As everyone knows, when a university hires new faculty, they just stack all their credentials up in a row and whichever one is highest gets the job. Easy peasy.
I've been on several searches and I'm always moved by solemn dignity of the Measuring of the CVs. I don't know how you do the Measuring at Princeton, but we meet in a candlelit room dressed in full regalia. The chair lays the CVs of each candidate on a table. Naturally, the longest gets the job.
No, no, it’s not a stack, it’s the total wall space needed to display the credentials including the size of the matting and frames chosen by the candidates
I vaguely remember reading about one lawsuit from many years ago of the form, "I was denied tenure but this less qualified woman was granted tenure," and discovery unsurprisingly documented that the male candidate was rejected for being an insufferable douchebag that no one liked.
How do they stack credentials? Like the number of "PhD" and "MD" and whatever else after their name? How does one compare people's achievements objectively?
Even this article subheading feeds into the idea that affirmative action automatically means "less qualified".
I remember arguing with a guy in the early 90s who used that argument about fireman/police officers, etc. I simply pointed out what those assumptions said about him.
“‘We’re just getting started,’ said Mitchell.” Extreme white male grievance personified—just like Russell Vought—in which a society that does not operate exactly as they want it to operate is intolerable.
