I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
guckert!
Women tend to live longer than men. I think that says a lot.
Zero'th?
(sorry C programmer writing).
Didn't Greg Palast speculate that Larry Summers was really a collective of space aliens sent to destroy our planet for when the rest of the aliens take over?
I think he may be on to something.
The guy does have a Kodos-like style about him ...
Women tend to live longer than men. I think that says a lot.
watertiger
Do tell, watertiger..?
But-but-but...
In two hundred-plus years of history we've elected at least one woman president, right?
Genetic differences between men and women DOES NOT MEAN that I lack a brain because I was born without male genitalia.
That's what these right wing fucks believe.
I would just like to say that women have it SO over men.
Can I get laid now?
Holden:
The one in office now isn't even a MAN!
how they're treated in the classroom, to their treatment by graduate school advisors, hiring, evaluation, promotion, etc... is just blind. And, no, I'm not saying it's because there are a million extreme male misogynists running around - a lot of it is subtle and some of it even comes from other women - but, added all up it amounts to a pretty big additional hurdle for women to climb.
Thank you for noticing.
Amen,
Not to say too much about Attaturk's secret life, but he too is familiar with the nitty gritty of discrimination. It is as pervasive as any form of prejudice in the workplace.
I'd like to say that anyone who can't see that there is substantial discrimination that adversely affects women at all levels... is just blind.
Unless your initials are CR and you fantasize about being married to an alcoholic idiot, of course. Then your future is assured.
A few years ago my mother applied to Harvard to get her doctorate in education and was told she was too old. She ended up at Columbia and is now listed in Who's Who in American Education.
One more thing, as someone who has spent a decent amount of time in academia, I'd like to say that anyone who can't see that there is substantial discrimination that adversely affects women at all levels - how they're treated in the classroom, to their treatment by graduate school advisors, hiring, evaluation, promotion, etc... is just blind.
It appears to me that, within academia, whether or not this is true, and certainly the degree to which it is true, is highly dependent on the field and probably the particular institution as well.
I don't understand: there is obviously a wide range of opinion among the left as to whether or not Summer's remarks have been misinterpreted. Are you saying that that entire spectrum of people are now trolls?
I mean, we get things like this: "Genetic differences between men and women DOES NOT MEAN that I lack a brain because I was born without male genitalia."
Is that what Summers said? Anywhere?
"I'd like to say that anyone who can't see that there is substantial discrimination that adversely affects women at all levels... is blind"
So, since Summers says that there is still discrimination, he's not blind?
White heterosexual men suck especially Christian ones.
Unless your initials are CR and you fantasize about being married to an alcoholic idiot, of course. Then your future is assured. - flory
CR? Who's CR? Am I slow this afternoon?
And its not just academia. I've had my own business for the last 15 years because I got sick and tired of trying to play the old boys games. Came a time when I was just too old and tired to give a shit anymore.
And there sure as hell wasn't anything genetically inferior about my abilities.
I quite agree with Atrios about this. When i first read about the flap I thought that the reaction to Summers'remarks was a bit extreme. Then, yesterday I read the transcript and my mouth dropped open. No wonder Harvard resisted releasing the actual quotations.
Do tell, watertiger..?
Sweeping generalization alert: I think the way women are socialized might have something to do with it. You know, women are more communally-oriented, more willing to share burdens, working together, that kind of stuff.
Oh, and while women get more violent during episodes of road rage (I have first-hand experience here), they tend to want to work out problems before exiting the saloon, guns blazing.
(/sweeping generalization)
CR? Who's CR? Am I slow this afternoon?
Condoleeza Rice. Former (incredibly incompetent) provost of Stanford. Currently holds some meaningless job in Washington. 
But-but-but..
Half the senate is female, right? Tell me I'm right, I can't bear anymore disappointment.
[/grief over no gaggle]
I figured that's what you meant, and if it wasn't, I was gonna say that!
Summers's comments were extraordinarily irresponsible. He turned a hypothesis which is barely tenable into a conclusion, effectively choking off efforts to combat discrimination and inequality. Someone in his position has got to be having a major league brain fart to say what he did. I think he's toast - and about time too. Those of us here in the Hub of the Universe who have followed his career have been choking on our bile ever since he arrived, cursing academia as "far out of the mainstream," out of touch with the culture of "the heart of America," with a pledge to cleanse academia of it's "liberal bias." Talk about a wanker.
Genetic differences between men and women DOES NOT MEAN that I lack a brain because I was born without male genitalia.
That's what these right wing fucks believe.
Terry C | Email | Homepage | 02.18.05 - 4:52 pm | #
You do however lack the brain some men think with.
um, watertiger? What did we talk about before? Remember?
She ended up at Columbia and is now listed in Who's Who in American Education.
"Roar, Lion, roar...."
Many a happy night spent hanging out on Low Library steps. (contented, slightly wistful sigh...)
I quite agree with Atrios about this. When i first read about the flap I thought that the reaction to Summers'remarks was a bit extreme. Then, yesterday I read the transcript and my mouth dropped open. No wonder Harvard resisted releasing the actual quotations.
Why do men have nipples? I think it is a design flaw.
When I was applying for grad school in the 90s (molecular biology) one retrograde asshole saw a ring on my finger. It was a family heirloom ring--no other significance. He asked if I was married. I said no. He went on and on about how bad grad school is for marriages because you have to work so much of the time....it was very clear that he assumed a girl like me wouldn't have the stamina for such hard work.
Asshole. I still *hate* this guy. But I got my PhD at another school. I hope his butt has been kicked out the door in a harassment suit....
I'd like to say that anyone who can't see that there is substantial discrimination that adversely affects women at all levels - how they're treated in the classroom, to their treatment by graduate school advisors, hiring, evaluation, promotion, etc... is just blind.
Spot on analysis, Atrios.
As a woman who was soaring in management in the 90s, to watching the entire paradigm shift backward to male domination since about 1998, this is a serious issue.
It's not because the quality of my work has declined, it's because the men in charge like to be with other men. They understand each other. They are not in to diversity. Ten years ago, my Company was sending both women and men on the road, to trade shows, promotions, etc. Now, I'm the only one who still travels with the big boys. Only occasionally, too, I might add.
The last event I was at, I encountered a bit of harrassment. Of the sexual variety. Men discussing my breasts, wanting to touch them, etc. One of the guys was a VP in the Company ~ he enticed another exec to ask if he could put his head between my boobs. I'm strong, I can handle it, but additionally, I have no where to go to complain...it's bullshit. Here I am, 44 years old, on a business trip, dealing with men who drink too much, and it still all boils down to sex.
This trend is prevalent, at least in my area.
GWPDA,
She attacked ME! All I did was make a legal right turn! Next thing I know, she's banging on my window and kicking the car door.
Women still can't to cadence in formation in the Army like men. It sounds like they're screeching.
I keed, I keed....
I'm tired of Lawrence Summer's comments. I'm tired of this topic for discussion.
I'm tired of having to justify my existence all the time.
Just saying.
Women tend to live longer than men. I think that says a lot.
watertiger
Are you speaking of life expectancy at birth?
If so, aren't you falling for the same fallacy as Chimpy when he claims that Blacks are getting short-changed by Social Security because they don't live as long as whites?
Women have a far greater life expectancy at birth because men tend to die young, primarily in accidents (then there's this war thing to consider as well).
Why do men have nipples? I think it is a design flaw.
I think Gannon would disagree with you on that.
The man is being hounded for what he thinks, not for what he has done. He must have apologized twenty times by now.
I agree that race and gender play a significant part in IQ scores and what some define as "success". I will make no apologies for what I believe. And I support almost every single progressive issue that Democrats put forth.
A Regular Poster:
Stories like your's are why I've never been tempted in 15 years to go back to corporate 'Murica.
Sue:
Props to your mom for showing em what's what.
Why do men have nipples? I think it is a design flaw.
I think Gannon would disagree with you on that.
watertiger
I guess you work with what you've got?
I once read a book about women pioneers in the field of archaeology. Man, the b.s. they had to put up with. One woman who asked her college counselor about her chances in post-graduate archaeology work was told to give it up and go into her kitchen and make jam. And the counselor was a woman.
Holden,
I was just wise-assing.
Then I got caught up in the anthropological shit.
mea culpa.
Atrios:
In honor of your Birthday - Fuck Bush (twice).
And where are the kitties?
Holden,
I was just wise-assing.
Then I got caught up in the anthropological shit.
mea culpa.
watertiger
I accept appologies, but I prefer cash. 
Women who complain about shoe designers suffer from battered women syndrome.
Women have a far greater life expectancy at birth because men tend to die young, primarily in accidents
Judging from episodes of "Jackass", I can see why.
Thanks for posting your comment. Unfortunately, we've entered a period of reactionary drivel in academe. From David Horowitz's efforts to stifle rational thinking at Ohio State to Summers's comments, we get a flavor of the prevailing preference to hold on to biases that maintain a version of the old social order. Too bad. Just wondering how long this will continue. My daughter comments that the most popular extra curricular group on campuses is the conservative Republicans. Guess we can see that as a large number of people yearning for clear-cut rules and hierarchical relationships. Too bad, too. We just need to keep persisting.
Genetic differences between men and women DOES NOT MEAN that I lack a brain because I was born without male genitalia.
By an odd coincidence, though, seem to be a lot of people born with male genitalia who have no brains.
However, I'd be very interested in a serious exploration of the genetic reasons women can never find their car keys...
I accept appologies, but I prefer cash.
How 'bout a pony?
I was also shocked when I read that transcript from a link on another site earlier. Couldn't believe he was so dumb as to say that.
What, exactly, was the venue? If I saw it mentioned, I've forgotten it.
Yeah, I'm telling you flory, corporate America sucks.
However, I'd be very interested in a serious exploration of the genetic reasons women can never find their car keys...
You've met my sister!
The guy is a DICK. The staff are furious with him and for good reason. I hope he's on the way out.
flory,
Thanks for the clarification.
Regarding socialization - what about the socialization of male/female relationships? Maybe it's because I am a bitter, lonely single hetero male, but it seems to me the strongest bastion of sexism is straight relationships. I know so many straight women who may be powerful and hypercompetent when it comes to their education and jobs but who, when it comes to relationships, act like they are stuck in some medieval romance in which their role is to be totally passive, etc.
I wonder how much sex stereotypes established in male/female relationships spill back into other aspects of life. E.g. a man doesn't trust a woman to be a go-getter in the business world because his experience with women in the dating world is that they are not the ones asking out the guys.
And as far as such gender roles are concerned - I do believe these are more socialized than biological (why should, evolutionarily speaking, women be so passive in finding mates?).
Another socialized aspect is sports which imprint a certain competative ethic on those who play them (not that I have - I'm 100% nerd): I wonder whether a lot of gender descripencies will disappear with my generation because women of my generation were far more likely to participate in organized sports as kids than in previous generations.
Sorry to offend, but this should stimulate discussion - eh?
"Summers's comments were extraordinarily irresponsible. He turned a hypothesis which is barely tenable into a conclusion, effectively choking off efforts to combat discrimination and inequality."
Did you, like, miss the part where he was asked to play devil's advocate for a provocative position?
Women have a far greater life expectancy at birth because men tend to die young, primarily in accidents
Judging from episodes of "Jackass", I can see why.
Its the goddesses way of cleaning out the gene pool.
climb hurdles?
Ô¿Ô - I know you keed there, but you've triggered a charming memory. In 1967, -my- mother was informed that the UCLA school of library science (by Lawrence Clark Powell no less) could not admit her because of her age - about 45 or so. She talked her way anyway, and after receiving her MLS, went to work for the LAPL, working her way up to a regional position. At that time, the entire management level of LAPL was female - this was before the field had gotten decent enough pay to start attracting male entrants. So, here are all these fairly high-powered women, professionals all, and one day, sitting around at lunch, it is noticed that every one of these women had served in the military during WWII. Two had been in the womens Marine Corps auxiliary - one as DI, a couple had been WAC Sergeants, one had been a WAVE, another a WASP. Mummy had been an assimilated Captain with the Red Cross, as it happened, thus outranking all of them. But the spectacle of spectacles was when the absolutely top librarian, a tiny little red haired thing from BackofBeyond, Texas took all of them thru drill in her best Marine Corps instructor's voice.... You betcha they can march in cadence Ô¿Ô . You betcha..
However, I'd be very interested in a serious exploration of the genetic reasons women can never find their car keys.
I never realized, before this, that I was a woman. Thanks for the tip.
Why is that every time I want to make a lane change there is a woman in my blind spot?
Atrios wrote:
"I'd like to say that anyone who can't see that there is substantial discrimination that adversely affects women at all levels - how they're treated in the classroom, to their treatment by graduate school advisors, hiring, evaluation, promotion, etc... is just blind. "
I won't dispute that women can be discriminated against in any or all levels of acadamia, but women can also be favored in any and all levels as well.
I've spent 26 years in academia too and my experiences haven't lead me to believe that one would have to be blind to miss all of the gender-based discrimination in that institution.
I am usually impressed with your level of reasoned argumentation, Atrios, in this case your argument boils down, in large part to, "There is widespread gender discrimination because I see it and if you don't think there is, then you're a jerk."
I like the professor - thanks for that link.
Ok, Summers is an idiot on top of everything else - he's clueless. Let me give you the names of some investment bankers I used to know; McCabe, Hennessey, Kirwan, Scanlon - Irish Catholic enough, you fuckwit?
What the hell has happened to the Ivy League? Jesus.
Women who complain about shoe designers suffer from battered women syndrome.
(she looked down at her highly stylish Italian loafers and smiled.)
Speaking of stylish, where the HELL are the birthday cats?
Yeah, I'm telling you flory, corporate America sucks.
Vicki - you have my profound sympathies.
