Harvard president suspects genetics make men better at science than women

i read the times story, which said that many females in the audience were not offended, because they understood that he was being speculative. he was asking for challenge, for debate, etc.

i am more worried about the people who refuse to debate the topic.

[QUOTE=snuffy]i read the times story, which said that many females in the audience were not offended, because they understood that he was being speculative. he was asking for challenge, for debate, etc.

i am more worried about the people who refuse to debate the topic.[/QUOTE]

Haven't checked the Times yet. Glad to hear the audience understood he was just raising something to contemplate. I'm seriously curious about this being looked into further. I want to know more, dammit!!! (i.e., where the president got his sources. I really want to know whether or not it's a valid experiment or just smoke coming out of his ass.)

from that BBC article:

this woman is absurd.

[QUOTE=snuffy]from that BBC article:

this woman is absurd.[/QUOTE]

I thought the same thing. Not only that but it's a pretty good bet she's just saying it for show, too. That's even worse.

[QUOTE=Undertow]I thought the same thing. Not only that but it's a pretty good bet she's just saying it for show, too. That's even worse.[/QUOTE]

she's a senoir academic at the most prestigious tech school in the world, and she walks out? why not stay, and tear the guy a new one at the end?

what a coward.

[QUOTE=snuffy]i read the times story, which said that many females in the audience were not offended, because they understood that he was being speculative. he was asking for challenge, for debate, etc.

i am more worried about the people who refuse to debate the topic.[/QUOTE]
what? i haven't even clicked the link and i'm so appalled i might be physically ill! heavens to betsy!

just kidding. no time to click but will try to report back later.

Well, I'm not offended. It's an interesting idea. I think it's possible that men are created in such a way that their minds would pick up science and math easier. I mean, when you think about it, guys are more logical than girls. Tell a guy your probelm and he just wants to tell you how to fix it. Women are born with a nurturing instinct and more emotional and generally more compassionate. This doesn't mean guys can't be or that women can't be logical. But it does seem like guys seem to lean towards one side and girls toward the other. But the funny things is, girls usually score higher on tests and stuff. So how does that fit in?

[QUOTE=dzudzu]Well, I'm not offended. It's an interesting idea. I think it's possible that men are created in such a way that their minds would pick up science and math easier. I mean, when you think about it, guys are more logical than girls. Tell a guy your probelm and he just wants to tell you how to fix it. Women are born with a nurturing instinct and more emotional and generally more compassionate. This doesn't mean guys can't be or that women can't be logical. But it does seem like guys seem to lean towards one side and girls toward the other. But the funny things is, girls usually score higher on tests and stuff. So how does that fit in?[/QUOTE]

Not sure, which is why I'd love to see this studied further. It's definitely possible.

I just thought, I wonder how feminists - the hardcore ones that spell "women" as "womyn," I mean - are going to react if the study shows men actually are genetically better at science...

[QUOTE=Undertow]Not sure, which is why I'd love to see this studied further. It's definitely possible.

I just thought, I wonder how feminists - the hardcore ones that spell "women" as "womyn," I mean - are going to react if the study shows men actually are genetically better at science...[/QUOTE]
I'm going to have to put on my who-cares? pants.

Let the men have their science. I don't want it.

[QUOTE=Vendetta]I'm going to have to put on my who-cares? pants.

Let the men have their science. I don't want it.[/QUOTE]

But debating is so much fuuuuuuuun!!!!!

This is ridiculous. I can understand how he would want to challenge women in the field of science, but this isn't the way to do it.

Seeing as four of my very good friends are all fuckin' scientific geniuses AND female, I'm going to disagree.

[QUOTE=RandomThought]This is ridiculous. I can understand how he would want to challenge women in the field of science, but this isn't the way to do it.

Seeing as four of my very good friends are all fuckin' scientific geniuses AND female, I'm going to disagree.[/QUOTE]

Hmm? In the article, the guy says he doesn't mean females cannot function in a scientific environment at all. He said he got some "evidence" showing males performed better in science-based tests than females and wanted to look into it more. He was making a VERY tentative research query, which can be easily misread as a conclusion, that males are genetically better at science than females. At least, that's my read on it. He's definitely NOT saying to females, "You can't do it. Go home."

