February 21, 2021

San Francisco Office

Office for Civil Rights
U.S. Department of Education
Via email: OCR.SanFrancisco@ed.gov

Dear San Francisco Office of the ED Office for Civil Rights:

Stanford University pervasively discriminates in favor of women and against men in extreme
violation of Title IX. As OCR knows, I have filed numerous Title IX complaints against other
universities in order to protect civil rights in education. I have not seen any discrimination so
pervasive as at Stanford University.

I am including a Frequently Asked Questions tailored to this complaint and applicable to all
allegations as part of my complaint; it answers many questions you might have.

1. SAGE-S Summer Camp (“Science Accelerating Girls' Engagement in STEM”). This

ongoing program, operated by Stanford’s SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory is exclusively
for girls, excluding boys. The program is an annual weeklong educational camp, to be held next
in Summer 2021 (https://conf.slac.stanford.edu/sage-2020/) (see also
https://conf.slac.stanford.edu/sage-2020/frequently-asked-questions).

In addition to the discriminatory name (“Girls’”), the program’s homepage photos show all girls
and no boys, adding, “We strongly encourage college bound girls [not boys] …”:

This discriminatory program has run each year since 2018 (https://conf.slac.stanford.edu/sage-
2020/about/our-story). My allegation concerns the entire annual program series besides any
particular event.

The following University staff are listed as agents of the discriminatory series:
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

Diana Gamzina and Giulia Lanza - Principal Investigators

Jen Arthur, Rebecca Armenta, Stefan Moeller, Jane Shtalenkova, Analisa Tan, Dominique White,
Molly Glover, Machelle Vieux

Loy Oppus-Moe, SAGE Program Coordinator

(https://conf.slac.stanford.edu/sage-2020/about/our-story)

Additionally, please note that SAGE-S is distinct from the University’s Stanford Advancing
Gender Equity (SAGE) Network, which provides a mechanism for systemic, pervasive sex
discrimination by Stanford University, as further detailed in this complaint: “The SAGE Network
provides a connection for the leaders of all interested women- and/or gender-related
initiatives, projects, and organizations at Stanford to share information, plans, and explore potential
collaborations. A Stanford email list (SAGE-network) supports communications among these
individuals” (https://wise.stanford.edu/get-involved/faculty-and-staff-networks).

2. Girls Teaching Girls to Code. In addition to the discriminatory name, this education
program, which appears to be operated by Stanford’s Office of STEM Outreach, is exclusively
for girls and Stanford women, excluding boys and Stanford men, as policy and practice:

Girls Teaching Girls to Code is a program where Stanford women teach and inspire Bay
Area high school girls to explore Computer Science and Engineering. Students learn coding
basics, build exciting projects, and develop strong relationships with mentors in the field.
Our annual Code Camp is our largest event, introducing 200 high school girls to computer
science with the help of 45 inspirational Stanford mentors. We also host several smaller
events throughout the year, including workshops, puzzle hunts, and company tours, to
encourage continued engagement and to help our students further explore their passions.
(https://oso.stanford.edu/programs/209-girls-teaching-girls-to-code)

Stanford’s program webpage shows a contact person with a Stanford email address:
joanne.jang@stanford.edu.

This program partners with UC Berkeley (https://www.girlsteachinggirlstocode.org/teams.html),

but for the sake of simplicity, this allegation does not complain about UC Berkeley’s
discrimination at this time. This website states:

At Girls Teaching Girls to Code (GTC), we empower college girls pursuing Computer
Science and Engineering to connect with local high school girls and inspire them through
mentorship and applied projects.

Over the years, we've introduced over 1,800 high school girls (and counting!) [but zero high
school boys] to the world of Computer Science and Engineering. 

This program is ongoing: “check back in 2021 for more events”

(https://www.girlsteachinggirlstocode.org/events.html).

This allegation concerns the entire program besides any particular event.
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

3. Girl Code @Stanford. This ongoing discriminatory program, operated by Stanford’s

Computer Science department, is exclusively for girls and excludes boys. In addition to the
discriminatory name, this annual education program explains that “Over the course of two
weeks, students will get to experience computer science firsthand through an introduction to
computer programming, tours of local tech companies and research labs, and visits from
leading academics and industry professionals” (https://cs.stanford.edu/girl-code-stanford).