DAS:
Another socialized aspect is sports which imprint a certain competative ethic on those who play them (not that I have - I'm 100% nerd): I wonder whether a lot of gender descripencies will disappear with my generation because women of my generation were far more likely to participate in organized sports as kids than in previous generations.
I've had a lot of discussions with male colleagues on this topic and I tend to agree with you. Even among men, the ones who can talk football and play golf are more likely to advance beyond those who don't - regardless of ability. Its a matter of making the right connections, and in 21st century 'Murica - sports helps.
"(why should, evolutionarily speaking, women be so passive in finding mates?)."
Because, since they are stuck with a 9 month pregnancy, the primary responsibility of child rearing, and a wide range of men to choose from, it benefits them to be choosy. In fact, this sort of sexual selection is thought to be one of the high-powered overdrive methods for evolution to rapidly increase particular traits.
As a liberal (raving according to my friends)I find myself for one of the first times to be in disagreement with the consensus. I am in my sixties and have been studing the data on male female difference since college. There is considrable research showing gender based difference in many apptitudes. Causation is always problematic. It would not surprise me if there is a genetic component; men on average are stronger; women on average are shorter. Why should it stop there? Let the data tell the story and don't let your emotions cloud your judgement.
Why is that every time I want to make a lane change there is a woman in my blind spot?
Um, cuz she was smart enough to take the opening when she saw it? 
Let the data tell the story and don't let your emotions cloud your judgement.
Don Beal
You're half correct about this. Socialization of the genders is huge, as well.
West Virginians are under-represented in professional tennis.
Professor b: "Mommies being more aggressive on issues of family time is not a socially-neutral fact. It has everything to do with socialization, and with men like Summers ignoring their own parental responsibilities because they can get away with it, knowing that women will pick up the slack."
I don't buy it. Call it a generalization, but women naturally have more of that nurturing side. Sure, socialization has something to do with it, but I'll also give some credit to evolution.
Similarly, blacks are not 80% (or whatever they are) of the NBA because they play more basketball as kids. Those numbers just don't add up.
Yes, discrimination is an enormous factor. Yes, men should be there for their kids. Yes, Summers' remarks are over the top. But we're the reality-based side, remember? We're the ones who believe in science, research, and education. When we discuss nature vs. nurture, we should admit that nature plays a part, too.
whee! harvard bashing! a project any good maroon can get in on...
but of course we've got the same kind of assholes here, probably more of them. it's really sad to realize just how backwards a lot of our science faculty can be, if the ratio of m-f science grad students is any sign. and just to add some flames to the fire, let me add that as a result of relying too much on foreign grad students from places where women's rights aren't a priority, there is the possibility that the trend against women in the sciences will only get stronger.
sexism is half of the reason why i gave up the sciences. i still have bad memories of the last lab i worked in, and the way the only two women there (me and a post doc) were treated.
plunge, it is not at all clear that women have traditionally been passive in seeking mates. We can't get fossil evidence on this, so any old theory is as good as any other theory. What we know about other primates suggests quite a lot of mate-hopping on behalf of chimpanzees, for example.
The problem is that we have had cultural evolution for centuries and it is very powerful. SO fathers and mothers have been deciding who marries their daughters and this is what is behind the passivity idea, I believe.
What the daughters did on their own, later on, is most likely hidden. It would be interesting to be able to do DNA analyses of the children born in harems some centuries ago, as an example, but we can't do that.
What I find interesting is that many women, when they get in positions of power, act more like men than men do -- to compensate for any beliefs that they may be "weak" or "emotional". It's kind of like Democrats do on security and economic issues these days.
Not really sure what we can do about that, but I'm just throwing that out there for consideration and to see if anyone has similar experiences.
Ah, Don Beal - just speaking as an historian, where would those sex-linked differences occur? Would that be in a female inability to master the history of the 18th century scientific revolution? Perhaps a male sex-linked bias toward systematic structural analysis of economic development and historical evolution in Upper Volta despite colonial opposition? Or a female proclivity to examine fluffy ballgowns in lieu of analysing demographic statistics in Mediaeval Iceland?
Pooh. I want to see the cats NOW. Either I see the cats or I'm moving to Frank and nobody can ever visit Phoenix again.
Hispanics have no apptitude for country music.
There is considrable research showing gender based difference in many apptitudes. Causation is always problematic.
Exactly. Which way does that causation arrow point? Since nobody's measuring these aptitude differences in utero, its kinda hard to differentiate genetics from socialization.
But seriously, why do broads have such trouble with math?
I agree that race and gender play a significant part in IQ scores and what some define as "success". I will make no apologies for what I believe. And I support almost every single progressive issue that Democrats put forth.
I used to work at the Educational Testing Service, in the research division. One of the researchers there was looking into sex bias in the SATs, and discovered that the writers of the test questions themselves were biased. They assumed that men were better in math skills and that women were better in verbal skills. Therefore, when they were validating the test questions, if a math-related question came back in which women generally scored higher than men, they assumed that the question was flawed AND THREW IT OUT.
This happened over ten years ago and was reported to me verbally. I doubt at this point, unfortunately, that it can be confirmed in writing.
men on average are stronger; women on average are shorter. Why should it stop there? Let the data tell the story and don't let your emotions cloud your judgement.
Don Beal
And you forgot women have bigger hips. Your point?
Your definition on strength? Girls have a better chance of surviving birth than boys. Women live considerably longer than men. I'd say women are the stronger of the two.
Eskimo figure skaters? Should be a natural, right?
"You're half correct about this. Socialization of the genders is huge, as well."
Right, and everyone, including Summers, acknowledges that. The question is whether there really are some innate factors. If so, it would be best if we find out what those are so we can better correct for them. For instance, as Summers says, if women really do tend to put family above job, then maybe we should seriously consider whether various jobs HAVE to be so demandingly anti-family.
There are ways to see if sexual differenecs affect aptitude. For instance, you can measure sex hormone levels, which vary within as well as across gender, but can't be explained by socialization (since there are no obvious outward differences, especially not in the formative years). Do various skills correlate to levels of sex hormone? Yes, the do seem to, though again, it's all within the range of averages rather than entirely different traits.
The point is not merely what he said. It's who he is. There are legitimate scientific issues regarding gender differences. Summers is not professionally competent to contribute to those debates. On the other hand, there are laws prohibiting gender discrimination. Summers is responsible for making sure that his institution obeys those laws. There is only one way to understand his remarks- he is pretending to be commenting on emerging science while he is in fact expounding a rationale for failure to comply with the law. This was not casual dinner table conversation.
I've spent 26 years in academia too and my experiences haven't lead me to believe that one would have to be blind to miss all of the gender-based discrimination in that institution.
well, i've only spent 18 years in academia, but i'm pretty sure that atrios' post is a mild way of putting what's obvious to some. i'll give you that there are places one can go in which women are favored, and unfairly so, but the overall picture of the american academe today reveals real gender disparity at the upper levels of administation, grants and scholarships, tenure and promotion, in particular in the sciences.
Bitch's presentation was hysterical. She's exactly the sort of angy, incompletely coherent, victimzed ranter who only helps to make conservativves stronger. Rush Limbaugh would have a field day with her.
Most people are understandably confused about sex differences and how valid they are and, yes, race differences too. The answer is to top you enemies by showing that the facts are on your side, assuming of course that that's possible.
Bitch's rant doesn't seek to enlighten. It seeks to intimidate. People hate that. This is exactly the kind of shit that makes people think liberals are jerks.
Feminism will be the death of liberalism yet.
Or a female proclivity to examine fluffy ballgowns in lieu of analysing demographic statistics in Mediaeval Iceland?
Wasn't that Holden's dissertation?
Brooklyn Girl, I have heard something similar about the SATs. The verbal questions were adjusted at some point in the last forty years, and after that women no longer scored higher, on average. Before they did. But the maths questions were not adjusted for sex differences the same way. There may have been a good reason for this adjustment, but if there was they never said what it was.
GWPDA, if you're still there, I just checked my mail and String's collar is here. Got it on her right and she's ding-a-linging running around. It's got that safty latch so it comes off it she gets hung on anything. Nice though and they other things, too. Give Arthur a big ol' kiss from String and me.
Mrs. Moore:
Hispanics have no apptitude for country music.
They don't even have an aptitude for conjunto.
Nice thought
Why is that every time I want to make a lane change there is a woman in my blind spot?
Um, cuz she was smart enough to take the opening when she saw it?
watertiger
I like to associate it with my mother always looking over my shoulder.
I've been blindsided by women too.
Why do men have nipples? I think it is a design flaw.
Where else you going to put the clothespins?
Or a female proclivity to examine fluffy ballgowns in lieu of analysing demographic statistics in Mediaeval Iceland?
Wasn't that Holden's dissertation?
flory
Another instance of rampant Holdenization.
Actually, Summers' other examples (Jewish farmers, Irish investment bankers) undermine his point. People in those groups are under-represented in those profession because the culture they grow up in, the educations they receive, and the contacts they establish (or don't) dissuade them from going into those jobs.
Still, based on the comments so far, a lot of you seem to be using Summers as a punching bag for your own issues.
Where else you going to put the clothespins?
attaturk
Nuts to you!
Y'all should read Susan Estrich's column today. Lots of good points. Even for a raspy-voiced broad.
A friend of mine went to grad school in physics and was told she should be home having babies instead.
Holden:
female proclivity
You're a girl?
Or a female proclivity to examine fluffy ballgowns in lieu of analysing demographic statistics in Mediaeval Iceland?--flory
Mediaeval?
Hey flory! I think you've coined a new word.
We are indeed living in Mediaevil times.
I agree that the important point about Summers' speech is that he placed the three theories into a rank order based on nothing but his own biases. He also posed the family-duty related theory as one of largely independent choice which totally ignores the way we get our values and views of our responsibilities in the first place.
His treatment of the discrimination theories is on a low level of sophistication and downplays the actual evidence.
All this means that he wasn't just throwing out ideas, he was pointing in one direction. And remember that his audience contained specialists in genetics and so on. So there is a sense of contempt in giving such simplistic views to such an audience, too.
It would not surprise me if there is a genetic component...
You mean like the reason men can't cook? The reason they can't clean house? The reason they can't raise children?
Stop me when you want to yell "bullshit"...
Another instance of rampant Holdenization.
Correction: Holdenization™.
"You mean like the reason men can't cook? The reason they can't clean house? The reason they can't raise children?
Stop me when you want to yell "bullshit".."
I think this is what separates scientists from laymen: being able to differentiate between "component of" and "THE reason that."
You're a girl?
flory
6'5", 215 lbs. of man.
Although Athenae may have another opinion.
Still, based on the comments so far, a lot of you seem to be using Summers as a punching bag for your own issues.
joe | Email | Homepage | 02.18.05 - 5:24 pm | #
They don't even have an aptitude for conjunto.
Toby Petzold
Hey, you know where anymore Guckert nudey pics are? I especially like the ones he's on the bed pretending to be asleep with his Freeper genitalia all out there like that.
Still, based on the comments so far, a lot of you seem to be using Summers as a punching bag for your own issues.
joe
Mine were meant as snark for clarification.
My own experience, already aired around here ad nauseum, is that the preconception exists that if a woman has a family, this impedes her ability to succeed. If a man has a family, it helps him.
Feel free to shit on me for this, but my aptitudes are significantly stronger than some of my male colleagues',and yet I am an adjunct while they're tenure track.
The racist run-up certainly puts this into perspective.
That bitch Joan Walsh takes a swipe at me -- without mentioning my name, of course.
Shaw:
I was quoting GWPDA. For some reason the tags didn't work.
Good catch though. I like the term.
Psst! Take a look over to the left. That smiling guy who should resign.
I think that pretty much settles this whole arguement.
I once saw a note that said "Never use your directionals on the highway, you'll just tip some else off to good spot."
My wife works at a Woman's College in the Hub area. They were so steamed after Summers made that speech they didn't hafta pay much to clear the big snow from the sidewalks. It all melted.
Hey, you know where anymore Guckert nudey pics are? I especially like the ones he's on the bed pretending to be asleep with his Freeper genitalia all out there like that.
Ô¿Ô
Objects may be smaller than they appear
I think this is what separates scientists from laymen: being able to differentiate between "component of" and "THE reason that."
crap i hate haloscan. nevermind.
"My own experience, already aired around here ad nauseum, is that the preconception exists that if a woman has a family, this impedes her ability to succeed. If a man has a family, it helps him."
Why? Because the assumption, and still much of the reality, is that in the woman's case this means it'll take time away from work, where in the man's case it won't. That's a problem. A problem that recognizing such a difference can HELP solve.
All I can say is that all of my
ex-wives kicked ass.
Maybe I was just lucky.
GWPDA, really love the collar. Again, thanks. It's the cutest thing with the little stars and crescent moons that reflect light. Another nice thought and also I can write my name and number on it in case she gets lost. Even the little bell sounds nice.
6'5", 215 lbs. of man.
Oooooh......I feel a swoon coming on.
STOP THE PRESSES.
Did you see this?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/20...2/18/16194/
0860
Fuck off, Joe.
No one's using Summers as a punching bag.
Reality dictates the truth, regardless of how anyone wants to spin the message.
However, I'd be very interested in a serious exploration of the genetic reasons women can never find their car keys.
...more curiouser- is how can they never fail to find mine?
6'5", 215 lbs. of man.
Oh, worrrrrd?!
So if my local Sheriff blurts out that addicts are prone to break laws to support their habit, he is providing a reason for their actions?. Thus providing rationale for not complying with the law?
I wonder if the Sheriff and Summers could still do their jobs? Knowing in the back of their minds that everything is not black or white?
6'5", 215 lbs. of man.
Is that six and a half inches cut, or uncut?
attaturk:
Objects may be smaller than they appear
Tee hee. I wish I knew how to do the giggling smileys.
damn, yosh- and CBS no less. something weird is going on here.
