters psychologically.. Many people may be afraid and intimidated by the thought of having to mess around with huge animals...
Whether they are above the human average of weight/size and physical strength makes a whole lot of difference in terms of confidence when dealing with a large animal..

I don't necessarily think that's true. If you follow that idea to its root, it essentially means that the confidence comes from an underlying thought that you could physically overpower the animal, and I'd call that foolishness rather than confidence.

Is anyone really surprised that there is a small female obsessed with equine med in a vet class? 😀

She didn't say equine med, and doesn't it disprove your point anyway?

 

[Armymutt25A]

The last time I applied, females were the favored - schools were trying to balance the profession. I didn't know any males who got in after 2 years, but at least 3 females with 3.5 GPAs. When my baby sister went to an info session at VT a couple years ago, she was told that females have a harder time getting in nowadays. It makes sense. Schools have some tough decisions to make and have a whole lot of people that they have to answer to. As a society, we seem to think that equal opportunity is the same as equal outcome. I have a hard time with the notion of "disadvantaged". To some people, never living in the same spot for more than a couple of years would be a disadvantage due to the interruptions in schooling. I saw the advantage of seeing a new part of the world and walked away with stories to tell for decades to come. Once schools (and other organizations) started mucking with the numbers to become more diverse, you have to expect the tide to shift around and one trait or another is favored more than another. This just might be the season of the Y-chromosome.

 

[Marsala]

In talking with some of the faculty that I have contact with, many seem to think that schools are actively seeking male applicants for several reasons. They cite the shortage of veterinarians, and then point out that many of the female students put work on hold to have families, and the idea (I'm guessing) is there wouldn't be as much of the "Mr. Mom" thing going on. The fact still remains that many schools (such as the one I'm referring to), are run by 'The Good Ol Boy Network', and they were disappointed when the trends in veterinary medicine swung in the direction of female applicants.

This does not represent MY opinion, this is only a condensed version of conversations that I have been a part of with faculty. Take it with a grain of salt.

 

[New Foundland]

I don't necessarily think that's true. If you follow that idea to its root, it essentially means that the confidence comes from an underlying thought that you could physically overpower the animal, and I'd call that foolishness rather than confidence.

She didn't say equine med, and doesn't it disprove your point anyway?

Nah, what I said doesn't at all imply that such people would have a foolish confidence that they can overpower..
Just more likely to have the confidence that they could do what is necessary more often than a smaller person could..


And no, obviously one instance wouldn't say a thing about my point..
My point was a general statement about the relationship between the LA/SA and M/F ratios..
I said "Many people may be".
Tons of females in vet school, many of the small, love horses and LA medicine, and are as comfortable around them as anyone will ever be..
But for those entering vet school who are small and relatively weak and have limited experience handling large animals.. Absolutely the confidence will make a difference, among other factors..


And no, she didn't say equine med.. but I can make a pretty safe assumption

 

[nyanko]

Nah, what I said doesn't at all imply that such people would have a foolish confidence that they can overpower..
Just more likely to have the confidence that they could do what is necessary more often than a smaller person could..

Right, and where does that "confidence" come from? If you're talking about size as the independent variable and the confidence as the dependent variable you're talking about a relationship between size and confidence. So why would there be this correlation, if not for the underlying idea of "I could overpower the animal if I needed to because I'm big?" You're proposing a correlation with no data and not even really any sort of reasoning backing it up.

And no, obviously one instance wouldn't say a thing about my point..
My point was a general statement about the relationship between the LA/SA and M/F ratios..
I said "Many people may be".

I disagree with you that size has much to do with the relationship thereof. There are too many mitigating factors to be able to make such a claim.

Tons of females in vet school, many of the small, love horses and LA medicine, and are as comfortable around them as anyone will ever be..
But for those entering vet school who are small and relatively weak and have limited experience handling large animals.. Absolutely the confidence will make a difference, among other factors..

Whoa whoa, now we're talking about experience too? Of course anyone who has limited experience with large animals is going to be less confident to begin with. But we're talking about size here.

And no, she didn't say equine med.. but I can make a pretty safe assumption

Can you?

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Interstingly, the smallest girls in my class were all foodies. It was the tall ones that were equine. One girl was five foot nothing and could work a steer like you wouldnt believe.

 

[New Foundland]

Right, and where does that "confidence" come from? If you're talking about size as the independent variable and the confidence as the dependent variable you're talking about a relationship between size and confidence.

Yes, that's what I'm talking about of course..

So why would there be this correlation, if not for the underlying idea of "I could overpower the animal if I needed to because I'm big?"

My problem is only with the word overpower...
What I speak of is confidence in your ability to restrain a certain part of a large animal, or manipulate it or get it to move, up to an extent.. There's no need to even consider the question of whether someone thinks they can overpower a 900 lb animal.. That would be, as you mentioned, foolish.

You're proposing a correlation with no data and not even really any sort of reasoning backing it up.

I'm offering up personal ideas that I feel are quite plausible (an understatement imo), not presenting a study to be published in a veterinary journal..
And I never said this "This is the truth.." I implied that it was possible that this could be one contributing factor to the smaller number of LA vets..
I thought the reasoning behind my proposal was self-evident..
Physical strength can be useful in being a large animal vet..
Is that up for debate?
Maybe the degree of usefulness, sure..

But my argument doesn't even require physical strength to be useful as a LA vet.. All it requires is that some people (namely those with limited LA exposure/experience) have the impression that physical strength is important/useful for a LA vet.
That impression alone, whether unfounded or legit, might be enough to push SOME PEOPLE away from seriously considering LA medicine..

Whoa whoa, now we're talking about experience too? Of course anyone who has limited experience with large animals is going to be less confident to begin with. But we're talking about size here.

Haha..
You basically tried to suggest that that the fact that a small female in somebody's class likes LA medicine "disproves my point"..
I pointed out that experience also greatly contributes to confidence..
And now you accuse me of venturing outside the scope of the argument?
Obviously experience factors into confidence in the ability to handle large animals..

I disagree with you that size has much to do with the relationship thereof. There are too many mitigating factors to be able to make such a claim.

You're invited to disagree. But please try not to attack misrepresentations of my position.
All I said was that size may play a factor with some people.. I didn't say there weren't tons of other factors also in play..