This allegation concerns the entire program series besides any particular event in the series.
Please note that the program advertises itself as an annual series: “this year's iteration …”

The program brochure (https://cs.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Girl%20Code.pdf) shows a logo

of a girl and a photo of all girls and no boys:

The program brochure adds that the program is for girls (“for the next generation of leading
women”):
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

Stanford staff member Keith Schwarz is listed as contact person (https://cs.stanford.edu/girl-

code-stanford/personnel) at htiek@cs.stanford.edu.

Please note OCR’s January 14, 2021, “Questions and Answers” document (“Q&A”): an
institution may not “rely on national statistics as evidence of limited participation, but must
instead clearly articulate why the particular sex-based scholarship or program was necessary to
overcome the conditions in its own education program or activity which resulted in limited
participation therein” (https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/qa-single-sex-
20210114.pdf).

Yet, that is at the core of how the University states its choice to discriminate on the basis of sex:

4. Stanford’s VMware Women's Leadership Innovation Lab operates a discriminatory program

exclusively for girls and not boys, Seeds of Change (https://oso.stanford.edu/programs/309-
seeds-of-change; Stanford contact listed as kpedersen@stanford.edu).

This ongoing program also relies on national statistics to justify its unlawful discrimination. The
program “provides innovative training and support to advance women in STEM as they
transition through high school and college to successful technology careers. Made possible by a
three-year $1.5M gift from information technology leader VMware, the program addresses the
glaring underrepresentation of women in computer science and engineering. … To address the
problem, Seeds of Change partners Stanford undergraduates in technology disciplines with high
school students interested in advancing the participation of women and girls in STEM, and
provides an integrated curriculum of mentoring, training and skills development. The program’s
goal is to establish and retain young women in technology fields, and create future women
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

STEM leaders. Seeds of Change launched in September 2017 with 20 Stanford undergraduates
and 80-100 students in grades 9 through 12.”

The program website is at https://womensleadership.stanford.edu/seedsofchange/about. Photos

throughout the website show all female students and no males. The introductory video at
https://womensleadership.stanford.edu/seedsofchange repeats the points about
underrepresentation of women and shows female characters needing help.

A reasonable male would understand he is not welcome on an equitable basis with females,
either as Stanford participants or as high school participants, if he is welcome at all. A
reasonable male would not click through to find the unbelievable statement that “all genders”
are welcome.

OCR normally requires a program with a discriminatory name (and as here, clearly
discriminatory language about mission, policy, and practice) to effectively communicate
nondiscrimination if it does not in fact discriminate. This program fails to save itself from
violating Title IX by hiding a nondiscrimination statement deep in its website, which clearly
contradicts all other advertising about the program.

5. Certain programs of Stanford SWE (Society of Women Engineers), a recognized

organization at Stanford, providing education activities for girls and not boys, as well as the
organization itself, which fails to effectively communicate nondiscrimination:

a) Girls Engineering the Future, advertised as exclusively for “high school girls”
(https://www.facebook.com/stanfordswe; held on Nov. 7, 2020):
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

b) Mentorship Program: a “yearlong” ongoing program in which “we are running a mentorship
program in which we pair high school girls with SWE members for a quarter to work on a hands-
on engineering project” (https://swe.stanford.edu/outreach.html).

c) TechBridge Workshops: an ongoing program in which “SWE partners with Techbridge, a

local organization dedicated to building girls’ enthusiasm for science and technology, to bring
20-40 middle school girls on campus each year. SWE volunteers take them on a tour of campus
and into a dorm so they can see what college life is like. The girls also have an opportunity to
tour a lab to get a more concrete idea of what engineers do”
(https://swe.stanford.edu/outreach.html).

d) “Internal” activities of Stanford SWE, photos of which appear to show all women and no
men: https://swe.stanford.edu/internal.html. Stanford SWE fails to effectively communicate
nondiscrimination in its own internal programs, not just because of its name but also because of
its programming and advertising, if it indeed does not exclude or limit Stanford males’
participation.
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

6. The Women in STEM program and activities operated by Stanford’s Women’s Community
Center (https://wcc.stanford.edu/women-in-stem). This program and its activities fail to
effectively communicate nondiscrimination. See its events at
https://femtastic.wordpress.com/category/women-in-stem/ -- a reasonable male would
understand his is limited or excluded in his participation in the Women in STEM program and
activities (such as the “#IamAWomanInSTEM” event in 2016, provided as an example of
ongoing discriminatory advertising rather than as an allegation against this past program).

The program’s Women in STEM Annual Symposium is an ongoing series “designed to empower
women in the STEM majors … for women in STEM” (https://wcc.stanford.edu/women-in-stem).