"Bitch's rant doesn't seek to enlighten. It seeks to intimidate. People hate that. This is exactly the kind of shit that makes people think liberals are jerks.
Feminism will be the death of liberalism yet.
Hieronymus Braintree"
Heiro, there are much smarter, better versions of feminism than that drivel.
Feminism doesn't mean that type of bullying, any more than it means feeling faint when you hear an idea youd don't like.
All in all, though, you're right - Rush would have a field day with this thread.
Yoshimi -
Saw it. Must watch Dan Rather tonight.
watertiger -
Every inch, every pound. I used to be raily thin, 175 lbs. in fact. Then my metabolism screeched to a halt.
My own experience, already aired around here ad nauseum, is that the preconception exists that if a woman has a family, this impedes her ability to succeed. If a man has a family, it helps him.
reminds me of that wives' tale (?) of a study that says married men live longer than single men, and single women live longer than married women.
Yeah, that works out well, doesn't it?
plunge,
Don't start. Trust me. This is about cultural prejudice parading as science. And it's fucked up my life more than you can possibly imagine.
I think this is what separates scientists from laymen: being able to differentiate between "component of" and "THE reason that."
plunge
I think a main "component of" "THE reason that" you are upset is because you fall into the logically fallacial trap of assigning the characteristics of a prominent few to a subsection of the community at large, without bothering yourself to offer a modicum of even anecdotal evidence to substantiate your thesis.
I.E. piss off.
Tee hee. I wish I knew how to do the giggling smileys.
flory
Click on the blue question mark just above the comment window,
Gender inequality is an insoluble problem to an extent that race and religion could never be. This is because of sexual dimorphism. We are animals. We are Homo before we are sapiens: size and physical attributes matter more in reality. Presence circumvents cleverness or the advantage of abstractions.
Hi NYMary {!waves!} Fancy seeing you on this road!
One good way of learning about these issues is through international comparisons. Different countries have different solutions to the long work-week and the home responsibilities and even different myths of motherhood and fatherhood. Looking at data from other countries is a good way to see when something is a particularly American problem. But Americans tend not to do this very much for some reason.
Then my metabolism screeched to a halt.
Why do I see Wile E. Coyote leaning back on his heels in a desperate attempt to stop before careening off a cliff?
"He also posed the family-duty related theory as one of largely independent choice which totally ignores the way we get our values and views of our responsibilities in the first place."
This is a really good point.
Oh, wait, Vicki told me to fuck off, so I guess that's that.
Toby, do you get all jiggy with it, too?
Is that six and a half inches cut, or uncut?
Wow, people ARE getting punchy, waiting for the cats.
Feel free to shit on me for this, but my aptitudes are significantly stronger than some of my male colleagues',and yet I am an adjunct while they're tenure track.
No sister, no need to shit on you for this.
You're right. This is what I encounter on a daily basis. It's gotten worse as I've aged, too. I've been told I'm over-educated for any job in my fairly large city! What a bunch of bullshit! I had to train the guy who is currently my boss ~ a situation where he was grandfathered in due to the blue blood rule (his father founded a company my company purchased, and then that company went under). The guy has no style and doesn't know shit about this end of this business, but hey, he's "family" ~ he gets the good job. I'll stop now.
I love you, NYMary ~ Keep up the righteous fight and the fun, intelligent and informative posts.
Hey, you know where anymore Guckert nudey pics are? I especially like the ones he's on the bed pretending to be asleep with his Freeper genitalia all out there like that.
I only saw them once, but I can't remember whose site I linked to for them. The instant I saw the pix of him in the WH press room, I remembered seeing him question McClellan sometimes on C-SPAN.
Pretty weird stuff. Someone's got some 'splaining to do.
The kitties are here! The kitties are here!
(/Steve Martin)
is there discrimination in academia?
YES
Are there significant societal pressures that deter women from Science?
YES
Might there be a genetic predisposition to certain types of logic depending on gender?
YES
Was Summer inconsiderate and probably out of place to say what he said?
YES
Is this reaction a simptom of the over-political-correctness that has caused liberal to be looked down upon by the electorate?
YES
Get the f over yourselves. Its issues like this that make me very dissappointed that I am a democrat and a liberal when people seek to crucify someone for speaking their mind. IT WAS NOT BIGOTED. He was stating what he thought to be an unfortunate truth. TRUE OR NOT this should not be taking up this much time or energy from people who have legitimate (SS, Nat'l security, Democracy) things to fight about. YOU ARE BEING PICKY - Get over it!
Hey, nothing wrong getting your freak on.
.
"Blahg-blahg-blahg..."
Real help for real men, women, children and geezers. Where I live. In the real world.
.
Hi, GWPDA!
Grrr. (not at you)
6'5", 215 lbs. of man.
And that's without his hot pink heels!
A.
reminds me of that wives' tale (?) of a study that says married men live longer than single men, and single women live longer than married women.
Wait. That's not true? Well, shit!!!!!
I bet Toby's butt is nicer than Guckert's.
We are Homo before we are sapiens
not.gonna.go.there.
IIRC,Sandra Day O'Connor graduated at the top of her class in law school and when she interviewed for her first job at a top law firm, she was told she could join the secretarial pool. heh.
Why do men have nipples? I think it is a design flaw.
Um... It doesn't have to be one. The plumbing gets laid down before the sexual differences kick in, gestationally.
Some men have breastfed children. More might be able to do it if they tried.
Anybody remember the Dixie Chicks?
How they organized boycotts? How they refused to air their music? Because of what they believed and said?
How is this different that somebody who calls on this man to resign?
You've got to be consistent even when it doesnt' suit you.
"Ask any parent of a Black child how many times their kid has been asked if they like Basketball."
I agree that much of what Summers said was out of line, but this is just stupid. She's suggesting that I'm a racist if I ask a black kid if he or she likes basketball? Come on.
Bill - I don't buy it. Call it a generalization, but women naturally have more of that nurturing side.
Bullshit. Total bullshit. A woman might have that response to her own child, but that does not necessarily translate into a generalization like that.
It's a role. It's the role that culture has imposed on women. Because we bear the children and we feed them - we are seen overall as nurturers because of our biology. It's an extrapolation that has become a cultural bias, IMO.
"reminds me of that wives' tale (?) of a study that says married men live longer than single men"
No, it just seems longer.
Any in the DC area? The freeperati are holding a demonstration in support of JGJG at 6:00 tonight. Please bring a camera and get pictures of the Free Reupblic supporting the hustler, if at all possible.
DEMONSTRATION IN SUPPORT OF JEFF GANNON
&
THE FIRST AMENDMENT
WHEN: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 2005, 6 P.M. TO 8 P.M.
WHERE: THE SIDEWALK BY MONICA’S GATE,
AKA THE NORTHWEST VISITORS ENTRANCE
THE WHITE HOUSE, 1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVE., NW, WASHINGTON, D.C.
(Washington) The D.C. Chapter of Free Republic, an independent grassroots organization, will be holding a demonstration at the White House this evening in support of former Talon News White House Correspondent Jeff Gannon and the rights of other reporters to do their jobs without fear of being destroyed by the political establishment.
I was thinking that since Gannon = Bush's gay lover (natch), then Lynne Stewart = Democrat because George Soros funds MoveOn.org as well as Stewart's defense fund.
Is this reaction a simptom of the over-political-correctness that has caused liberal to be looked down upon by the electorate?
YES
yep
Too, goddamned too recently, holding humans in bondage was politically correct.
The little bell on the collar is making String all frisky-fied kinda like Toby sometimes. Toby's a little sex kitten like Guckert, I bet.
Bullshit. Total bullshit. A woman might have that response to her own child, but that does not necessarily translate into a generalization like that.
Look at Bar Bush. Wire Monkey supreme.
Why the vitriol? The 'intrinsic aptitudes' phraseology is unfortunate and the science premature - but too many axes are being ground here and Summers' actual statement being overlooked. It seems fair that biology, socialization, and personal choice are interrelated causes of an absence of women in certain fields.
The better view of Summers' statement is not that 'women are inadequate to attain certain honors' but that 'honors are distributed in an inequitable manner' because of the inhuman costs.
Where ya'll are mad at Summers for insulting women, you should be mad at the general marketplace (academic and beyond) that abuses not only women, but everyone who participates in it.
Anybody remember the Dixie Chicks?
How they organized boycotts? How they refused to air their music? Because of what they believed and said?
Newsflash, not everybody had a problem with that.
People have every right to boycott something they find abhorrent. I'll support that right even while I deride certain boycotts as really fucking pointless and dumb.
The Dixie Chicks were in no position to influence US policy. As head of a major university this man is in a major position to influence the education of women. Therein lies the difference.
But people should be free to boycott whoever they feel like boycotting. Free country and all.
A.
GWPDA, really love the collar. Again, thanks. It's the cutest thing with the little stars and crescent moons that reflect light.
Black and silver collar for a black kitty. Woohoooooo! Hurrah for Stringey's new outfit!
And Shaw? "me·di·ae·val". Can't do the combined 'ae' in Haloscan.
"I have nipples, Brad. Could you milk me?"
I haven't really paid attention to this story, but frankly, I was more shocked at Summers' bit about the Catholics, the white basketball players, and the Jews. The disparaging-women stuff was couched in a nice-enough sheen of academic doubletalk that might have allowed it to slip by, but he's right out there with the religious-racist stuff, isn't he? I can't imagine any executive in the country with any knowledge of HR issues that would stand up and use that stuff as his "opening joke" in any sort of official-business setting. Wotta maroon!
Does anyone know what studies he's referring to that show that genetically men have larger standard deviations of mental and physical attributes? Because if this is true, then it's a mathematical certainty that the pools of top-tier scientists will be heavily male. It seems like it would be better to attack Summers by scrutinizing his evidence rather than giving ad hominem diatribes.
Professor B doesn't address the variability thing, primarily just the long work hours = no family thing. She says something to the effect of that it's a socialization effect when a couple has children and the woman ends up having to take care of the kids and the man gets to keep after his career. Notwithstanding the fact that it's the woman who is pregnant, I thought summer's was saying that it's genetic that women would rather spend time with their kids then devote 80 hours a week to work. Again, couldn't we consult the papers he cites?
After reading the transcript I thought the most important point of his talk was that people should thoroughly investigate these questions and then be prepared to deal with the answers like grown ups. Clearly, society is not yet prepared.
dear yep,
we are discussing our POVs about Summers' remarks.
I don't think you need to tell us what to discuss and how to discuss it.
Summers brought up a very controversial subject, we're kicking ideas around here.
We've discussed SS, nat'l security and democracy a gazillion times and will continue to. But just now Atrios posted something we want to talk about.
What part of that do you not understand?
Picky? Stop being such a scold.
WHERE: THE SIDEWALK BY MONICA’S GATE,
AKA THE NORTHWEST VISITORS ENTRANCE
Ohhhh....aren't they cute? They made a funny.
You mean like the reason men can't cook?
Cooking nonsimple things tends to require multitasking. There are, I believe, several studies tending to show that women (for whatever reason) multitask better than men, on average. Frankly, it wouldn't surprise me at all if this weren't at least in part biological.
(Washington) The D.C. Chapter of Free Republic, an independent grassroots organization, will be holding a demonstration at the White House this evening in support of former Talon News White House Correspondent Jeff Gannon and the rights of other reporters to do their jobs without fear of being destroyed by the political establishment.
pixie
I hope somebody gets some pics of Toby there in his leather thong.
I don't want Summers to resign or to shut up or anything. But I'd like those of you who say that this is a trivial topic to try to imagine how you'd feel if you hear some version of this topic in some slight sense about every week of your life. If you hear people like Toby tell us that gender inequality is here to stay, while smugly grooming himself. And if there is someone like Toby telling you at least once a month.
It's kind of hard to stay neutral and academic when the topic is whether people like me are able to stay neutral and academic. If you have never had to defend your own worth in this sense it may seem quite silly to argue over it. If you live it, on the other hand...
The D.C. Chapter of Free Republic, an independent grassroots organization, will be holding a demonstration at the White House this evening in support of former Talon News White House Correspondent Jeff Gannon and the rights of other reporters to do their jobs without fear of being destroyed by the political establishment.
Two doors down will be the "Fire Dan Rather" party, coincidentally also held by the Freepers.
Remember kids - it's Ignore the Moronic Brownshirt Fucks Day!
Now with B9 added, for those who can't ignore after every meal...
You were plugged on the Daily Show last night. Nice one.
"I think a main "component of" "THE reason that" you are upset is because you fall into the logically fallacial trap of assigning the characteristics of a prominent few to a subsection of the community at large, without bothering yourself to offer a modicum of even anecdotal evidence to substantiate your thesis."
I offer... this thread. Or the same one on many blogs. People are responding as if Summers said "there is no discrimination" or "it could only be discrimination or genetic aptitude, and it's not discrimination"
Thanks, Regular Poster. You're very kind.
I am currently in the middle of two (unpaid) projects for the department for which I adjunct (well, one of the two--no one who adjuncts works at just one school, usually). One is a departmental website, for which I have built personal web pages for all of my colleagues, including those who egregiously violated my rights in a recent hire. The other is an online database of course materials for new instructors. I am the only non-tenure track person on the committee, and the one doing the bulk of the work. Why? Well, it need to be done, and lots of my colleagues (even, maybe especially, the men) fear technology. Two, rumor is they're going to hire again, so I'm busting my ass to look like a good citizen of the department.
Oh, and for those of you in academia: I teach 5/5/2.
And Shaw? "me·di·ae·val". Can't do the combined 'ae' in Haloscan.
GWPDA
Still, I think Mediaevil is a cool name for the MSM.
I miss your musk, Ron.