Oh, Snuffy (and those interested in another source), here's the NY Times article: [URL=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/18/national/18harvard.html?hp&ex=1106110800&en=bf850d692ab7cba9&ei=5094&partner=homepage]http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/18/national/18harvard.html?hp&ex=1106110800&en=bf850d692ab7cba9&ei=5094&partner=homepage[/URL]

[QUOTE=dzudzu]Well, I'm not offended. It's an interesting idea. I think it's possible that men are created in such a way that their minds would pick up science and math easier. I mean, when you think about it, guys are more logical than girls. Tell a guy your probelm and he just wants to tell you how to fix it. Women are born with a nurturing instinct and more emotional and generally more compassionate. This doesn't mean guys can't be or that women can't be logical. But it does seem like guys seem to lean towards one side and girls toward the other. But the funny things is, girls usually score higher on tests and stuff. So how does that fit in?[/QUOTE]
i pretty much agree with you on this one.
it's called balance. not a perfect one, but it's all we got and should just be accepted.
guys are like this. girls are like that. and in many ways we're the same.
i can't stand how fucking sensitive people are these days, but i'm glad to see how most Cultists are reacting to this.

i still haven't clicked the link. i'm busy, painting and writing poems as i gaze out the window at the daisies god plopped there.

[QUOTE=RandomThought]Seeing as four of my very good friends are all fuckin' scientific geniuses AND female, I'm going to disagree.[/QUOTE]

No offense, but statements like this don't do much to help prove that women are good at logic. Hell, I've got six friends, all male, all scientific geniuses. Doesn't prove a damn thing, except that I've got some nerdy friends.

hmm interesting, well I always scored higher then most guys on the science parts of tests, but I'm probably the exception, I actually never understood what people in general thought was so difficult about science, I mean all you have to do is look at stuff and see what it does. I would actually think that woman would be better at some of the research work because it involves hours of careful exaimination and patience qualities that I find man have a little less of. I think our society scares people away from science in the first place, especially women. In engineering around sophmore year most people hit the I don't know if I can do this phase and most of the guys and encouraged and told that they can do it and most of the girls are asked if they've considered other majors (I was actually told that I would be better off in psychology then engineering because it was more suited to my nature) so I'm not sure if the testing isn't more of a nurture thing then nature.

[QUOTE=mr_hash]hmm interesting, well I always scored higher then most guys on the science parts of tests, but I'm probably the exception, I actually never understood what people in general thought was so difficult about science, I mean all you have to do is look at stuff and see what it does. I would actually think that woman would be better at some of the research work because it involves hours of careful exaimination and patience qualities that I find man have a little less of. I think our society scares people away from science in the first place, especially women. In engineering around sophmore year most people hit the I don't know if I can do this phase and most of the guys and encouraged and told that they can do it and most of the girls are asked if they've considered other majors (I was actually told that I would be better off in psychology then engineering because it was more suited to my nature) so I'm not sure if the testing isn't more of a nurture thing then nature.[/QUOTE]

I like what you said about society scaring people away from science because I think people do that, and maybe they aren't aware of it all the time. Somewhat-related case in point: last year when I interned at a local paper in Lawrence, I wanted to do an article on a neuroinformatics lecture and how KU was benefitting from neuroinformatics. Neuroinformatics is basically different methods of studying the brain for diseases like Alzheimer's. It ended up not getting published because the editor wanted me to dumb down the text of the article, so much so I felt like I had to explain what a human brain in the article. Now doesn't [I]that[/I] kind of reflect a negative light on a town if an editor thinks a (hopefully) simple article would go over everyone's heads, like they never held a scalpel or a beaker once in their lives, and in a college town, no less.

there's another good point, I think the media is too afraid to challenge anyone these days, it happens everywhere in movies and books, newpapers everything is dumbed down and spelled out, like they're afraid that if they make us think we wont buy their product

[QUOTE=Undertow]Not sure, which is why I'd love to see this studied further. It's definitely possible.

I just thought, I wonder how feminists - the hardcore ones that spell "women" as "womyn," I mean - are going to react if the study shows men actually are genetically better at science...[/QUOTE]

I say challenge the feminists and beat them to the punch. If they want to prove something to the world, here's their chance. They should take part in these studies and show how equal to men they really are. No more unfounded claims, bitches! You want respect? [I]Earn [/I] it. [I]Prove [/I] that you deserve it. If not.. then just go talk about your vagina to someone else.

