Abstract

Women are underutilized in most academic fields and in the most prestigious positions in academia. There are roughly two methods of attempting to remedy this underutilization. Policies of formal equality of opportunity and affirmative action are passive, nondiscriminatory policies. At most, FEO insures that women who are clearly superior to all their male competitors will have a legal means of resource, if they are not hired. Preferential treatment policies are aimed not just at exceptionally well-qualified women, but also at the women who are equal in ability to the average successful white male job applicant. ;There are three major arguments against PT for women in academia: the argument that such policies are unjust to white males, the argument that justice can only be done to individuals and not to groups, and the argument that governmental interference in hiring practices will harm the universities. The arguments against PT convince me that these policies should be restricted and reasonably enforced; however, more harm and injustice would be done if such policies are not implemented than would be done by weak preferential treatment for women in academia. Weak PT includes using statistical evidence to locate underutilization, setting goals based on the availability pool, allowing femaleness to count as a positive value, and avoiding "secondary sexism." ;Arguments for PT fall roughly into three categories: distributive justice arguments , social utility arguments , and compensatory justice arguments