Since the wiki page was categorized Women's/Gender/Queer Studies, we also included sexuality studies jobs whether they were housed within GWFS departments/programs or in stand-alone departments and programs such as LGBT studies, queer studies, and sexuality studies (of which there are few).14 We excluded positions that wanted a gender and/or sexuality specialist in another department (for example, a political science department recruiting a feminist scholar). ...in addition to knowing more about how search committees regard the GWFS PhD, we wonder to what degree GWFS searches are tasked with hiring marginalized scholars to increase the diversity profile of the institution.32 To the extent that this is the case, it not only puts pressure on GWFS to do the diversity work of the institution, thereby letting other programs off the hook for their continued hiring of faculty with identity-based privilege, but it also puts tremendous pressure on the faculty member who secures the position to take on undue burdens of committee and mentorship work.33 We wonder how this phenomenon marks some GWFS PhDs as more attractive to hiring committees or influences a hiring committee's decision to turn to non-GWFS PhD applicants to fill available positions. For those who wish to stay in academia, what are the dominant narratives about finding a tenure-track job in GWFS, how do they circulate, and why do they persist? Since our inquiry was prompted by a desire to test our theories - our stories - about the job market, it would be valuable to return to these stories in the future. ...we see ourselves in conversation with the New Faculty Majority and the NWSA Contingent Faculty Interest Group (incidentally coestablished by Gwendolyn Beetham, who has a PhD in GWFS).35 Like these initiatives, our findings call into question the expansion of PhD programs meant to prepare graduates for jobs that do not exist.