The program also runs an ongoing “year-long Women in STEM mentoring program, launched in
the 2017-18 academic year, which pairs undergraduate and graduate women in STEM fields for
long-term mentoring relationships” (https://wcc.stanford.edu/women-in-stem).

7. Although Stanford Women in Technology appears not to discriminate on the basis of sex in
membership (https://itcommunity.stanford.edu/programs/ideal-it/wit), it discriminates against
males in its activities, which are often for females but which exclude or limit participation by
males. This is a registered organization to which Stanford provides significant support.

 The Stanford WIT/Year Up Mentoring Program “is a partnership between Stanford

WIT and the Year Up Internship Program in order to accomplish WIT’s objectives of
addressing the gender gap in technology.” A reasonable male would understand he is
not welcome on an equal basis with females.
https://itcommunity.stanford.edu/programs/ideal-it/wit/service-
outreach/yearupmentoringprogram
“University IT (UIT) coordinates this partnership on behalf of the university.”
https://itcommunity.stanford.edu/programs/ideal-it/year-up
 Its first focus area is to “Build and empower the next generation of women in
technology.” https://itcommunity.stanford.edu/programs/ideal-it/wit
 The March 22, 2021, #IamRemarkable Workshop is for the benefit of “women and
underrepresented groups” (not a man if he is not in an underrepresented group, though
“allies” are allowed). https://itcommunity.stanford.edu/programs/ideal-it/wit/meetings
 The program’s Service and Outreach policy is in part to “Build and empower the next
generation of women in technology.”
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1KmBXmWW8X-
loORBYy6jShDeSC0_qbmK3WgUdy3RjHnE/edit#slide=id.g6354f3a0bd_0_0

8. A distinct group called Stanford Women in Tech (https://www.stanfordwit.tech/), a

discriminatory women’s group officially recognized by Stanford, states its discriminatory
purpose, in addition to its discriminatory name:

Our goal is to create a community that supports and connects Stanford Women [boldface
in original] working in different fields of technology: social media, software, IT, Internet,
consumer goods, telecomm, clean tech, biotech, gaming, entrepreneurship, non-profit and
more. …

ABOUT US
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

Providing a way for Stanford Women to get advice, pursue career opportunities, recruit great
talent, share knowledge, and network among each other.

The group further acknowledges: “Our group was born as part of the Stanford Women Initiative.
Our goal is to support, empower and provide Stanford alumnae with robust career resources,
and a diverse professional network to discover, navigate and advance their desired career
paths.” https://www.stanfordwit.tech/stanford-wit

It is clear to a reasonable male that he is not welcomed on an equal or equitable basis, and
Stanford appears to offer no “Stanford Men in Tech” equivalent for male alumni.

9. In support of the overall, general allegation of pervasive sex discrimination at Stanford, I add:

“The department of Radiation Oncology continues to recognize gender disparities and plans to create a
program dedicated to facilitating networking events for women faculty and trainees. Our program will
consist of bi-annual events aimed to connect women faculty, residents, and trainees professionally and
personally, and seeks to foster role model relationships.”
(https://med.stanford.edu/facultydiversity/faculty-community/networks/OFDD-community-
support-initiative.html; emph. added).

It is unclear if the department of Radiation Oncology has proceeded with its discriminatory
intent. This allegation also concerns any actions that have already been taken to implement the
planned discriminatory activities of this department.

10. (a) Stanford Medicine recognizes and substantially supports MAVENS (Mentoring to
AdVance WomEN in Science), whose mission is to “Our mission is to inspire, empower, and
support women in academic medicine throughout their career progression in order to create an
integrated community of scientists.” While the program may be open to all mentors without
discrimination on the basis of sex, its educational and other activities clearly do discriminate on
the basis of sex, as its name and mission clearly communicate
(http://med.stanford.edu/cvi/education/mavens.html).

(b) Stanford Medicine’s GME Diversity Committee operates the GME Women in Medicine
Leadership Council (WIM). Although activities are open to “women trainees, and those who
support them,” the service activities of the program are for the benefit of women rather than men
(https://med.stanford.edu/gme/wim.html). A reasonable male understands that despite the
saving clause of nondiscrimination, women are preferred to men by policy and practice (in
addition to the discriminatory name) in this group. The group photo shows all women and no
men.