[QUOTE=ireLocus]I say challenge the feminists and beat them to the punch. If they want to prove something to the world, here's their chance. They should take part in these studies and show how equal to men they really are. No more unfounded claims, bitches! You want respect? [I]Earn [/I] it. [I]Prove [/I] that you deserve it. If not.. then just go talk about your vagina to someone else.[/QUOTE]

But the point isn't that women CAN'T do it. The point is that men are more inclined in that direction.

I think what it really boils down to is thenature vs. nurture question. How much of who we are is based on what is ingrained in us as males or females and genes as opposed to how we are brought up?

[QUOTE=dzudzu]But the point isn't that women CAN'T do it. The point is that men are more inclined in that direction.

I think what it really boils down to is thenature vs. nurture question. How much of who we are is based on what is ingrained in us as males or females and genes as opposed to how we are brought up?[/QUOTE]

I know that, you know that... but how many feminists do you know that will be able to see it [I]that [/I] rationally? I mean... thay [I]are [/I] womyn.

[QUOTE=ireLocus]I know that, you know that... but how many feminists do you know that will be able to see it [I]that [/I] rationally? I mean... thay [I]are [/I] womyn.[/QUOTE]

good point. But I'd rather not get those feminazi's riled up or we all have hell to pay.

[QUOTE=dzudzu]good point. But I'd rather not get those feminazi's riled up or we all have hell to pay.[/QUOTE]

femiNAZI's... hehehe... I love to hate 'em.

Update: [URL=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/20/education/20harvard.html]http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/20/education/20harvard.html[/URL]

[QUOTE=Undertow]Update: [URL=http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/20/education/20harvard.html]http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/20/education/20harvard.html[/URL][/QUOTE]

I tried to click the update, but it asks me to register. anyway you could cut and paste a the jist of the article there, undertow? thanks a bunch.

[QUOTE=ireLocus]I tried to click the update, but it asks me to register. anyway you could cut and paste a the jist of the article there, undertow? thanks a bunch.[/QUOTE]

Sheesh, you and Dzudzu are in it against me an New York Times articles, aren't you?

Anyways, here it is:

[QUOTE]Harvard President Apologizes Again for Remarks on Gender
By SARA RIMER

Published: January 20, 2005

With the unabated furor over his recent remarks suggesting that women may not have the same innate abilities in math and science as men, Harvard's president, Lawrence H. Summers, issued a two-page apology to the Harvard community late last night.

"I was wrong to have spoken in a way that has resulted in an unintended signal of discouragement to talented girls and women," Mr. Summers said in a letter that was posted on his Harvard Web site.

"Despite reports to the contrary, I did not say, and I do not believe, that girls are intellectually less able than boys, or that women lack the ability to succeed at the highest levels of science," Mr. Summers wrote.

It was his third public statement in three days about his remarks at a conference on women and minorities in science and engineering last Friday, with each statement becoming stronger and more apologetic. His remarks have dominated the discussion on the Harvard campus and beyond, with female academics, alumni and donors expressing concern over his leadership.

Mr. Summers, an economist and a former treasury secretary, acknowledged that he had been hearing plenty of reaction himself. "I have learned a great deal from all that I have heard in the last few days," he wrote in his statement. "The many compelling e-mails and calls that I have received have made vivid the very real barriers faced by women in pursuing scientific and other academic careers."

He wrote in the letter that he had attended the conference, held by the National Bureau of Economics, "with the intention of reinforcing my strong commitment to the advancement of women in science, and offering some informal observations on possibly fruitful avenues for further research."

However, he added: "Ensuing media reports on my remarks appear to have had quite the opposite effect. I deeply regret the impact of my comments and apologize for not having weighed them more carefully."

Mr. Summers emphasized earlier this week that he had been deliberately provocative in his statements at the conference.

Cynthia Friend, the chairwoman of Harvard's department of chemistry and chemical biology, called Mr. Summers's apology "important" and "welcome."

But Professor Friend, who was for about 20 years the only woman in her department at Harvard, said that the apology did not erase Mr. Summers's remarks at the conference. "The problem is you can't take it back," she said.