The new book 'Blink' by Malcolm Gladwell, discribes precisely this practice of subconscious prejudice. An enlightening read.
And uhh his statements that there aren't many catholic bankers or whites in the NBA is just a plain statement of fact. Citing a fact isn't racist. Prof. B goes off, noting that the *causes* of these outcomes were racism. Merely noting the outcomes is not racism, even if the causes are.
i really don't get why trolls would defend summers. it confuses me. he's an ass, most of the faculty there think so, and this isn't the only thing he's done to embarrass the school. putting his foot in his mouth at a place where people make their living analyzing each and every word is just more proof that he's not well suited for the job.
why is there a competition?
vive la difference!
The only arguable point is what Atrios said: that women get a raw deal.
My inclination is the evolutionary one: that the pack hierarchy looks up to the alpha male.
And uhh his statements that there aren't many catholic bankers or whites in the NBA is just a plain statement of fact.
Cite, please.
No? Shut the fuck up.
Toby, be sure to wash and rinse your thong and hang to dry, hun, before the big demonstration and such.
NY Mary: "Feel free to shit on me for this, but my aptitudes are significantly stronger than some of my male colleagues',and yet I am an adjunct while they're tenure track."
Amen, sister. The last time I interviewed for a full-time job at the university--where I'd been teaching as an adjunct for 10 years--they asked my if I'd "have time" for a full-time job (implying, since, y'know, I have kids, I couldn't manage to teach 3 whole classes.
I didn't get one of the full-time jobs (several people with less experience and a lesser degrees but w/no kids got them) but now I've had to take on a second adjunct position, so I'm teaching 4-5 classes because I "didn't have time" to teach 3.
Don't even get me started on how well the "cool dudes" (20-30-something guys who do the buddy thing with their students, but who don't know sh*t about what they're supposed to be teaching) always get those fabulous evaluations.
Can't do the combined 'ae' in Haloscan.
ASCII 145=æ
ASCII 146=Æ
Hold down the alt key and use your keypad with the numlock on to enter the number.
"genetic reasons women can never find their car keys..."
Snort. More like the modern fad for carrying purses or knapsacks. The keys will always sink to the bottom. I wear my keys around my waist like a Renaissance person, so I know where they are.
Yo, Larry! My Jewish grandfather and all six of his brothers were farmers. Just sayin'.
As an administrator who does personnel reviews at a major university, I can testify that Atrios is absolutely correct. A few years ago when I was considering returning to the classroom, I was told that the fact that I was past the childbearing years would make me a prize. No family time needed for me, no sirree.
NYMary - You want any supporting letters or stuff for your application file? I can do that kind of thing, easy. Remember, I AM GWPDA, after all. (Hey, it gets me educational discounts on software, which means something.)
Now I want a picture of Stringey in her new outfit.
And uhh his statements that there aren't many catholic bankers or whites in the NBA is just a plain statement of fact. Citing a fact isn't racist. Prof. B goes off, noting that the *causes* of these outcomes were racism. Merely noting the outcomes is not racism, even if the causes are.
(Washington) The D.C. Chapter of Free Republic, an independent grassroots organization, will be holding a demonstration at the White House this evening in support of former Talon News White House Correspondent Jeff Gannon and the rights of other reporters to do their jobs without fear of being destroyed by the political establishment.
pixie
Freepers for Prostitues in the White House!
I can't wait to see them marching with that sign.
Hispanics have no apptitude for country music.
Mrs Moore | Email | Homepage | 02.18.05 - 5:18 pm | #
Somebody's never heard any Freddy Fender, apparently.
They don't even have an aptitude for conjunto.
Toby Petzold | Email | Homepage | 02.18.05 - 5:23 pm | #
Again, somebody's never heard any Freddy Fender. Of Flaco Jimenez, for that matter.
Holden:
Thanks for the info. All the time I've spent here and I never noticed the little blue question mark.
Cooking nonsimple things tends to require multitasking. There are, I believe, several studies tending to show that women (for whatever reason) multitask better than men, on average. Frankly, it wouldn't surprise me at all if this weren't at least in part biological.
Not being surprised at all by it being biological is not the same thing as it having been proved to be biological. I have read lots of studies in the field of gender science, and the problem with the vast majority of them is that we don't currently have the tools to determine when something is strictly biologically determined. IF there even is such a thing. Some recent research suggests that the environment may even turn genes off or on, and this casts the whole nature-nurture debate into a very different light.
cmdicely - If what you are saying about cooking, women and multi-tasking is true, then how come about 97% of the great chefs on the planet are MEN?
Get a grip - mutli-tasking? And why would that be built in, necessarily? Like males don't need to be able to pay attention to more than one thing when they are hunters who have to bring food into the camp in order that everybody doesn't die?
Der Uberscheiße - fair enough. I should have said, I don't have the code here and don't feel like looking for it.... But thanks!
Why all the hostility here? Jesus -- calm down, everyone.
i really don't get why trolls would defend summers.
It's a kneejerk reaction to anyone who gets pounded for making misogynistic remarks: one of us! One of us! If they stopped to think for a second, they'd realize he's a card-carrying member of the hated liberal academics they spend so much time disparaging, but they can't get stop looking at the shiny "keep 'em in the kitchen and bedroom" part. The hand-wringing over the number of whites in the NBA probably attracts 'em, too.
Of course, if you go through his remarks and replace all instances of female references with references to conservatives, they'd be at his door with the pitchforks and torches...
NY Mary: "Feel free to shit on me for this, but my aptitudes are significantly stronger than some of my male colleagues',and yet I am an adjunct while they're tenure track."
Amen, sister. The last time I interviewed for a full-time job at the university--where I'd been teaching as an adjunct for 10 years--they asked my if I'd "have time" for a full-time job (implying, since, y'know, I have kids, I couldn't manage to teach 3 whole classes.
I didn't get one of the full-time jobs (several people with less experience and a lesser degrees but w/no kids got them) but now I've had to take on a second adjunct position, so I'm teaching 4-5 classes because I "didn't have time" to teach 3.
Don't even get me started on how well the "cool dudes" (20-30-something guys who do the buddy thing with their students, but who don't know sh*t about what they're supposed to be teaching) always get those fabulous evaluations.
lolly,
I know we're out there, and a lot of us. It's eerie.
The irony for me is that my spouse, whose credentials are identical to mine, was hired ABD and is doing great. At 35, he's running the program which comprises the majority of courses in our department. He'll be chair someday, not too far away, and then maybe a dean. I've considered suing my institution, but it's his institution too, so Ithink it would be unwise. But I don't expect to ever be hired there.
And to flip Summers' point, this is in the liberal arts, so shouldn't the assumption be that *my* aptitudes are superior?
"i really don't get why trolls would defend summers."
Again, disagree = troll? I worked my ass off to try to get John Kerry and local Dems elected, I hate the right's guts, but if I disagree, I'm trolling. Fan-tastic!
"he's an ass, most of the faculty there think so, and this isn't the only thing he's done to embarrass the school."
No offense, but I don't have a high respect for "the faculty" as a group. They include some of the worst offenders of people that make liberals look like idiots, including sponsoring Carol "women speak in a different voice than men and are more nurturing and don't like logic but it isn't bigoted to say so with my crappy research because I'm a feminist!" Gilligan. And don't get me started on the Cornel West flap. That egomaniac threw a hissy-fit of outrage after being asked to, maybe, like, teach a class or maybe publish some in-field research after 13 years of recording spoken word albums and writing books for the public and not much else. No one who knows anything about the departments that hate Summers can claim that they have been models of academic rigor or that they didn't deserve some demands for reform, which of course they didn't like and resent to this day.
Don't y'all get me started on the interviews I did with law firms my second year of law school. The most consistently asked illegal question was: "Do you think you'll want to have children if you marry?"
Oh no, we aren't discriminated against. Not at all. It's just that I never heard of a federal judge addressing a young male lawyer standing before him as follows: "Are you a lawyer?"
What gets me is, the stuff that is used to refute Summers' rant was taught to me in freshman social studies class.
I am reminded of it as well during the annual 'sensitivity training' seminars we have in large corps.
I work in the male-dominated tech world, and the women who get hired must meet one requirement. They must be able to stand being around all us nerds and geeks all day.
And if you think it's hard getting a job as a woman, try to get hired as a transexual C developer; it is not pretty. And yet I've worked with two so far, so go figure.
"And to flip Summers' point, this is in the liberal arts, so shouldn't the assumption be that *my* aptitudes are superior?"
Why and how are we supposed to conclude anything from your one experience at this one institution? First of all, no one said that there isn't discrimination still at play, and second of all, we have no way of knowing the full story in your case: all we know is that you don't have the job you think you deserve and it pisses you off. There are a lot of people out there in the same position, some of whom have legitimate claims, some of whom don't, and we have absolutely no way to know which your case is.
On-topic, personally my biggest problem with Summers' remarks isn't so much the remarks themselves, it's that after catching all the shit he's caught, he's whining that folks are trying to keep him down, man. Instead of standing tall and backing his shit up, he's complaining. And instead of backing him, his defenders (rather specific or just generally) are doing more whining about "feminists" and "politcal correctness" and whatnot. It's just silly and doesn't answer any questions, nor does it solidify Summers' argument.
Personally, I think trying to figure out what trends are caused by biology and what are caused by socialization is a bit minky, because one could argue damn near everything is caused by social interaction of some type or another. Maybe someone who's had absolutely no human contact throughout his or her life could do it, but until then, we're just stabbing in the dark.
For what it's worth, I think human beings only have three drives that are one-hundred percent purely biological: eatin', shittin' and fuckin'. Everything else is because some other asshole told us it was a good idea. But that's just me...
Tena, it's been my experience that the 'multitasking' function in males is allowed to go dormant by the involvement of others. Women seldom have others at hand to deflect that particular ability. Men quite often are encouraged to focus on one particular thing..... Nurture I suspect.
Hey, did you see? Stringey got her collar all reflective moons and stars, with a bell, and a quick release, and a little red shiny pendant for her name, and Incog's, and a set of really nice grooming gloves too. I got all of those at the same time I was getting Arthur's dinner, stopping at the library, analysing Orientations, and applying for a couple of jobs....
Whoa! Where did some of that come from? Google up some of the literature before you come unglued.
There's a big difference between the scientific study of genetic differences, and making policy decisions based on conjecture, and very often, pure hackery.
Which do you think is more likely in the course of this 'debate'?
And of course, the usual hacks will weigh in on subjects of which they know little or nothing.
NYMary, Tena, et al. - Let me recommend a little visit with Hartman v. Wick.
Life can be made easier, but it isn't fast and it isn't even reasonable.
Don Beal, I've never seen your name here before.
Kindly do not imply that refutation of your opinion, thru very mild sarcasm, constitutes becoming 'unglued.'
And buddy, I was running Veronica searches when you were still using No. 2 pencils.
The man is being hounded for what he thinks, not for what he has done. He must have apologized twenty times by now.
I agree that race and gender play a significant part in IQ scores and what some define as "success". I will make no apologies for what I believe. And I support almost every single progressive issue that Democrats put forth.
padcrasher
You're dumber than pond-scum, i reckon. Your reading comprehension appears to approach that of a trilobite.
Item:
He is not being hounded for what he thinks. He is being criticized for using his position (in which he oversees the hiring, promotion, and education of male and fmeale scholars) to advance a spurious, speculative notion which on the face of it, seems to justify practices which are either accidentally or intentionally inequitable.
Those words too big fer ya, cully?
Item: he has apologized but he has not recanted nor has he recused hiomself from decisions in which his unsupported suppositions are crucial to the professional lives of persons whom he evidently deems his inferiors.
Item:
Race and gender are determinative variables in the assignment of 'academic/scholarly social goods': admissions, financial support, internships, publication support, etc.
Item:
If those beliefs for which you deem yourself immune from apology are summed up in you defense of Summers, then, no, i'd agree, an apology would be insufficient, and your protestations of support for every OTHER "Democratic program" exept gender equity looms large as a factor disqualifying you from participation in this discourse, if fo no other reason than that the estimable females who write here don't need your shit, cully...
There are a lot of people out there in the same position, some of whom have legitimate claims, some of whom don't, and we have absolutely no way to know which your case is.
Your experiences, however, are universal, sacrosanct, and beyond reproach.
Get bent.
cmdicely - If what you are saying about cooking, women and multi-tasking is true, then how come about 97% of the great chefs on the planet are MEN?
Because a big part of becoming a known as a great chef is education, economic opportunity, and networking with existing business people, all of which men have an edge in throughout the world.
Get a grip - mutli-tasking? And why would that be built in, necessarily?
There are a number of reasons that have been advanced to explain how that might have come to be, but I'm rather agnostic among them, as unlike the finding that such a difference does exist, they are usually non-testable.
Frankly, I'd be more interested in undestanding the underlying mechanism than proposing untestable conjecture as to what pressure might have produce the result, and until you understand the underlying mechanism, you don't know if its directly linked to some other clearly survival-linked difference.
For instance, there isn't really a good survival reason for people in Africa to have developed a much greater propensity to sickle-cell anemia as a trait; OTOH, that trait is a result of having two alleles of a particular kind -- and having one of that kind provides resistance to malaria. Something that there is a clear reason for Africans to have developed a greater propensity to have.
If you reject findings of differences in traits because you can't see any superficially obvious reason for the trait difference to develop, you don't discover things like that.
NY Mary--
I don't know whether it would even be possible to sue--especially in this political climate. The whole academic worth thing is very weasly.
When UCLA's English dept. used to decide who was worthy of continuing in the program to get a Ph.D., they talked about finding out who had the "intestinal fortitude" to succeed; somehow, more men than women seemed to have that "intestinal fortitude"--even among students with the same GPAs and test results . . .