(c) Stanford Medicine offers opportunities to women it does not offer men, and does not appear
to use a pooled-award scheme that would satisfy Title IX, through the McCormick programs
(https://med.stanford.edu/facultydiversity/faculty-development/mccormick-distinguished-lecture-
series/katharine-d-mccormick.html):

McCormick Faculty Awards:  These awards provide research/project funding to junior

faculty women [not men] for career advancement, or to junior faculty men or women who
support the advancement of women in medicine through research. Fellows are awarded up
to $30,000 per year for two years, for stipend support only, plus an optional travel
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

supplement of $1,000 (travel supplement may be changed to fellowship funding at the end
of the fellowship).

McCormick Travel Funds: These funds are used to support selected women [not men] to
attend external professional development seminars. Please find a list of qualifying external
professional development seminars.

McCormick Lectureship: This lectureship series Katharine McCormick’s lifelong support of

women’s rights. Each year a distinguished woman scientist is invited to speak to the
Stanford community about her work.

11. Stanford provides substantial support to a number of additional officially recognized Stanford
organizations that discriminate on the basis of sex. (For the sake of simplicity I do not at this
point include Title VI allegations.) Simply being open to “all genders” does not save such
programs when their activities clearly serve women as a preference, by policy and by practice,
to the limitation of men. A reasonable male understands he is not served equitably by these
organizations and their activities.

 The Women of Color Collective (WoCC) “is a student-led initiative that promotes visibility,
collaboration, and community for gender marginalized scholars of color” (Graduate School of
Education, https://edfund.stanford.edu/winner/women-color-collective-wocc-1).
 Womxn of Color in Engineering (WOCE):

WOCE (pronounced “woke”) is a new initiative that seeks to create opportunities to

gather Womxn* of Color graduate students in the School of Engineering by
supporting year-long student-led programmatic efforts and collaborations across
campus. Anyone of any gender and from all backgrounds who support these goals
is welcome to attend events and join the group. 

* "womxn” is an inclusive feminist term that encompasses people that identify as:
female, femme, non-conforming, non-binary, and/or trans-people [but not men with
a male gender identity]
https://engineering.stanford.edu/students-academics/equity-and-inclusion-
initiatives/graduate-programs/womxn-color-engineering-woce

 Stanford Womxn in Law “is a tight-knit community of womxn interested in pursuing law after
college. In addition to weekly legal case discussions, we also hold panels on topics ranging from
the finances of law school to LSAT preparation with SLS students, professors, and other
professionals in the field.” It received $10,085 from Stanford for this academic year’s events
(https://assu.stanford.edu/stanford-womxn-law).
 Stanford Women in Business (SWIB) “is Stanford's premier undergraduate pre-professional
community for women [not men]. SWIB provides business resources, hosts educational events,
and maintains a strong network of professional women [not men].” This group received more
than $10,000 from Stanford for this academic year’s activities (https://assu.stanford.edu/stanford-
women-business).
 Smart Women Securities (SWS) “is a national organization geared towards educating women
[not men] in finance. We bring in local profession[al]s to lead seminars and conversations about
personal finance and teach specific skills necessary for investing.” This group received more than
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

$7,500 from Stanford for this academic year’s activities (https://assu.stanford.edu/stanford-smart-