Nancy Hopkins, a biology professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was at the conference and was so upset by Mr. Summers's remarks that she walked out. "I applaud what he is saying now," she said last night, responding to Mr. Summers's letter. "But I still remain deeply concerned that someone could say the things he said last Friday."[/QUOTE]

Once again womyn's emotions curb a man's right to state the truth.

[QUOTE=ireLocus]Once again womyn's emotions curb a man's right to state the truth.[/QUOTE]

And nobody wants to touch that, eh?

[QUOTE=ireLocus]Once again womyn's emotions curb a man's right to state the truth.[/QUOTE]

It seems early to call it "truth." I'd say, "...curb a man's right to speak his mind and to be able to challenge himself as well as others."

[QUOTE=ireLocus]And nobody wants to touch that, eh?[/QUOTE]

Just did. Booyah.

Oh ok..... fine. I just wanted to see if I could rile up a couple womyn. but all I got was you.

[QUOTE=ireLocus]Oh ok..... fine. I just wanted to see if I could rile up a couple womyn. but all I got was you. ;)[/QUOTE]

Aw shit. Does that mean I have womyn cooties now?

[QUOTE=Undertow]Aw shit. Does that mean I have womyn cooties now?[/QUOTE]

Oh gawd I hope not.

What I think is that women and men, in in general excel at different sets of skills of which neither set makes one more "intelligent" than the other. When they are combined is when we get the good stuff. Right now I think the unique intellectual skills of women are very much undervalued and underutilized. I can't see how that wouldn't be true for science too.

Just to add to this, I came across an article on the BBC today.
Here it is for your viewing pleasure
[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4202199.stm[/url]
clicky clicky

[QUOTE=Jeebus]What I think is that women and men, in in general excel at different sets of skills of which neither set makes one more "intelligent" than the other. When they are combined is when we get the good stuff. Right now I think the unique intellectual skills of women are very much undervalued and underutilized. I can't see how that wouldn't be true for science too.[/QUOTE]

That's because so many womyn are working these days, and not doing the things they excel at, like dishes and laundry and cooking. What good is a womyn that can't do these things?

oh... just kidding. This is a really good point actually.

[QUOTE=Proton]Just to add to this, I came across an article on the BBC today.
Here it is for your viewing pleasure
[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4202199.stm[/url]
clicky clicky[/QUOTE]

hehehe, don't get me started on womyn drivers...

I personally don't have a problem accepting that something about the way a male brain develops generally makes it easier for him to do math than the way a woman's brain develops (though I don't think we should stereotype, or make public statements which contribute to stereotyping). But then, I am convinced that women's brains have developed in such a way that makes certain intelligence skills easier for them than men too. But in terms of math skill giving the edge to men for doing science, I don't see that.

In any male dominated area of society, those in control are going to elevate to the highest value what they are best at. Look at business. It used to be that strict authoritarianism prevaled as the management standard. Is it just a coincidence that as women became more influential in society, and entered the work place more, management ideals changed (and for the better, by far)? I doubt it.

[QUOTE=Proton]Just to add to this, I came across an article on the BBC today.
Here it is for your viewing pleasure
[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4202199.stm[/url]
clicky clicky[/QUOTE]
that's kinda interesting, I actually have high testosterone levels for a woman so maybe that explains something, though my index and ring fingers are the same length so I don't know. What I do know is that studies show that men are much worse at multitasking then women are, so women would be better suited for the environments that require many things to happen at once. I think that women have a lot of the skills for science and that science would definatly benefit from an increase in the number of women involved.

Again I'm gonna say that everyone, men and women, should be more science literate, people are afraid of science and it's nothing to fear, you don't need to be smart or understand magical things to get it, if I can get this far in engineering anyone can, I'm the biggest ditz ever! I use the word thingy to describe testing equipment!

Oh and another thing I've noticed is that in my engineering society the women participate more then the men do and work together better and therefore wind up assuming more leadership positions and excelling more in the work field after graduation because of the networking and leadership skills that are gained being an officer.

[QUOTE=Proton]Just to add to this, I came across an article on the BBC today.
Here it is for your viewing pleasure
[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4202199.stm[/url]
clicky clicky[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]The research looked at the spatial, numerical and verbal skills of 40 student volunteers. [/QUOTE]

And this is why most studies/reasearch ends up being bullshit. Why do they even bother reporting on findings in such small studies? Its insignifcant and stupid.

Was it this one?

I suspect that science makes men better at genetics.