Argthtjtr

the new faculty should be female in order to help address the wildly disproportionate gender ratio in our current faculty.

This is not a good reason. Gender imbalance is fought educating everybody (males, females and any possible group) equally and hiring the best people, regardless of their gender, not choosing people by gender, that's sexism.

The candidate that we support is highly qualified in terms of research and teaching. Moreover, among all the candidates who have visited, they are the only one who have any experience with diversity initiatives and getting underrepresented groups into stem. This is very important to many of us, especially since the department is planning to add an undergraduate program in the near future.

These are very good reasons to hire someone, and reasons to be proud being hired for. If I was her I'd find disrespectful being hired first because I'm a woman and second because of these good reasons.

We are planning to write an open letter to the department in support of this candidate, citing her qualifications as someone who has worked to make science a more inclusive place for women and other underrepresented minorities.

Again, these may be good points to write in the open letter, but the fact that she's a woman shouldn't matter. She's a great candidate no matter what she has between her legs.

I find this logic of hiring women because they are women very sexist, towards both men and women. Towards men because they are at a disadvantage, towards women because you're treating them like kids, giving them a preferential route they don't need. Women can clearly be good enough to be hired just for their skills and not for their gender.

Fight for her to be hired if you think she's the best choice, write the letter and explain why she's the best choice, that she's better than the other candidates because she is better, not because she's a a lady.

If you write such an open letter and she is hired, there is a risk that rumor will spread that she was only hired because she is female and your open letter will help substantiate that rumor. Such rumors are harmful even if she was clearly hired on merit alone.

So consider the possibility that your letter does more harm than good. And, if you do write such a letter, make it clear that you think she is the most qualified candidate for the job, not that you think she should be hired for her gender.

(The answer is written from a US perspective but may apply in certain other countries as well - hopefully this is of some relevance for OP.)

I am not a lawyer, but I’m pretty sure that what you are proposing (taking gender into account in hiring of faculty) would be illegal in any public university in my state, and I suspect it may run afoul of other US states’ and perhaps US federal legislation. See here and here for more information. I advise you to inform yourself of the laws and policies where you are before writing any letters.

Asking your department to do something that breaks the law is not only completely inappropriate, but it even risks leading a risk-averse administrator to choose (consciously or subconsciously) to take the opposite course of action from what you are proposing, just out of fear that they might later be accused of illegal discrimination, with your letter being used as evidence that they acted out of impure motives.

I do think it’s probably appropriate (under reasonable assumptions about your institution’s culture being a relatively normal and healthy one) for you and other graduate students to express your opinions to the department about which candidate is most qualified for the position, based on objective criteria that are unrelated to gender.

It is certainly appropriate for you to express your desire for a particular candidate. In addition to writing to the chair of the department, it would also be helpful to contact the chair of the hiring committee (in case that individual is not the chair of the department).

If you are concerned about blowback for some reason, it would also be possible to write and submit the letter anonymously.

You can request that the process is thorough and, for example, short list is open. That is to prevent situation where candidates are all college buddies of some dude (because they went to all-male college or whatever).

You can influence the search processes, but hiring should be merit-based, and gender-neutral. However, in my opinion, "manels" appear because of lack of outreach and openness rather than "we couldn't find female candidates". So when people say

you should hire more women

what they mean (IMHO) is

check your process so that you don't follow implicit and explicit biases

For example, does your college provide day care? Or parental leave? Is there some controversial situation that is unresolved? (see what's up with my school)

And of course, you as students have (limited) power to nominate more candidates you deem high-quality. Nobody can stop you from telling your deans or professors "you should also consider X, Y, and Z because we love their work"

There is general agreement that more women in STEM would be a good thing. There appears to be considerable disagreement about how to achieve this. However, I would like to address the idea of the open letter specifically.

We are planning to write an open letter to the department in support of this candidate, citing her qualifications as someone who has worked to make science a more inclusive place for women and other underrepresented minorities.

My main question is is whether it is appropriate for us to additionally express our desire for a woman faculty member.

I may be slightly too risk averse, but I believe writing an open letter in support of a particular applicant (regardless of race, gender, etc) is ill advised for the following reasons:

1. It is not clear if this candidate wants/needs your support. I presume the fact you are aware of her candidacy implies she has made the short list for the post on her own merits (if gender was a factor in this decision is unknown).


2. The existence of such a letter and a (relatively) wide potential readership could be interpreted negatively by some groups. In my university it is not unusual for even trivial matters, such as the name of a student event, to make national news if it can be construed to be controversial. She may not want to have her name associated with such a potential controversy.


3. If she is hired your letter may be pointed to as evidence of bias in the hiring process even if there was none. In an extreme case it could even lead to a lawsuit. The university would have to be very careful about how to respond to the letter and may decide it is safer to avoid the candidate.


4. Your motivations for writing the letter may be questioned by some groups. Did you write it out of a genuine desire for more female faculty members or was she a friend/connection of yours and you're trying to manipulate the hiring process? (I think your intentions are genuine but others may see things differently)

If you would like to write an open letter advocating for more women academics in your department and highlighting the importance of making STEM more inclusive I think this could be a positive thing. But I don't think you should identify a particular candidate in the letter.

If you want to advocate for a particular candidate you should do so privately to the hiring committee. You could write a letter directly to the chair or discuss it with them in person. I also think this would be more effective.

We are planning to write an open letter to the department in support
of this candidate, citing her qualifications as someone who has worked
to make science a more inclusive place for women and other
underrepresented minorities.

Assuming that you value inclusivity (and most do, although some don't), then supporting her candidacy for her abilities and experience is entirely appropriate.

My main question is is whether it is appropriate for us to
additionally express our desire for a woman faculty member.

Well, that does depend on how willing you are to be called out for sexism.

What is the difference between the following two statements:

1. Hire him because we want a man in the position.




2. Hire her because we want a woman in the position.

Oh, you can get all sorts of justifications, but the heart of it is that specifying the sex of a new hire as a job qualification is sexist. By definition.

Stick with the inclusivity argument. Everybody knows what you mean.

I can see this from two perspectives:

1. The college benefits from recruiting. If the female candidate in question can help with STEM recruiting of females, it will bring more applicants (and money) to the college. The college could also then (later on) boast to be "in top-5 colleges for graduating female STEM grads" or what-not. (E.g., the college I go to boasts about being in the top-5 most diversified colleges in the US due to all the exchange students it brings in.)




2. The college is about cranking out research, not balancing gender gaps. As such, they won't care about what gender someone is, or what value they bring to gender diversification initiatives. They're just looking at everything from a research puppy mill perspective, and will hire whatever workhorse they think can crank out the research.

(As a side note, while researchers get stuck teaching, teaching is not their main job. So, a researcher that can teach well is probably a secondary attribute the college considers, but not as highly as, say, students would prefer. Some colleges don't care about a researcher's teaching ability or past experience. It's all about research with them. All of this really hinges on what the college values: research vs. bragging about what they provide for the students.)