women-securities).
 The Womxn’s Coalition, among other things, “facilitates a group dedicated to womxn's
empowerment.” A reasonable man (of male gender identity) will understand he is not welcomed
on an equal or equitable basis. This group received more than $7,000 from Stanford for this
academic year’s activities (https://assu.stanford.edu/womxns-coalition).
 Womxn in Electrical Engineering (see https://ee.stanford.edu/event/student/womxn-electrical-
engineering-hosts-prof-trippel-lunch-qa; was Women in Electrical Engineering): “Aims to
provide a sense of community for women students in EE at Stanford. The group organizes Big
Sister/Little Sister mentoring pairs, lunch meetings, special seminars, and social and outreach
events to address women-specific issues and provide a place for networking among current
graduate women and EE alumnae” (https://ee.stanford.edu/student-resources/student-
organizations).
Further, the group acknowledges that it has not just a mission of helping women, but this is its
discriminatory policy and practice: “Stanford’s Women in Electrical Engineering (WEE) student
group was founded in 2004 and has grown in size and engagement throughout the years. The
organization fosters a sense of community among female EE students through programming that
includes mentoring, community service, outreach, and social events. In addition, WEE provides
opportunities for professional development and networking across all of the engineering
disciplines.” Although the organization includes a saving-clause disclaimer that “Anyone of any
gender who supports these goals is welcome to attend events and join the group,” the actual
services provided are for females and not males (https://www.wee.stanford.edu/), discriminating
on the basis of sex. Indeed, the many photos on the group homepage appear to show all females
and no males.
 “Since June 2001, Stanford has sponsored mentoring groups for PhD students and postdoctoral
scholars promoting the success of women [not men] in science and engineering (WISE). For the
past several years, a similar program has also been available for PhD students and postdocs to
promote the success of women in the social sciences and the humanities (WISSH)”
(https://vpge.stanford.edu/events/programs/wise-and-wissh-groups ).
 “The Mechanical Engineering Women’s Group aims to to [sic] foster a sense of community and
environment of support among all graduate women in engineering at Stanford. The club hosts
events that address topics of interest to women engineers.”
https://engineering.stanford.edu/students-academics/support-and-resources/student-organizations
(see also https://me.stanford.edu/our-culture/student-organizations )
 Many additional registered student organizations are advertised with the discriminatory name
“Women” (some appear to have later changed the word to “Womxn”) at
https://docs.google.com/document/d/17eCKvaDIgKk6ZzhduXqET0a2YZFyK6Z9acRgxzA_DOk
/edit, and they and Stanford fail to effectively communicate nondiscrimination. “Saving clauses”
of nondiscrimination do not save these organizations from their advertising, policy, and activities
of being for women (or having a preference for women) to the exclusion or limitation of men, at
the least in their services to women, if not also effectively in access to activities and membership.
 Stanford Womxn in Design (SWID) does not effectively communicate nondiscrimination. For
instance, it operates a SWID Fellows Program, advertising it in a discriminatory way: “Fellows
are welcomed into a community of womxn and gender non-conforming students [but not men
who are gender-conforming] who are interested in pursuing design-related careers”
(https://stanfordwomenindesign.com/programs). Its many Leadership Team members are all
women (https://stanfordwomenindesign.com/ourteam).
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

 Stanford Faculty Women’s Forum, while claiming to be open to all faculty members, serves
women to the exclusion or limitation of men (https://facultydevelopment.stanford.edu/diversity-
engagement/faculty-networks/faculty-womens-forum/about-stanford-faculty-womens-forum-
fwf). Simply allowing male faculty members to also serve women in a discriminatory way does
not save the organization from discriminating against men.
 I merely note, without adding a Title VI allegation at this time, the following organizations
(https://engineering.stanford.edu/students-academics/equity-and-inclusion-initiatives/graduate-
programs/student-societies), while it appears that oSTEM may also violate Title IX by not
effectively communicating nondiscrimination and appearing to discriminate in its provision of
activities.
 The Society of Black Scientists and Engineers (SBSE)
The mission of SBSE, a chapter of the National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE), is to increase the
number of culturally responsible Black scientists and engineers who excel academically, succeed
professionally, and positively impact the community!
 The American Indian Science and Engineering Society (AISES)
The Stanford AISES chapter encourages American Indian and Alaska Native students to enter the
world of science and engineering while preserving their cultural heritages. The chapter works to
decrease isolation, increase self-esteem, and support the academic achievement of community
members through informal and formal practices.
 The Stanford Society of Latinx Engineers (SOLE)
We believe the world needs not just innovative engineers, but also ones who value familia,
professionalism, outreach, and academics. SOLE is a chapter of SHPE-MAES and HENAAC.
 Black Engineering Graduate Student Association (BEGSA)
The mission of BEGSA is to build a sense of community among the Black Stanford Engineering
community. The group facilitates students’ professional development and academic success by
providing forums for engagement, discussion, and collective learning.
 Latin@ Engineering Graduate Student Organization (LEGOS)
LEGOS is an organization oriented toward the success of Latin@s pursuing graduate studies in
engineering at Stanford.
 Stanford Native American Graduate Students (SNAGS)
SNAGS is a part of the Native American Cultural Center (NACC), encouraging students to engage
with resources and events associated with a vibrant Indigenous community in the surrounding Bay
Area.

[…]
 Out in Science, Technology, Engineering & Mathematics (oSTEM)
A national student society dedicated to increasing the participation of queer people in disciplines
related to science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM). 

12. Student Affairs at Stanford operates housing exclusively for non-sorority females without
offering equitable housing for non-fraternity males. Roth “is the only all-female, non-Greek
house on campus. Womxn from all around campus draw into Roth, from athletes to unhoused
sorority members to upperclassmen, unified by their desire for a well located house on the
upper row and really good food.” https://resed.stanford.edu/residences/find-house/roth

Allegations 13-20 concern Stanford’s Graduate School of Business (GSB). I allege pervasive
discrimination against men at GSB.