At the department where I now work, I have seen perhaps a dozen full-timers come and leave, while I'm still there as an adjunct. Whatever they're using to determine who has what it takes to teach in the department isn't up to snuff here.
Oh, and sorry everybody about the double post.
Merely noting the outcomes is not racism, even if the causes are.
Whaaaa? Did this make sense to you while you were typing it?
Saying that there aren't many Jewish farmers without mentioning that Jews were forbidden from owning land in Europe is a ridiculous thing to say. You can't look at the effect and pretend the cause doesn't exist.
We should renickname Monica's Gate to Jeff's Portal just for the freepers.
"For what it's worth, I think human beings only have three drives that are one-hundred percent purely biological..."
Well.....let's look at this. I can think of a few activities for which I never engaged in a sit-down-analysis session to determine efficacy:
scratchin' my a$$
pickin my nose
fartin
pissin
spitin
doing all of the above at the same time
and finally......bitin my fingernails!
Backslider - eatin', shittin' and fuckin'. Everything else is because some other asshole told us it was a good idea. But that's just me...
I tend to agree with you in large part. Only I'd add "running" to that list. Somebody used to call it the 4 F's - fighting, fucking, fleeing and feeding.
Tena, and it's just darling. She's running around now with it on jingling. The little bell isn't annoying as you might think. It has a soft sort of muted tinkle. Makes her seem like a regular lil' ol' house kitty instead of a wild stray I found.
"Wotta maroon!" I can also testify that academics, particularly those over fifty, can be remarkably socially backwards compared with their agemates in private industry. It comes from living in a bubble.
And why have the numbers of women receiving tenure gone *down* during Summers' watch? Have women lost gray matter during the last three years? http://tinyurl.com/3v4l8
"Bitch's rant doesn't seek to enlighten. It seeks to intimidate. People hate that. This is exactly the kind of shit that makes people think liberals are jerks.
Feminism will be the death of liberalism yet.
Hieronymus Braintree"
--------------------------
If that's how you feel, go and join the freepers.
Feminism is an essential component of liberalism.
And stop reaching for your smelling salts over that posting - one woman was justifiably pissed off, and expressed it, and now your delicate sensibilities are offended.
Are you really a liberal? Or just some wimpy wanker?
plunge,
Given the fact that I come with a "control"--a male, travels with me, both went to state schools in the northeast for the BA, both got MA & PhD at the same institution, taught the same courses at the same places, though I did this for longer, both have children--the same children--I think I can argue for something other than my own peevishness. And yes, this is one institution, but read lolly's post, talk to female academics anywhere. This happens all the time.
Wiggling my ears is biological.
Jeez, I need to get control of myself I'm just gushing uncharacteristically for myself about these neat gifts.
~ahem~
GWPDA - Oh my gosh - that collar sounds perfect. Maybe someday Incog will have pictures for us.
String's collar is here. Got it on her right and she's ding-a-linging running around.
Incog,
You need to post a picture of that, so the rest of us can admire String.
Glad she got through her surgery all right.
Yes, Incognito, we need pictures of String in all that finery.
I got all of those at the same time I was getting Arthur's dinner, stopping at the library, analysing Orientations, and applying for a couple of jobs....
GWPDA
toppling off my chair--and disturbing my Dixie-belle from her pillow-- in uncontrollable guffaws...
For what it's worth, I think human beings only have three drives that are one-hundred percent purely biological: eatin', shittin' and fuckin'.
Even those three aren't purely biological anymore. Culture still determines how and when and even why you do them...
Ô¿Ô - pictures - we want pictures.
I loved your description - don't apologize. In fact, that may be my favorite comment you've made, ever.
I can just hear the bell.
Maybe someone who's had absolutely no human contact throughout his or her life could do it, but until then, we're just stabbing in the dark.
There was that girl they found kept in a closet for many years...she helped Linguists figure out some interesting aspects of speech. Her socialization was a total zero iirc, yet there were certain innate concepts related to cause & effect that she grasped initially.
Oh, and one more point about my "control"--we work in exactly the same area of academic specialization, and I'm told, by students who've had us both, that our teaching styles are remarkably similar.
"You and Professor Thersites must have a great marriage," one kid said to me this semester. "You talk exactly the same."
Are you really a liberal? Or just some wimpy wanker?
Nancy
i think the latter nicely captures the necessary subtleties, Nancy...
rorschach - Even those three aren't purely biological anymore. Culture still determines how and when and even why you do them...
Very true - I really doubt that it's possible to untangle nature and nurture. I think they are interdependent in ways we have yet to discover.
i think the latter nicely captures the necessary subtleties, Nancy...
Plus, alliteration is always cool.
For centuries Jews were specifically and clearly told farming was dirty and beneath them, and they sought skilled labor, bureaucratic and mercantile positions. A Jewish farmer--because they did exist anyway--was someone without other options. However, in the nineteenth century, farming became an important skill in the reclamation of the literal land itself, and the stock Zionist archetype from the early era, besides the fearless and tireless soldier, is the Jewish farmer. In numerous societies certain occupations are determined to be foirbidden, but because they are necessary, lower-class or lowest-caste people hold them for generations. To go back to a Jewish example, witness usury pass back and forth from respectability to forbidden evil, from Christian to Jewish privilidge, driven humorously enough by the untrustworthiness of Christian lenders.
Perhaps the more interesting example is, why do we at various times seek a push for certain industries (the space race, the information technology thing, biotechnology in the seventies and now) unless it's just a changeable variable like our tax rate?
Leviathan,
Well, pissing and spitting are both methods of removing excess waste products, so just lump it under the general "shitting" term. The rest is grooming, more or less. Upon reflection, I see no reason not to throw that one in there, too.
Tena,
Ditto for fleeing. Self-prevervation, either through fleeing a predator or maintaining a shelter. You could probably through our tendency to cluster together on that particular pile, as well. Actually, maybe grooming is a part of that, too, since the whole point of grooming (apart from vanity, of course) is getting rid of unpleasent hitchhikers on the body electric. So, hmmm...
So...consuming food, reproduction, excretion of waste products and personal safety, which may or may not include grooming, and if it doesn't, it's by itself. So, in other words, if it's something all animals do...then what else would count? Not just stuff some animals do and some don't, but a general shared occupation.
Not being surprised at all by it being biological is not the same thing as it having been proved to be biological.
This is quite true, and I would never argue the contrary.
I have read lots of studies in the field of gender science, and the problem with the vast majority of them is that we don't currently have the tools to determine when something is strictly biologically determined. IF there even is such a thing.
This is certainly a problem, though I don't think that "strictly biologically determined" is all that important.
Some recent research suggests that the environment may even turn genes off or on,
"...suggests that..." is probably an understatement; my wife, who works in the biological sciences in industry, tells me that it it is quite clear that certain chemical factors can activate and deactivate genes, and that this knowledged is used all the time in the field; I'm not sure this says a lot about whether or not things are biologically determined, so much as how they are biologically determined, and how that determination can be altered.
and this casts the whole nature-nurture debate into a very different light.
The nature-nurture debate is, at root, probably too strongly put as the two are presented as polar opposites, whereas there is a wide continuum, and the question really should be more open-ended -- "What causes trait X?" -- rather than binary "Is it nature or nurture?".
Backslider,
Sleep?
I'll get some pictures. Promise.
When will the pundits give this shit up? If there isn't free speech at a University, then there isn't free speech anywhere!
O'Reilly, Scarborough, Coulter (you bitch)...get over it!
Well, Backslider, if that's your framework, then communication has to rank right up there, whether it's "I wanna fuck" or "I'm about to kick your ass," it seems a common occupation.
But still, when it comes to humans, every biological drive is culturally inflected.
We have fallen from the grace of the state of nature, and nothing is pure! (/excessive drama)
I can also testify that academics, particularly those over fifty, can be remarkably socially backwards compared with their agemates in private industry.
Strangely enough, my experience has been the reverse, but then most of the over-fifty academics I've known have been in the liberal arts, and most of those I've known from private industry have been from a business, accounting, technical, or non-collegiate background, so it probably has nothing to do with "academia" vs. "private industry".
>>Merely noting the outcomes is not racism, even if the causes are.<
Whaaaa? Did this make sense to you while you were typing it?
Saying that there aren't many Jewish farmers without mentioning that Jews were forbidden from owning land in Europe is a ridiculous thing to say. You can't look at the effect and pretend the cause doesn't exist.<
So you're saying that he's a racist for noting what is an absolute fact without also going into the long list of reasons why it is true? In fact, his point in the passsage was that "we should think systematically and clinically about the reasons for underrepresentation."
People like Professor B flying off the handle when someone talks about indisputable facts that are/could be the result of racism just makes it difficult to talk meaningfully about these issues.
NYM:
The last (iar) DrMrsKono and I also were in essentially the same field, and students had the opportunity to have classes with us both fairly often. Sometimes, students were amazed and aghast that ProfMrsKono and I were capable of even mutual communication, so different were we in style, approach, and content.
When asked how DrMrsKono and I met, I would explain that we met in a honky-tonk. She and her sister and brother-in-law were out pub-crawling, celebrating her acceptance into a PhD program, and we met when they got down to my level...
true story
Why has nobody mentioned how important evolutionary psychology is to this discussion?
Summers got his ideas about the genetic inferiority of women directly from Steven Pinker, especially from The Blank Slate. And note how Pinker (along with Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, Steven Sailor and the National Review) wasted no time in jumping to Summers' defense.
Summers' explanation of women's career failures are pure evolutionary psychology: women don't want to be scientists (Pinker made the same point in Blank Slate); women aren't as capable, and then, maybe, there might be some discrimination - but that's minor compared to women's own lack of desires/abilities.
Evolutionary psychology is a wonderful tool for conservatives - it gives a sheen of science to all their deeply-held beliefs about the superiority of males. It's a wonderful way to get patriarchy off the hook - it "proves" women are mainly failing because they don't want to succeed, and they aren't capable of succeeding, not because the still male-dominated world stacks the deck.
One of the funniest spectacles in the world of evolutionary psychology is when the hard-core faction tries to push the idea that both femaleness and non-whiteness are responsible for mental failure, while the "liberal" faction disagrees - they believe that only femaleness is responsible for mental failure.
And BTW, these people are well-organized. The University of California at Santa Barbara is HQ for the evolutionary psychology movement. They list Pinker as one of their allies (although they still list him as being at MIT)
http://www.psych.ucsb.edu/resear.../cep/
index.html
rorschach - Even those three aren't purely biological anymore. Culture still determines how and when and even why you do them...
True, but you're still gonna do 'em, by hook or by crook, or at least wanna do 'em. I'm living proof that a human being can go a rather distressingly long stretch sans sexual relations and even be of the mindset that it's not the utmost drive in what I do. That all being said, I still wanna get laid - either consciously or the "some days, you just can't get rid of a hard-on" experience we've all shared - and the only base reason for sexual activity is reproduction. I'm not quite convinced human beings are, at their base, pleasure-seeking creatures. I just know I am.
And considering that, you try going a week without taking a dump and see what happens. The hows, wheres and whys may be subject to socialization - and they are - but the needs are hardwired into us.
this is not about a liberal unwillingness to accept even the possibility that there are any genetic causes of differences in male/female outcomes.
Of course not!
LMFAO
NYMary - sleep - good one. Die, too, I suppose. If that isn't biological, I can't think what else it would be.
Of course you're free to boycott whatever you wish. I'm saying it's going overboard to try and harm someomone's career because you don't agree with their beliefs. This man has done nothing illegal or unethical. Now the faculty may have other good reasons calling for his resignation.....fine as long as it's not because of what he thinks.
"Genetic differences between men and women DOES NOT MEAN that I lack a brain because I was born without male genitalia."
===========================
I prefer to believe that men were born without a womb and the ability to create life.
Hey - It's Friday and I am done for three days. Whoopeee!!!!
Happy birthday Atrios.
For centuries Jews were specifically and clearly told farming was dirty and beneath them, and they sought skilled labor, bureaucratic and mercantile positions. A Jewish farmer--because they did exist anyway--was someone without other options>
yeah, the ancient jews were wandering herdspeople. farming was anathema to them. Think Cain (farmer) and Abel (drover)...Cain and Abel is the story of the first range war...which the jewish herders lost; they were eventually pushed off the rangelands by the farmers, became marginalized urban dwellers, and have been pissed off about it ever since...
not to say they aren't entitled...just sayin
Why has nobody mentioned how important evolutionary psychology is to this discussion?
Summers got his ideas about the genetic inferiority of women directly from Steven Pinker, especially from The Blank Slate. And note how Pinker (along with Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, Steven Sailor and the National Review) wasted no time in jumping to Summers' defense.
Summers' explanation of women's career failures are pure evolutionary psychology: women don't want to be scientists (Pinker made the same point in Blank Slate); women aren't as capable, and then, maybe, there might be some discrimination - but that's minor compared to women's own lack of desires/abilities.
Evolutionary psychology is a wonderful tool for conservatives - it gives a sheen of science to all their deeply-held beliefs about the superiority of males. It's a wonderful way to get patriarchy off the hook - it "proves" women are mainly failing because they don't want to succeed, and they aren't capable of succeeding, not because the still male-dominated world stacks the deck.
One of the funniest spectacles in the world of evolutionary psychology is when the hard-core faction tries to push the idea that both femaleness and non-whiteness are responsible for mental failure, while the "liberal" faction disagrees - they believe that only femaleness is responsible for mental failure.
And BTW, these people are well-organized. The University of California at Santa Barbara is HQ for the evolutionary psychology movement. They list Pinker as one of their allies (although they still list him as being at MIT)
http://www.psych.ucsb.edu/resear.../cep/
index.html
Nancy--The very notion of "evolutionary psychology" (or at least how it tends to be employed) is such a gross transgression of disciplinary bounds for no good reason (and as you point out for many bad ones), that I always want to counter with, "Oh yeah, well I believe in...quantum sociology! And, and... Euclidian biology!"
