Skip to main content

This commentary is part of The Globe's series, Work In Progress: The Global Struggle for Gender Parity.

-------------------------------------------

Marina Adshade teaches at the University of British Columbia's Vancouver School of Economics.

Story continues below advertisement

-------------------------------------------

Many people question the need for special scholarships and bursaries specifically targeted at certain demographic groups, but the need for these scholarships goes beyond levelling the playing field for all students. The costs of discrimination are not just shouldered by those on the receiving end; discrimination imposes costs to us all when it prevents some of our most productive members from playing an active role in society.

For example, I know that the reason I did not receive funding to attend graduate school was because I am a woman. This did not happen in the 1950s, it happened less than 20 years ago. And this was not a case of a woman thinking she deserves a grant over better-qualified men. I didn't get funding because the person responsible thought women should not be given scholarships.

I know that it is unseemly for a woman to speak of her success, but the story can't be told without sharing that I was an extremely good student. So good, in fact, that I was given both prizes that that department awards to undergraduate students, and was considered for a Governor-General's Academic Medal awarded to the student with the highest academic standing in the entire university.

Which is pretty good for a single mother, whose daughter was 22 months old when she started her degree and four years old when she finished.

In my final year at York University, I applied for a Canadian government scholarship to help fund my graduate education. When I received no funding, I went to the office of the faculty member responsible (who was also my professor at the time) to seek clarification as to why I had been unsuccessful. He explained that the process for allocating grants tasked individual departments with responsibility to rank applications, and that he had chosen to rank me seventh out of seven candidates.

He went on to explain that this was not because I was inferior to other candidates – he acknowledged that I was not – rather because he could see no reason to give a scholarship to a woman when there were "perfectly well-qualified men."

Story continues below advertisement

I tell this story to many of my university classes today because it puts a human face on discrimination within academic institutions. And I tell it because it illustrates the role that discrimination plays in the choices that women make; choices that often lead to lower-paying jobs.

I could have become discouraged by this event and abandoned my plan to get a Ph.D. and become a university professor. And society would have said, "She earns less because she chose to have less education." Or, I could have become disillusioned with studying in a male-dominated field, and society would have said, "She earns less because she chose to become educated in a low-paying discipline." I could have let this event stifle my ambition, and society would have said, "She earns less because she has prioritized her family over her career."

I did none of these things, of course, and instead I worked my way through graduate school accumulating debt along the way, much of which went to paying for daycare rather than textbooks. But in the end it was a special bursary for female graduate students that made my postsecondary degree possible. Its value was only one quarter of the Canadian scholarship I was denied because of my gender, but put food on our table during some very lean years.

The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, whose job it is to allocate Canadian taxpayers' dollars to deserving graduate social-science students, still follows the same process today for allocating grants; merit is not simply based on objective measures, but rather individuals within universities are given the opportunity to subjectively determine which students deserve funding, and which students do not.

It is this subjective approach to merit that allows discrimination to persist, and not just against women, but against many other groups of disadvantaged individuals.

An Ontario court recently ruled that a scholarship for white, heterosexual, single men was not in the public interest. I think that this is the right approach to judging the appropriateness of special scholarships and bursaries. As long as women continue to earn less than men, it is in the public interest to ensure that women are free to make the same choices as men. Giving additional financial assistance helps make those choices possible.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

If your comment doesn't appear immediately it has been sent to a member of our moderation team for review

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.