13. Stanford’s Graduate School of Business (GSB) operates the High-Potential Women
Leaders Program advertised at women (beyond the discriminatory name): “As a high-potential
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

woman leader preparing to take on more responsibilities …”

(https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/exec-ed/programs/high-potential-women-leaders-program). The
saving clause at the bottom of the page professing nondiscrimination does not save this
program from clearly communicating to men that they are not welcomed on an equal or
equitable basis in this program.

14. GSB also offers ongoing Women’s Circles for alumnae but no “Men’s Circles” or equitable
opportunity for male alumni: https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/alumni/communities/womens-
programs/womens-circles; see also https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/experience/news-
history/womens-circles-go-virtual).

Stanford pervasively offers these discriminatory activities in more than 120 locations worldwide.
https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/alumni/communities/womens-programs/womens-circles

15. GSB also recognizes Women in Management, which does not effectively communicate
nondiscrimination if it does not, in fact discriminate. Stanford acknowledges that this is an
“identity group” (https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/programs/mba/student-life/diversity/women).

16. GSB also pervasively hosts discriminatory Women’s Coffee Chats “in over 40 cities”
(https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/programs/mba/student-life/diversity/women).

17. GSB also acknowledges that “it is our priority to provide support to all of our alumnae
[seemingly in preference to male alumni]”
(https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/alumni/communities/womens-programs). Indeed, male alumni will
not find equitable opportunities such as:

 GSB Alumni Career Services “offer programs and resources specifically designed to
support alumnae who are re-entering the workforce after a career break.”
 “Be Inspired by GSB Alumnae Voices”: “Designed from real stories and perspectives of
diverse GSB alumnae, these video vignettes are structured to spark personal reflection
around one’s own values and decision-making process in the workplace.
 The Stanford Women on Boards Initiative “is committed to increasing the representation
of Stanford alumnae on corporate and fiduciary boards, increasing Stanford women’s
readiness for board service; and further developing the capabilities and influence of
Stanford women already on boards.”
 “Planning a women’s event during your reunion is a great way to bring women together,
strengthen personal and professional connections within your class, and identify
resources for navigating work/life balance.”

18. GSB also operates an annual Early Career Women in Finance Conference (https://gsb-
sites.stanford.edu/ecwfc/), which is obviously for early career women in finance and not simply
an intellectual exercise about such women. The 15th iteration of this conference was held in
June 2020. This allegation concerns the overall, ongoing conference series besides any
particular event in the series.

19. GSB also exclusively offers scholarships to women for the Seed Transformation Program,
which begins in September 2021: “Limited scholarships for women CEO or founders and social
entrepreneurs are available” (https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/seed/transformation-program).
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

20. GSB also operates the Executive Program in Women’s Leadership

(https://assu.stanford.edu/stanford-women-business). Its profession of nondiscrimination at the
bottom of the webpage (requiring an extra click after reading about how the program is for
women, under Who Should Attend) would not persuade a reasonable male against the clear
conclusion that this program exists for women in preference to men. See also
https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/exec-ed/programs/executive-program-womens-
leadership/participant-profile:

21. Stanford’s Women Faculty Networking Luncheon(s) are an ongoing series at Stanford
that fail to effectively communicate nondiscrimination, if they in fact to not, despite the
discriminatory name, discriminate on the basis of sex:
https://med.stanford.edu/facultydiversity/events.html.

22. Since approximately the year 2000, Stanford has operated women-preference programs
under the heading of Gabilan Funds (https://news.stanford.edu/pr/00/anonymousgift55.html):

 Women-preferred Stanford Graduate Fellowships in Science and Engineering – which

might satisfy Title IX if the women-preference fellowships are part of a pooled-funding
program that satisfies Title IX, though no such mention is made on the cited webpage.
 The Gabilan Provost's Discretionary Fund “with a preference for women and with
special attention to engineering and the sciences. The endowment will generate about
$400,000 a year and is aimed at attracting and retaining highly sought-after faculty.”
(“This gift will certainly enhance our efforts to hire outstanding senior women faculty.”)
(See also https://facultydevelopment.stanford.edu/recruitment/recruitment-programs.)
 The Gabilan Undergraduate Engineering Diversity Program Fund in the School of
Engineering, “with a preference for programs that prepare, encourage and support
women as they pursue their education leading to careers in engineering.”