NYMary:
Oh, and one more point about my "control"--we work in exactly the same area of academic specialization
And since you work in the same school that's probably a big part of your problem. Clearly, as a female, you don't need the career. You've got a husband to support you. Giving you tenure would be taking it away from some man who needs it to support his family.
Oh goodie Incog - Arthur and I want to see. (He helped to pick it out - the little bell? It's very much the same timbre as that of Arthur's tags as he trots thru the house. A very dear and homey sound.)
And lolly? UCLA has some interesting attitudes towards the granting of advanced degrees - much less employment. My best favorite was when UCLA told me that I wasn't qualified to teach Western Civ because of the narrowness of my field. My field was the British Empire, 1880-1926.... But then, I'm engaged right now in removing a PhD from someone to whom UCLA inappropriately granted it, just to make sure that yet another toxic, CIA bought-and-paid-for half-assed spook doesn't get inserted into the academic stream. Oh UCLA! At least I still have the hood....
NYMary,
Hmmm. I guess I'd put sleep in their with eating, in that it's neccessary to refuel and rest the engines. You can't go without sleep or food or water because your body would fall apart. There's probably a better way of saying it, but for the most part, I'd say sleep is in the same category as eating.
Unless you're telling me to take a nap, which I probably will soon enough.
rorschach,
Hmmm...another thought. I don't know if human beings "need" to communicate so much as it's merely away of getting food/nookie/a pot to piss in. It's like saying "we need to have thumbs". Of course, I can see that, too. However, I think animals communicate and that's more a facilitator to need than a base need in and of itself.
As for falling from nature, I don't know. I think almost everything human's do is "natural" since we're a part of nature, no matter how much we try to deny it. It just ain't all good for nature or, for that matter, us doing it. Someone much wiser than me said something along the lines that whether man is a fallen divine being or an evolutionary quirk gone horribly awry, man is nevertheless a out-of-sorts with everything else. I dunno if it means we're a "mistake" of anything, but there's some definate validity to the idea that whatever's supposed to be "right", we ain't doing it.
Yeah there's no way evolution could have played any sort of role in our psychological make up.
That's why we have the same psychology as chimps.
QED.
woody guthrie's guitar is talking about biblical times and our example was ***a few thousand*** years later than that. But that just illustrates the larger point, doesn't it? Go back far enough and all societies are gaggles of poor farmers.
flory,
True, but we trade off the one course taught in our area (Irish Literature), and mostly we teach shit courses (Composition). It's not like he was hired to be their Irish lit person.
In fact that's why we have the same psychology as amoebas!
double QED!
Yeah there's no way evolution could have played any sort of role in our psychological make up.
That's why we have the same psychology as chimps.
QED.
Male Chimp: "And That is why female chimps do not want to be pack leaders."
Female Chimp nearby: "Shut up, all of you! We're trying to pull bugs out of trees with these sticks we made!"
Not to quibble, but reproduction is certainly one of those universals, but fuckin' isn't. Many animals reproduce asexually...
Backslider,
I think that was one of the best arguments against Intelligent Design that I've read. Everytime I hear that phrase, I think about how insane our species is collectively.
War! Intelligent design?
Pollution! Intelligent design?
Religion! Intelligent design?
But that just illustrates the larger point, doesn't it? Go back far enough and all societies are gaggles of poor farmers.
I'm sure you can find at least one example somewher of a society that went straight from hunter/gatherer or nomadic herder to something other than "poor farmers" in the modern era, but, yeah, that's generally true.
NYMary:
You both teach Irish Lit - and you get paid for it? How is that a job?
Oh, wait.....undergraduates. Never mind.
It's not like he was hired to be their Irish lit person.
Were you both hired at the same time? Cos if you were, I'd be willing to bet there was at least an unconscious train of thought...'We probably can't give them both tenure; and she might quit in a few years because of kids - so we'll put him on the tenure track - he needs it more.'
rorschach,
but the urge to fuck is often disconnected from the urge toward reproduction.
And I was raised Catholic!
Boom chick! Thanks folks! Try the veal!
GWPDA, thanks again. You're very thoughtful.
"Summers got his ideas about the genetic inferiority of women..."
Summers didn't express any ideas abou the genetic inferiority of women. He suggested that women are less likely to be among the very highest percentiles, and also that they are less likely to be at the very lowest percentiles - that their abilities tend to cluster more closely to the median then men. It's just as accurate to say he said men were inferior, because they're more likely to be way below average then women. Which is to say, not fair at all.
Is this statement true? Maybe, maybe not. But it is not at all a statement that one sex is inferior to another.
Go back far enough and all societies are gaggles of poor farmers.
קוי
yup...which begin to thrive by dispropriating the migrants...
settled sod-busters versus the herd-following grazers...
BTW: (קוי )--you said "we"; are this k&y reconstituted in (cyrillic?)
Hmmm...another thought. I don't know if human beings "need" to communicate so much as it's merely away of getting food/nookie/a pot to piss in. It's like saying "we need to have thumbs". Of course, I can see that, too. However, I think animals communicate and that's more a facilitator to need than a base need in and of itself.
I think now we may be straying into individual survival vs species survival, in which case communication and, yes, reproduction/fucking do not fit in your category.
For survival, eating, elimination of waste, and sleep are all the individual needs...
Fucking Sullivan:
HEADS UP: I let rip on the academic Stalinists baying for Summers' blood on the Chris Matthews Show this weekend. I cannot believe the hysteria. Well, actually, the sad things is I can believe it. But if Summers goes down, the chilling effect on intellectual freedom in this country will be intense. That's what the far left wants - turning universities into propaganda tools rather than centers for genuine intellectual inquiry. The idea of the university, to purloin Newman and Oakeshott, is under attack. This is about far more than university politics. It's about the future of free inquiry.
He's like a zombie. If the university is under attack at all it's from the wingers (has Sully missed the memos?). And the other thing with this that pisses me off is that Sully has made a fucking career out of crusading against discrimination against gays in this country, but he is unwilling to see that discrimination against women is rampant in the workplace.
Oh Kono - you've reminded me. You say that you and the former Dr.Mrs.Dr.Kono drove a Lexus? We have so much in common. I drive a Luxus and find it just elegant. (And Arthur doesn't get a bit nervous either.) Great machine. And you know, a tune-up is all of $6.50...
rorschach,
That's quibbling.
Somehow, I don't think my female friend who graduated undergrad from Harvard with a physics degree and went on to get her doctrate from cal tech would agree with Mr. Summers' remarks. Neither would my friend with three masters who's doing a joint MD/PhD program, nor another friend who got her PhD in computer science, or the friend who did Biotech for her undergrad, not to mention yet another friend who obtained a post-doc in geology...
flory,
It was weirder than that. We started as adjuncts at the same time, but I took another job, working much longer hours (teaching high school) so that the family would have benefits. He worked less, but was seen on campus frequently, which probably helped.
And the Irish lit course is one class, once a year. Thers never teaches more thn one lit a semester. (I do, but at my other campus.)
Is this statement true? Maybe, maybe not. But it is not at all a statement that one sex is inferior to another.
joe
it's a statement which supports differential treatment, based not on performance but on aggregated speculative data in a system which already only sees the universe through one lens...
rorschach,
but the urge to fuck is often disconnected from the urge toward reproduction.
And I was raised Catholic!
Well, c'mon. That's hardly surprising! If you were still a devout Catholic, then maybe I'd raise an eyebrow, but I was raised Catholic too, and have spent all of my active years actively avoiding reproduction!
Ô¿Ô - I was (and am) delighted to make you guys happy with such a thing. It makes me smile to see the Little Stringey with her red badge and her tinkly bell. You should both live and be well.
Evolutionary psychology is not the same thing as evolutionary theory in general, will. It's something piggybacking on evolutionary evidence such as fossils.
Yet we can't have fossil evidence on prehistoric sociology or psychology so all the theories are just conjectures.
I'm reading an interesting book on that by Anne Innis Dagg, called "Love of Shopping" Is Not A Gene.
For survival, eating, elimination of waste, and sleep are all the individual needs...
rorschach | Email | Homepage | 02.18.05 - 6:42 pm | #
Yeah, but the survival of the group is dependent on the continued survival of individuals, isn't it? I mean, yeah, them that can't keep up get weeded out, but if all the cows ain't getting hot bovine lovin', we'll soon run slap out of burgers.
it's a statement which supports differential treatment,
No, it doesn't. Even if true, it doesn't support differential treatment. All it does is explain differential results from equal treatment.
Now, if it is, in fact, wrong but believed to be true, it could be a statement that belief in makes actual differential treatment less likely to be discovered because people excuse inequity in results as being the result of different ability, so it is an idea which, if false, needs to be forcefully combatted on the merits.
I drive a Luxus and find it just elegant. (And Arthur doesn't get a bit nervous either.) Great machine. And you know, a tune-up is all of $6.50...
GWPDA
you got one of the really really quiet ones...the bearings in those things are so sweetly smooth, you only have just about to nudge it to get clipping...but they're not great for really heavy going, imo...
I just read an account of the debate held last night between Richard Perle and Howard Dean wrritten by a left winger who attended the debate. The highlight of the report is when some 52 year old Democrat threw a shoe at Richard Perle while screaming "mother f****** liar" numerous times as the police dragged him out of the debate hall. He missed Mr. Perle, who took the incident in light fashion. I believe there were local TV stations there, so I would think the whole episode would be on tape. Ah, the Democrat Party at work!!! There is simply no plumbing the depth to which the American left has fallen.
Yeah, but the survival of the group is dependent on the continued survival of individuals, isn't it?
Well, no. Often the survival of the group is dependent on individuals dying out. If individuals didn't die from other means before resources ran out and just kept reproducing, very soon the habitat would be overrun, the resources completely inadequate, and the whole thing come crashing down.
"it's a statement which supports differential treatment"
Correction: it is a statement that CAN be used to support differential treatment. It is entirely possible to agree with that statement and still support fair treatment among the sexes.
Let me turn it around: IF that statement is true, does that mean differential treatment between the sexes is appropriate, moral, or fair?
Yep, that's just like Mr. Perle to be a mother fucking liar and take it lightly.
.
cmdicely, I'm in a liberal arts department at the reputedly most liberal university in the nation. I used to work for two megabanks, a law firm, two manufacturers and several high-tech firms. The faculty are, hands down, the worst*. They regularly give soundbite about the oppressed, then turn around and treat junior faculty and staff members like peons. Sometimes an emeritus will try to get me to type an envelope or make coffee. So maybe it's the hypocrisy that really annoys me.
*FWIW, the best place was the socialist bakery.
The reported disparity between the wages of men and women is due, in part, to the absence of women from the workforce during times of chldbearing and rearing. That skews women's numbers downward a little.
NYMary, I wasn't inviting you to elaborate. You can tell us all you want: the problem is that we only know your side of the story. For all we know, you could be leaving out key elements, even unwittingly, that would make the cause of the disparity obvious. Or you could be completely justified. How are we supposed to know or conclude anything from what you say?
cmdicely,
Yeah, there's that, and I admit to simplifying things a good bit. I'm not a biologist, after all, and in any event, no monkey bidness, eventually no monkeys.
cmdicely, there is an article discussing some of the extreme tail stuff in the New York Times. I'm not sure if it's still accessible by the short-term linking, but this would be the link:
Angier etc.
The authors talk about the meaning of the higher tails for men in some tests, but they don't talk about the reasons for there being more men in the tails in some tests. These include the possibility that men or boys game tests more, that there are more men in the tails in general in some areas, and that the tests we use may catch boys and girls at different stages in their developmental paths which would make the results be off.
I can't remember if they discuss the fact that many men who thrive in sciences did not score in the high tai to begin with, or if this was from some other source.
The point all this ignores is of course that the women Summers was discussing are already in the high-scoring portion of the tests, given that they are in an Ivy League school.
GWPDA,
Nice machine! Thers insisted, when we lived in Florida, on a manual mower, and it was great. Here, we live on a sodden acre, and though I try to cut into the square mowing feet with landscaping and my vegetable garden, a push mower would be pretty onerous. Our neighbors all have ride-ons and think we're nuts for not having one of those. They also think we're nuts because we don't have a snowblower, but this winter I'm coming around to that line of thinking myself.
Homosexuality is built into the human code. Non-reproducing uncles have more time and resources to help guarantee the success of their nieces and nephews.
flory,
The "he needs it more" argument is the one that really, really steams me. And I know committees think that way.
And plunge, I wasn't elaboarting for you. Just to be clear.
"but they're not great for really heavy going, imo..."
No, they're stated as no good for more than around a third acre and I'll attest to that. Not that they fail, but rather doing a mechanical mow of more than that is enough to make the user fail. But if you're dealing with less than that, they're brilliant. Good for you, and good for the grass too - it doesn't razor or pull the blades, it scissors it - and the adjustibility of the clip is very nice. The sheer appropriateness of the technology is a pleasure too. You can pick up the thing and run it over the lawn, hose it down and that's it. Nothing more. The key to it is achieving the correct height measure tho.
he reported disparity between the wages of men and women is due, in part, to the absence of women from the workforce during times of chldbearing and rearing. That skews women's numbers downward a little.
The disparity remains even if we remove all people with children from the study, which means that this is not the only reason, or even the largest reason (in most studies I have read).
flory,
The "he needs it more" argument is the one that really, really steams me. And I know committees think that way.
And plunge, I wasn't elaboarting for you. Just to be clear.
NYMary
NYMary: That is a nasty situation there, and you are right--even if you weren't both there, academia punishes litiginous junior faculty and doesn't forget. And word spreads. It's lose-lose to be in that situation.
My partner and I hopefully are different enough in specializations not to end up in similar situations...
