When presented with resumes from female and male imaginary applicants, hiring committees favored the male applicant over the female in almost every case. Not only that, when they did decide to hire the female applicant, she was offered $4,000 less per year than her male counterpart.
Now before you cry out that men are sexist and that this isn't fair, you should note that even females on the hiring committees leaned towards the male applicants over the female... even when the applications were essentially identical. Only 1/5 of all science Ph.D.'s in this country are awarded to females and of those half are students attending school from abroad... meaning there are very few Ph.D.'s given out to American women in the scientific community.
Please feel free to read through the entire New York Times article for a better understanding of the study before posting and comments
Thoughts?