23. Stanford’s Faculty Incentive Fund explicitly provides a funding preference to women
candidates for faculty positions, over equally qualified men in the same hiring pool
(https://facultydevelopment.stanford.edu/recruitment/recruitment-programs). Stanford also
provides up to $500 to its faculty members and academic departments to bring potential
students and faculty members to Stanford for campus visits, providing the funds for women but
not similarly situated men (https://vpge.stanford.edu/fellowships-funding/recruitment-support). If
OCR does not have jurisdiction over these discriminatory practices, please let me know.
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

24. SWIMM: Stanford Women in Math Mentoring “is a mentoring program that aims to reduce
the gender gap in mathematics. Undergraduates interested in math and computational science
are paired with graduate student mentors from math, statistics, and ICME”
(https://swimm.stanford.edu/). From this webpage it is unclear whether this is a registered
student organization or a direct program of Stanford. At the very least, the program does not
effectively communicate nondiscrimination: The nondiscrimination statement at the bottom of
the webpage does not satisfy a reasonable male that he is equally or equitably welcome to be
mentored in math (he likely would not even read that far down the page, after reading the
organization’s discriminatory name and mission).

25. WiMSCE: Women in Mathematics, Statistics, and Computational Engineering

“(pronounced like ‘whimsy’) is a student and faculty group at Stanford University established with the
aim of retaining graduate women [not men] in higher education by providing opportunities to interact
with their [i.e., women’s] peers and mentors across the Institute for Computational and Mathematical
Engineering (ICME), Mathematics, Statistics and Management Science and Engineering (MS&E)
departments. WiMSCE aims to provide members with knowledge and guidance pertaining to professional
opportunities and personal challenges faced both during and after graduate school.”
https://wimsce.stanford.edu/about

The group’s Facebook page, which appears not to have been updated since 2019, but which is still
advertised at https://wimsce.stanford.edu/, makes it clear that the group historically and currently
excludes men: “We are a group of women graduate students and postdocs”
(https://www.facebook.com/wimsce/).

26. Physics Undergraduate Women and Gender Minorities at Stanford (PUWMAS) “is
Stanford's first student group entirely dedicated to undergraduate women and gender minorities [no men
who have male gender identity] interested in Physics.” https://physics.stanford.edu/about/equity-and-
inclusion/resources

27. Stanford Women in Politics is a recognized student organization at Stanford Law School
that discriminates on the basis of sex (https://law.stanford.edu/women-in-politics/). In addition to
its name, it explicitly serves women in its activities: “is an organization dedicated to developing a
community of women interested in any sort of political, policy, or legal field”
(https://www.stanfordwomeninpolitics.com/our-mission). Although membership and participation may be
open to all (if a male were to believe the nondiscrimination disclaimer), the program clearly engages in
activities with a preference for women, as any reasonable male would perceive.

28. Although Stanford’s ongoing series of Women Leaders in Global Health Conference(s), operated
and advertised by its Center for Innovation in Global Health, claims to be open without discrimination on
the basis of sex, it clearly operates for the benefit of women in preference to men. In addition, the
conferences exclude men as conference chairs: “Each conference is chaired by a woman”
(https://globalhealth.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Request-LOI-_2021_WLGH-conf.pdf).

29. Stanford’s chemistry department offers senior women scholars an opportunity that the department
does not offer to senior men, through its Distinguished Women in Science Seminar (DWIS) Series
(https://wise.stanford.edu/get-involved/academic-and-research-programs). It is unclear when the next
such event will occur. This allegation concerns the advertised ongoing series besides any particular past
event.
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

30. Stanford provides six Cap and Gown scholarships exclusively for women that do not appear to be
part of a pooled scholarship program that would satisfy Title IX
(https://capandgown.stanford.edu/scholarships/). Even if these scholarships are part of a pooled program,
recipients also receive additional benefits not available to similarly situated males:
 The Cap and Gown Centennial Scholarship Fund (KASOO)
 The Cap and Gown Scholarship Fund (KASOP)
 The Sandra Day O’Connor Cap and Gown Scholarship Fund (KAWBP)
 The Margaret C. Barr Cap and Gown Scholarship Fund (KAVOG)
 The Rosamond Clarke Bacon Cap and Gown Scholarship (KAVNT)
 The Bettye Luhnow Bailey Cap and Gown Scholarship (KAAGF)
[…] All six Cap and Gown scholarships are given to undergraduate women by Stanford
University’s Office of Financial Aid. We are happy that over 150 women students [and
zero men] have benefited from this long tradition. We invite Cap and Gown
scholarship recipients to participate in various events with our Alumnae Board
and actives. [emphasis added]