NYMary - Brill makes a terrific electric mower that might suit you. Go to that same location and take a look. I'm just crazy about their stuff, and now, in the third year of its use, I find the push mower to be in great shape and very reliable. I'm sure the electric model would be perfect.
Right now I'm shopping for a nice composter, myself.
echidne:
The disparity remains even if we remove all people with children from the study, which means that this is not the only reason, or even the largest reason (in most studies I have read).
True. Men make more money because they're expected to. Plus, they are more willing to take risks and be aggressive in getting the bigger bucks. That's attributable to physiology.
Konopelli re: your post @4:05.
Sacramento is not "bourgeois". The city votes solidly Demo: Rbt Matsui was our rep. in Congress for 20 some years until his recent death. We went for Kerry by a large margin.
The Sacramento County suburbs are more Rethug, of course That is the primary source of the "moronic brownshirt fucks in Sacramento....some of the biggest yahoos around" whom dave mentioned at 4:19.
To be fair, our moronic rethuglicans are no dumber than those in the rest of the country. They just haven't as much TV experience.
The disparity remains even if we remove all people with children from the study, which means that this is not the only reason, or even the largest reason (in most studies I have read).
Same here, Echidne.
Plus, this should, in my opinion, be fuel for a movement to require parental leave--equal parental leave--to both parents... But that's just me.
Oh, and I'm sure everyone's seen this , but on the subject of powerful men speaking stupidly:
The president of the American Medical Association has come to the defense of New York Medical College under attack for banning a gay students group from campus.
In an interview with the Westchester Journal News AMA President John Nelson said as a private institution the college has the right to set and enforce its own policies.
Nelson then said that the school was acting no differently than Brigham Young University in banning Coca-Cola from campus or its suspending of four athletes accused of raping a 17-year-old girl.
flory,
The "he needs it more" argument is the one that really, really steams me. And I know committees think that way.
Hard to believe it still happens today. And from everything I hear - its getting worse.
NYMary,
This is only mostly about sexism. Administrators are cheap SOB's, and if they can get two people for the price of one, they will. The sexist part is that they chose your husband as the "one."
One of you needs to get an offer from another university, and make a spousal hiring contingent on the offer, either for a new job or a retention offer for your husband. You could find a better joint future somewhere else. If both of you are happier and more solvent, your kids (if any) will appreciate that more than the "advantages" of living in the metropolis.
The reported disparity between the wages of men and women is due, in part, to the absence of women from the workforce during times of chldbearing and rearing. That skews women's numbers downward a little.
As others have stated, this is pretty clearly not the whole explanation; OTOH, quite a bit of the rest may not be from pay discrimination, but from women seeking security over pay, or being more restricted in geographic searches because of social factors that are not the employer's fault (like women being more likely to restrict themselves by their husband's work location than vice-versa).
Toby, no. The differences that remain after standardizing for most known differences between men and women are sizable and at least some of them are due to discrimination. Studies that use the audit method (of hiring male and female actors and of teaching them to do the same thing in interviews and giving them standardized references) have shown that this applies to at least part of the unexplained differential.
Plus, this should, in my opinion, be fuel for a movement to require parental leave--equal parental leave--to both parents
Even if equal parental leave is allowed, men will be more able to not take as much because childbirth isn't as physically demanding on them, and in many fields taking time out has a serious consequence. N
Until humans reproduce entirely outside of their own bodies, women will have babies, and those that do will face disadvantages in certain fields.
"hispanics have no aptitude for country music."
-mrs moore
wrong. the best country music being made these days is from texas and the border areas and is sung in spanish.
And about the tails in various tests in general: Most of these tests normalize the distribution. This means that if you get one question wrong and almost all the other questions right you are punished a lot more than you would for getting a question wrong while getting about half the questions wrong. So people in the extreme upper tail are not that much better from the people right below them. Useful to remember in thinking about the issues.
cmd--
I know. I am not arguing for equal maternal and paternal leave. I mean equal parental leave after the birth. Maternal leave for pregnancy is on top of that.
Sorry for the vagueness.
Until humans reproduce entirely outside of their own bodies, women will have babies, and those that do will face disadvantages in certain fields.
Well, this depends very much on how we decide the society should look like. If we decide that childbearing should not matter at all, then you might be right. If we allow for childbearing (like we allow for sleep and relaxation now), then things might look very different.
In other words, the society is not something unrelated to how we make it.
CYRILLIC!
indeed! such norping!
This is k&y in cyrillic:
КЭИ & ЮРИ
(we don't know "and" in Russian; in Hebrew it's easy, it's just "v'-" [and "b'-" is "in," and "m'-" is "from" and "l'-" is "to."])
Echidne--I still am, after months and months, waiting the time when I first disagree.
As far as childbirth and society--this is why I find Marge Piercy's Woman on the Edge of Time so fascinating.
She completely technologizes reproduction, in liberating fashion, turning Huxley on his head...
Although we do not yet understand why "yu (an acute angle growing out of a horizontal line) ri (two semi-parallel vertical lines of uneven length)" looks like a freaking ankh. But it is cool. The next challenge being after all Kemet!
watertiger cool blog love your snarkyness
An appropriate punishment for Summers would be to exile him to one of the third world countries whose economy he destroyed when he ran the IMR.
Anyway, someone's gotta be on the bottom. But I wouldn't deny that sexism explains why women are discriminated against on the job.
neognosikos what does it mean and why do you think we are hippokrites young toby of draft age?????
" and is sung in Spanish." Olav, that would be, 'and is sung in Spanish next door to GWPDA.' It seems to involve a polka beat as well. Fun to listen to. Soon, when it's warmer, the nabe will get together and do the street party stuff - which considering that the father of the house next door to GWPDA is the master pastry chef of the local country club should be REALLY, REALLY, good....
I know it steamed my mother a whole hell of a lot for her to get her nursing degree, to work her ass off as a nurse while going to school to get a post-grad degree, to be raising three children on her own, and then to hear, after she'd spent years working hours that would have broken most people, "Well, we just hired that guy fresh out of anesthesia school and paid him more than we do you, because, you know, he needs to make more money."
More than a woman with three children? More than a woman with the same education AND more experience? Who never called in sick, even once? Who was through having children?
Fuck all these bastards. The discrimination is bone-deep.
Thanks, rorschach! Are we the same person? I better find something you won't like. I embroider, for example.
How about putting the incompetents on the bottom, regardless of gender or race?
Thanks, rorschach! Are we the same person? I better find something you won't like. I embroider, for example.
Echidne of the snakes
Hmmm... When I was younger, I used to cross-stitch, so here we are again.
Or perhaps we can just square off and have cross-stitch v embroidery turf-wars. Nah, it's been too long for me to know enough...
And LJ--
Clearly, that's a proposal with which Petzold would never agree!
Rory:
Not considering whose cock he sucks.
Well, this depends very much on how we decide the society should look like. If we decide that childbearing should not matter at all, then you might be right. If we allow for childbearing (like we allow for sleep and relaxation now), then things might look very different.
If by "allow for childbearing" you mean "give people who leave the workforce to have children preference over people with better job-relevant skills", then, yes, the disadvantage might disappear.
Then again, I don't think that enshrining this kind of discrimination in law or social practice is a good idea; people should be free to make choices about their lives, but that doesn't mean they need to be isolated from the consequences of them.
Correcting for past discrimination is one thing; but insulating people against the consequences of their own free decisions is another.
I think real inequities -- that no doubt are a large part, and probably the largest part, of the disadvantages that women face -- is important. But I don't think that every difference in biology can be negated effectively by law, or should be.
I'm not gay, LJ, but thanks for reconfirming my notion of liberals' hypocrisy on the question of orientation tolerance.
Thanks, rorschach! Are we the same person? I better find something you won't like. I embroider, for example.
Echidne of the snakes
I do all kinds of needlework - embroidery included. Also petit point, fine darning and seaming and both whitework and cutwork. Always assuming I can actually see what I'm doing....
cmdicely, here is something in which we differ quite considerably:
Then again, I don't think that enshrining this kind of discrimination in law or social practice is a good idea; people should be free to make choices about their lives, but that doesn't mean they need to be isolated from the consequences of them.
Correcting for past discrimination is one thing; but insulating people against the consequences of their own free decisions is another.
Using the same argument I could say that work should be twenty-four hours a day and if some people make the free choice to sleep some of that, well, it's their problem. The example fails because we all need to sleep.
The point I'm trying to make is that some things are more than just private choices with no wider consequences. If women stop having children the human race ends. It's not like the choice to have ice-cream or not which I don't want the society to support or to condemn. It's something very different, something with societal implications, something that gives us the next generation. The people who will be your doctors and dentists and nurses when you are old.
The society benefits from this task and I see nothing wrong with the idea that the society should support this task, too.
GWPDA, you might be interested in my Friday embroidery blogging, then. I'm going to put up one picture every Friday from now on.
I have never posted on Atrios before but wanted to weigh in on this issue. I have a particular interest in this question because I am a female physicist, daughter of a physics professor, and younger sister to another physicist. I have worked as a tenure-track professor and as a planetary scientist at NASA. I have been lucky not to have encountered any discrimination through the course of my career for being female or for having a family (one 4 year old girl and one 10 month old boy). In fact, I was allowed to work three days a week following the birth of my daughter at NASA and as a physics professor was allowed to work 2/3-time until my daughter went to kindergarten. I actually agreed with almost everything Larry Summers said and did not find his comments offensive.
Using the same argument I could say that work should be twenty-four hours a day and if some people make the free choice to sleep some of that, well, it's their problem.
Well, no, that's a "distantly parallel" argument, not "the same" argument, but, yeah, that's pretty much the status quo for all kinds of exempt fields now. So?
The point I'm trying to make is that some things are more than just private choices with no wider consequences. If women stop having children the human race ends.
So? There is no evidence that women, under a system where they are compensated fairly for their present skills and compensated extra in pay in the workforce for their choice to have children would stop having children in such numbers as to threaten the survival of the species, so I think that's a completely bogus argument.
Further, inasmuch as they produce a public good, any correction ought not to be on the backs of their private employers, but on the public. If you want to give women who have children pay for the government for the sacrifice of childbearing (on top of any tax deductions, etc., that people get to support children), well, I can see an argument for that policy.
But for enforced workplace non-merit discrimination to compensatefor personal reproductive choices...no, I don't see that. I don't think employers should be allowed to punish or forced to reward such choices.
cmdicely, I wasn't advocating any particular form of intervention. It was your post that mentioned that taking into account childbearing would be discriminatory. Yet we have arrangements for military service, for example, and most people don't view those as discriminatory.
So? There is no evidence that women, under a system where they are compensated fairly for their present skills and compensated extra in pay in the workforce for their choice to have children would stop having children in such numbers as to threaten the survival of the species, so I think that's a completely bogus argument.
In what sense is it bogus? I'm pointing out that childbearing has considerable external benefits. You appear to argue that these don't matter if people have enough children without these benefits being acknowledged. This is a different argument from stating that having children or not is a private choice.
- I'm going out to eat now, but I'll check the thread later on if you want to talk more.
It wouldnt be too hard to deal with this if it werent for Republican resistance to it - The Swedes, just to take one example, have publicly funded child care that everyone can use. The Europeans in general have much more generous mandated parental leave for new children. This sort of thing makes it a lot easier for parents to have children and high powered jobs at the same time.
Larry Summers may be wrong, but why is he not allowed to be wrong? Why is his being wrong some sort of crime that must be punished? The braying for his head reflects very, very poorly on the true tradition of liberal inquiry. The entire PC BS reflects poorly on trying to get people to think critically.
Certainly attack Summers for positing a poorly articulated and poorly backed up argument, but the personal vilification makes the Left seem like the Frothing Right.
I am a female tenured physics professor at a large state university.
I got this position, with tenure, after making a name for myself as a research scientist. Except for the job security, the whole idea of being "one of the guys" with the kind of egomaniacs this discipline attracts was always very off-putting to me.
The tendency for men to score higher in abstract shape manipulation has nothing to do with aptitude for science. The first approximation a physicist makes with every new problem is to assume spherical symmetry.
Echidne of the snakes - surely. Many, many years ago, I used to go to the museum and trace out embroidery patterns. Exhausting, and most folks thought I was mad - but oddly, my grandmama who had taught me needlework, thought it was interesting too. I got stalled out in Spanish blackwork - I mean when do you use Spanish blackwork? And my eyes aren't awfully good any more - but my hands remember how to do things....
If academic thought is never allowed to be wrong, how can we ever be sure it's right?
One of the great advantages of an academic setting is ideas like this can be hashed out and discussed without regard to political correctness.
I hope that is not forgotten as we continue down this path toward destroying this man's character.
Noting that there _is_ discrimination against women is obvious.
It's also a non-sequitur. Whether Summers had a valid point in saying:
1) Some disparity in our hiring rates will be explained by discrimination in grade school, high school, college admissions, etc., about which Harvard can't do anything;
2) Some disparity will be explained by the lamentable truth that women, even those with high-power careers, will get stuck doing disproportionate shares of the child-rearing, about which Harvard can do nothing;
3) Some of it might even be explained by genetic differences that seem from the initial and non-rigorous data to be real and possibly even relevant to science careers, about which Harvard can do nothing; so
4) Nothing makes it certain that if we do everything we're supposed to do we're going to have a 50% / 50% ratio, and let's not forget our duty to think clearly about what it is we're doing here;
is answered _at all_ by it. Yes, there is discrimination. Is there only discrimination, or more to the point, is there only discrimination by Harvard, that explains hiring differentials? No? Then _maybe people ought to think things through before jumping to the easy conclusion that every differential is the direct result of what a man in this room said or did_.
Not that I'd expect it. The duty I referred to above seems ever to be honored more in the breach.
Disappointed Fan,
TtP
I'm sorry, and not what I'd consider a troll, but if this _isn't_ about " a liberal unwillingness to accept even the possibility that there are any genetic causes of differences," then what is it about?
I mean, surely if there's a real reason, you could articulate one, right? It _could_ be put into words?
for those interested in research on gender differences, here are some review papers specifically on spatial cognition...
I'm interested in the research, and also how we talk about the research, and it's supposed implications. For the record, I am persuaded that a person in Summers position should not assert that innate differences are more important than social forces, while clearly social forces are still incredibly important in hiring and training. However i'm not impressed with the quality of the debate on the left. Let's be open to debate and resist the urge to censor and punish for raising the topic. If the problem in raising the topic is that social forces, and discriminatory practices are being ignored, then we should raise those issues, not shout people down.
If on the other hand the problem is that we don't like the very idea that there might be some innate influences then I think we are deluding ourselves.
Here are the some refs I got from psychinfo….
1. Coluccia, Emanuele; Louse, Giorgia. Gender differences in spatial orientation: A review. [References]. [Peer Reviewed Journal] Journal of Environmental Psychology. Vol 24(3) Sep 2004, 329-340. Elsevier Science, Netherlands
2. Newcombe, Nora S; Mathason, Lisa; Terlecki, Melissa. Maximization of spatial competence: More important than finding the cause of sex differences. [References]. [Chapter] McGillicuddy-De Lisi, Ann (Ed); De Lisi, Richard (Ed). (2002). Biology, society, and behavior: The development of sex differences in cognition. Advances in applied developmental psychology, vol. 21. (pp. 183-206). Westport, CT, US: Ablex Publishing. xviii, 284 pp.
3. Vecchi, Tomaso; Phillips, Louise H; Cornoldi, Cesare. Individual differences in visuo-spatial working memory. [Chapter] Denis, Michel (Ed); Logie, Robert H (Ed); et al. (2001). Imagery, language and visuo-spatial thinking. Current issues in thinking & reasoning. (pp. 29-5. Philadelphia, PA, US: Psychology Press. xv, 196 pp.
4. Halpern, Diane F; LaMay, Mary L. The smarter sex: A critical review of sex differences in intelligence. [References]. [Peer Reviewed Journal] Educational Psychology Review. Vol 12(2) Jun 2000, 229-246. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands
5. Joseph, R. The evolution of sex differences in language, sexuality, and visual-spatial skills. [References]. [Peer Reviewed Journal] Archives of Sexual Behavior. Vol 29(1) Feb 2000, 35-66. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands
6. Maguire, Eleanor A; Burgess, Neil; O'Keefe, John. Human spatial navigation: Cognitive maps, sexual dimorphism, and neural substrates. [Peer Reviewed Journal] Current Opinion in Neurobiology. Vol 9(2) Apr 1999, 171-177. Elsevier Science, United Kingdom
7. Casey, MBeth. Understanding individual differences in spatial ability within females: A nature/nurture interactionist framework. [Peer Reviewed Journal] Developmental Review. Vol 16(3) Sep 1996, 241-260. Elsevier Science, United Kingdom
8. Palacio-
8. Palacio-Quintin, Ercilia. What are the differences in boys' and girls' development? [French]. [Peer Reviewed Journal] Bulletin de Psychologie. Vol 49(424) May-Jun 1996, 371-382. Bulletin de Psychologie, France
9. Doell, Ruth G; Longino, Helen E. Sex hormones and human behavior: A critique of the linear model. [Peer Reviewed Journal] Journal of Homosexuality. Vol 15(3-4) 1988, 55-78. Haworth Press, US
10. Caplan, Paula J; MacPherson, Gael M; Tobin, Patricia. Do sex-related differences in spatial abilities exist? A multilevel critique with new data. [Peer Reviewed Journal] American Psychologist. Vol 40(7) Jul 1985, 786-799. American Psychological Assn, US
And it's fucked up my life more than you can possibly imagine.
NYMary
More importantly, it has fucked up YOUR life more than his...kick 'im in the nuts, Mar...i got a bat
as someone who has spent a decent amount of time in academia, I'd like to say that anyone who can't see that there is substantial discrimination that adversely affects women at all levels ...
Well of course there is. There are no more reactionary racist discriminatory people on Earth then Liberals with tenure.
Here is a great post with comments from a transexual who used to be a man. She could not believe the discrimination, is a radical feminist now.
Light of Reason
FIRE FUCKING LAWRENCE SUMMERS, AND GET RID OF THAT CRANK EDWARD WILSON WHO STARTED ALL OF THIS. NONE OF THIS MATTERS. THE WORLD MADE A COMMITMENT TO EQUALITY OVER 200 YEARS AGO AND IT'S NOT GOING BACK. EVEN IF DIFFERENCES WERE SCIENTIFICALLY CONFIRMED, IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE. WHEN ARE PEOPLE GOING TO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE WILL BE NO SOCIAL ENGINEERING BASED ON SO CALLED GENETIC DIFFERENCES.
I was luckily not one of the generation of women who suffered continual overt discrimination in academia.
But I (a professor at an elite liberal arts college) have experienced my share. From a high school physics teacher who would give me a B and my lab partner an A for the same lab report and would ignore my comments in class. To fellow (male) math students in college who would let me solve our problem sets and then somehow forget that I was the one coming up with the answers.
This sort of subtle discrimination can shatter someone's confidence, and I believe that it is more than a tragedy when a university president can say something that could validate such behavior. The litmus test here is that if he had said the exact same things about African-Americans, Summers would not continue to hold his post. Why is it still okay in 2005 to utter discriminatory things about women?
"The point all this ignores is of course that the women Summers was discussing are already in the high-scoring portion of the tests, given that they are in an Ivy League school."
Yeah, seriously! How come all the "civil rights" debates are about how the chairs get distributed among six figure PhDs in Ivy League schools?
"Genetic component" "gender based"
"intrinsic differences" blah,blah,blah
Please read: "The Mismeasure of Man" by Stephen Jay Gould.
As for me, I once thought I was a person trapped in a man's body, (and what a body!) but lately I've been pondering, wondering as I wander: Am I a man or a Moose?
I am a male, married Ph.D. student and I am also the full-time, primary care provider for two sons, aged 9 months and 3 years. Balancing between dissertation writing, classroom teaching and parenting is not easy. But it IS possible, and in many ways graduate school gives you more of a chance to stay at home with kids while working than more traditional jobs (because of irregular work hours). Sadly, I've witnessed numerous cases at my university where women faculty members discourage women grad students from having a family even as they express "amazement" that I'm able to do precisely what they claim female graduate candidates cannot do. These women advisors often tell their advisees that they will be discriminated against in the workplace if they have a family. I have no idea how true that is but I'd imagine that these advisors know first-hand how true it is.
The scandal-plagued Bush administration.
"Get a grip - mutli-tasking? And why would that be built in, necessarily? Like males don't need to be able to pay attention to more than one thing when they are hunters who have to bring food into the camp in order that everybody doesn't die?"
Tena-research HAS in fact shown that men have more trouble multi-tasking. It's because the connection between the left and the right side of the brain is stronger in women than it is in men. Don't disparage an idea just because it appears to be politically incorrect to you at first glance.
"Get a grip - mutli-tasking? And why would that be built in, necessarily? Like males don't need to be able to pay attention to more than one thing when they are hunters who have to bring food into the camp in order that everybody doesn't die?"
Tena-research HAS in fact shown that men have more trouble multi-tasking. Many scientists point to the fact that the connection between the left and the right side of the brain is stronger in women than it is in men as to why women are better multi-taskers. Don't disparage an idea just because it appears to be politically incorrect to you at first glance.
Disappointing argument so far - as I expected. Selfrighteous rants, trolling and defensiveness.
The question is "why are there fewer women in certain positions than men." A reasonable answer may suggest there are a confluence of factors - personal choice, sociology, biology, discrimination (actually sociology).
Rather than listing the Mme. Curies and Albrights to challenge the facts - why no ask: do we want a society where the price of getting a leadership position is working 80-hour weeks and sacrificing families?
We have to look to that question if we are ever to find answers to problems that concern not only the women who happen to seek high prestige jobs, but everyone in America.
Self-tokenization and victim complexes are unhelpful. Worse, they greatly ease the other side in its relentless push towards subjugating our country.
Please--let's grow up!
atrios wrote, One more thing, as someone who has spent a decent amount of time in academia, I'd like to say that anyone who can't see that there is substantial discrimination that adversely affects women at all levels - how they're treated in the classroom, to their treatment by graduate school advisors, hiring, evaluation, promotion, etc... is just blind.
But women also get substantial favoritism at certain levels.
For example, in certain fields, it's easier for women to get research and postdoctoral fellowships for grad school and after.
adam wrote, Many scientists point to the fact that the connection between the left and the right side of the brain is stronger in women than it is in men as to why women are better multi-taskers.
Yeah, and like much of neuroscience (I should know, since I work in it), this is just pure speculation, even if that speculation is done by neuroscientists.
"this is not about a liberal unwillingness to accept even the possibility that there are any genetic causes of differences in male/female outcomes."
That's how the extreme left, who seem to be the one's bitching the most, are portraying it. Oh well, genetic determinism is bad, unless it already backs up a liberal point. The problem, as usual, is that we're letting the extreme/loony left frame issues and that makes everyone look bad. This is why we cant win elections outside of liberal strongholds which can tell the difference between a lefty and a loony leftie.
Agree 100%. There is a whole lot of discrimination all over the work place.
One day, though and hopefully soon, affirmative action will completely go away.
Then my promotion potential won't be limited because I am neither a women or black.
This is simply more dead-white-male-bashing from a bunchof PC thugs (Quote compliments of Ms. Hoover - Lisa Simpson's 3rd Grade Teacher).
V/R Arthur (I'm a Dead, White Male) Miller
Why are you libruls unwilling to accept even the possibility that there are any genetic causes of differences in male/female outcomes? Is it because you hate America?
Thanks, Atrios. You rock!
Remember, Larry is the scumbag who wrote a memo when he was with the World Bank seriously arguing that it is proper for the first world to export its environmentally damaging industry to the third world BECAUSE LIFE IS CHEAPER THERE!
Like so many of our "elite," Sommers confirms what I call the incompetent white man hypothesis.
It goes like this. If, as wignuts who oppose affirmative action claim, any kind of "favoritism" inevitably "lowers standards," then 400 years of white male affirmative action must have really done some damage. It's hard not to credit this hypothesis when you take a look at Larry.
Why do men have nipples? I think it is a design flaw.
Yoshimi | Email | Homepage | 02.18.05 - 4:59 pm | #
Navigational aid
Bill wrote: "[...]blacks are not 80% (or whatever they are) of the NBA because they play more basketball as kids. Those numbers just don't add up.
[...] But we're the reality-based side, remember? We're the ones who believe in science, research, and education. When we discuss nature vs. nurture, we should admit that nature plays a part, too."
Given that we're looking at 'reality' here, how would one explain the fact that for many years in the early 20th century, professional basketball was overwhealmingly dominated by Jewish players? What "natural" factors could have accounted for that demographic?
Well and good that we should be open to the rational, scientific evaluation of hypotheses, but we also have to remain aware that remarks like Summers' are intended as much (or more) for political advocacy than for any academic, scientific or scholarly debate.
I keep reading about how Summers' comments are supposed to help advance a set of discriminatory policies, and are not just academic speculation on his part.
So I gotta ask - what discriminatory policies has Summers advanced? Has he forbidden the hiring of women? Has he even tried to roll back Harvard's affirmative action policies?
If Summers is trying to push some policy agenda with these comments, I'd expect to see some evidence that he has actually pushed such a policy agenda.
I thought that some of the criticism of Summers was overblown until I actually read his comments (I someimtes forget to get the facts before I have an opinion), but once I read them I have to say they were fucking stupid. Even if the question of intrinsic differences between the sexes (among the genders?) is legitimate and awaits more definitive research, the "Jewish farmers" and "Catholic investment bankers" stuff was idiotic. How about the traditional big city Irish police forces of the late 1800s and early 1900s? Gee, had our Hiberian brothers simply evolved into their role as supressors of the rest of the immigrant riffraff, or was there maybe just a teensy bit of discrimination involved?
If anyone wants to continue this discussion…
An attempt to summarize my thoughts
Questions to ask about any real world process when group (or even individual differences) are found and cognitive or other aptitude differences are postulated as explanatory factors. (such as employment and salary differences between genders).
1. To what extent can we predict the real world outcome from an ‘aptitude’ test (yes those are scare quotes).
2. How do environmental (physical, social) factors influence scores on the tests?
- How much can scores on the test be affected by subsequent training?
- Does improvement through training on these skills predict the real world outcome or is it only test-related?
- How much can scores be affected by developmental factors (childhood, or other long term)
- How much can scores be affected by social expectations (internalized or other)?
3. How do these same environmental factors influence the real-world outcome?
4. How well can we measure any of these things? To what degree have we tried?
5. When an assertion that aptitude is important or ‘most’ important, cui bono?
6. What ought to be done (if anything) when aptitude differences are found to be important?
(hint: it doesn’t involve dismissing social factors)
-what is the most constructive way to discuss these politically charged topics?
-what social changes might we want to make if any?
This is entirely wrong-headed.
I'm a fan of this blog, and a regular reader, but the linked page makes very little sense. Strip awaythe emotional language, and all you have is a disagreement over the direction the science is going and what issues it may or may not raise. There is absolutely nothing wrong with stating minority views, and stating them to an obviously unreceptive audience, as I would think any reader of this blog would be well aware. This is not to say that you have no right to react angrily if you think someone is seriously wrong on a matter of substance (say, Nader), just that you should try to keep your wits about you nonetheless, and not just mindlessly yell "prejudice".
Yes, I've read the transcript.
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