31. Stanford’s Department of Music provides a Diversity in Computer Music Scholarship exclusively
for “students from underrepresented backgrounds in the field of electronic and computer music, including
women, ethnic minorities, gender minorities, and 1st-generation students.” While all women are eligible,
only men who fit one of the other categories are eligible, in violation of Title IX. For the sake of
simplicity I do not allege a Title VI violation at this time. The scholarship provides full tuition to
Stanford’s SuperCollider educational workshop (https://ccrma.stanford.edu/diversity-in-computer-music-
supercollider-scholarship). This allegation refers to the overall scholarship program, which is ongoing,
besides any particular year’s scholarship.

32. The Department of Music also provides

(a) Women in Music and Gaming Scholarship exclusively for females:

Up to 2 (two) women (between ages 16-36) will be selected to attend the Designing Musical
Games::Gaming Musical Design Summer Workshop at CCRMA [the department’s Center for
Computer Research in Music and Acoustics] with full tuition scholarship. A certificate will be given
to each participant upon successful completion of the workshop.

The stated goal of the scholarship is to “Promote the engagement of young women [not men] in
the fields of game design and development and interactive electronic and computer music”
(https://ccrma.stanford.edu/blogs/rob/women-in-music-and-gaming-summer-workshop-
scholarship).

(b) Women in Computer Music Scholarship for Programming Max/MSP exclusively for
females (https://ccrma.stanford.edu/women-in-computer-music-max-workshop-scholarship):

GOAL:
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

Promote the engagement of women in the field of electronic and computer music.

HOW IT WORKS:

Up to 2 (two) women will be selected to attend each of CCRMA's Max/MSP/Jitter workshops

(Part 1 "Safe and Friendly Introduction to Max" and Part 2 "Really Understanding Max") with
full tuition scholarship.  You may apply for a scholarship for either or both weeks.

33. Student Affairs at the University advertises a discriminatory external scholarship in violation of Title
IX at https://elcentro.stanford.edu/resources/scholarships:

SPWLA's Public Service Summer Fellowship 

$2500 award to support a student public service work.
Must be a female undergraduate to qualify
If applying, send a resume and cover letter to SPWLA Fellowship Committee c/o Ann
Thannopavarn 

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

1. Please state any relationship to the institution: None (nor is any required to proceed).
2. Are you aware of any specific males who wanted/attempted access but were denied,
including being allowed to register or participate? No (nor is any required for OCR to
proceed).
3. Do you or anyone else you know (additional witnesses) have any personal knowledge
regarding these allegations? I have personal knowledge of the cited webpages, which
involve direct evidence of the actual practices of the institution, as well as having personally
experienced the discriminatory advertising and marketing of the discriminatory programs in
those webpages. The webpages were viewed by me via the internet. I do not know of any
additional witnesses with any additional knowledge regarding the allegations.
4. Are you alleging that the language used on the institution’s website is discriminatory
against men and/or boys? In Teamsters v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court noted
that discrimination is not limited to direct signs that people will see (such as “women only”)
but can include “actual practices” such as how the opportunity is publicized and “recruitment
techniques.” I allege the programs, activities, and scholarship offers and advertisements
violate Title IX. This includes website language. (This is consistent with OCR’s historic
enforcement of Title IX.) I specifically allege that the advertising of the complained-of
programs is discriminatory and that this advertising is clear evidence of discriminatory
policies and practices by the institution. A reasonable male student would understand, from
the cited webpages, that he is being discriminated against on the basis of sex. Additionally,
the victim would not find substantially similar, equitable opportunity that is coed or single-
sex.
5. Have you filed a complaint with the institution? No.
6. Do you know which of the institution’s staff have been involved? If a staff member is
mentioned on a cited webpage, that is all the information I have about said staff member. I
have no information about any other.
San Francisco Office
Office for Civil Rights
February 21, 2021

Thank you for your attention. The University’s address is 450 Serra Mall, Palo Alto, CA 94305-
2004.
Sincerely,

/s/
Adam Kissel
2308 Washington Street East
Charleston, WV 25311
(302) 668-8219
adamkissel@gmail.com (email correspondence preferred)