Posted on 01/17/2005 5:02:08 PM PST by CDB
Harvard President's Comments on Women Prompt Criticism By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: January 17, 2005 CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (AP) -- The president of Harvard University prompted criticism for suggesting that innate differences between the sexes could help explain why fewer women succeed in science and math careers.
Lawrence H. Summers, speaking Friday at an economic conference, also questioned how great a role discrimination plays in keeping female scientists and engineers from advancing at elite universities.
The remarks prompted Massachusetts Institute of Technology biologist Nancy Hopkins -- a Harvard graduate -- to walk out on Summers' talk, The Boston Globe reported.
``It is so upsetting that all these brilliant young women (at Harvard) are being led by a man who views them this way,'' Hopkins said later.
Five other participants in the National Bureau of Economic Research conference, including Denice D. Denton, chancellor designate of the University of California, Santa Cruz, also said they were offended by the comments. Four other attendees contacted afterward by the Globe said they were not.
Summers told the Globe he was discussing hypotheses based on the scholarly work assembled for the conference, not expressing his own views. He also said more research needs to be done on the issues.
Conference organizers said Summers was asked to be provocative, and that he was invited as a top economist, not as a Harvard official.
The two-day, invitation-only conference of the Cambridge-based National Bureau of Economic Research drew about 50 economists from around the country to discuss women and minorities in science and engineering.
Summers declined to provide a tape or transcript of his remarks, but he did describe comments to the Globe similar to what participants recalled.
``It's possible I made some reference to innate differences,'' he said. He said people ``would prefer to believe'' that the differences in performance between the sexes are due to social factors, ``but these are things that need to be studied.''
He also cited as an example one of his daughters, who as a child was given two trucks in an effort at gender-neutral upbringing. Yet he said she named them ``daddy truck'' and ``baby truck,'' as if they were dolls.
It was during such comments that Hopkins got up and left.
``Here was this economist lecturing pompously (to) this room full of the country's most accomplished scholars on women's issues in science and engineering, and he kept saying things we had refuted in the first half of the day,'' said Denton, the outgoing dean of the College of Engineering at the University of Washington.
Summers already faced criticism because the number of senior job offers to women has dropped each year of his three-year presidency. He has promised to work on the problem.
Even though what he said is almost certainly true.
Only open mouth to insert other foot, rinse and repeat as needed.
True maybe, but for whom?
James Tranto oat Best of the Web Today has it nailed pretty well:
"The president of Harvard University, Lawrence H. Summers, sparked an uproar at an academic conference Friday when he said that innate differences between men and women might be one reason fewer women succeed in science and math careers," reports the Boston Globe:
Nancy Hopkins, a biologist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, walked out on Summers' talk, saying later that if she hadn't left, ''I would've either blacked out or thrown up." . . . It was during his comments on ability that Hopkins, sitting only 10 feet from Summers, closed her computer, put on her coat, and walked out. ''It is so upsetting that all these brilliant young women [at Harvard] are being led by a man who views them this way," she said later in an interview.
You've just gotta love this Nancy Hopkins, who managed with her little outburst to reinforce stereotypes of feminists as humorless harpies and of women as ruled by their emotions.
Maybe, just maybe, there is a relationship between testosterone levels and the ability to do math and science. Perhaps someone should look into that...
Somebody better tell this guy that to say anything not PC about women or blacks is against the Cardinal rule for Acedemic survival.
It just isnt done. Truth be damned, If you want to keep your job shut up.
Hopkins is a perfect example of what you get with the rampant politicization of science. There's nothing resembling an open mind there. She has no respect for the scientific method, or differences of scholarly opinion. She should have gone into a field such as Women's Studies where raw emotion and adherence to orthodoxy is your ticket to success instead of a field that requires critical thinking skills and tolerance for ambiguity and the unknown.
I dont think its just math and science where women dont match up. Women and men are different and its their problem if they want to ignore it when its convenient for them.
now imagine if there would be any outcry if his comments about how fewer men study english or psychology.
Wow, this guy has guts.
Perhaps he is related to William Wallace?
I should expect he will be drawn and quartered if he does not swear allegiance to political correctness.
Well it would strike me as odd if God, or nature, or evolution -- whatever one believes -- made it so that the biological forces that make us man and woman would limit the inherent differences only to physical anatomy, and not to anything mental or emotional.
And I'm only speaking of generalities here, there are always exceptions to rules, but they don't invalidate the rules themselves.
"Even though what he said is almost certainly true."
We've had good research data for thirty years and more that demonstrate the plain validity of his comments.
"this room full of the country's most accomplished scholars on women's issues in science and engineering,"
If this Midol-deprived idiot-chick were right, she'd have a "room full of accomplished woman scholars in science and engineering."
But she doesn't. She has a bunch of liberal arts types who probably can't do basic calculus, bloviating about "women's issues."
Studies have verified that only about 15% of the human race has the aptitudes to be successful engineers. They really are, like artists, born not made. And very few of that small minority are female.
I guess the truth is no defense.
This is a tough one. There may be some small difference in math aptitude between men and women, if there is, it's probably not so large that women can't succeed. I know a researcher who studies this issue and there was a much higher percentage of women in computer science a few decades ago, so I don't think you can just blame this on a gender gap. Don't recall if I ever got an explanation from the person about what account for the drop.
>>>>>>>You've just gotta love this Nancy Hopkins, who managed with her little outburst to reinforce stereotypes of feminists as humorless harpies and of women as ruled by their emotions.<<<<
\
Now that's a good one.
War of the sexes --pinging to resident women FReepers. Bring your friends!!
Nancy Hopkins is making a career out of this. Here's a critique of her complaints against MIT from 1999. (Scroll down to see data on the distribution of math talent, males vs. females.):
http://www.uaf.edu/northern/mitstudy/
I wonder how Miss Hopkins would have reacted had Summers remarked that females are innately better at some things than males. Or would she have insisted that anything a female can do could be done equally well by a male?
I have three kids -- two daughters and a son. My son was better in math and science then my oldest daughter and a lot better than my youngest daughter but he didn't like either subject all that well but made good grades. He is now a graduate assistant at The University of Oklahoma in the English Department and will be getting PhD to become an English Professor specializing in the Renaissance era.
My youngest daughter hates math and science and is not very good at either while she is excellent in History and English and is a Journalism major because she loves researching and writing.
My oldest daughter had a tough time getting through College Algebra and the two required science courses she had to take in college but is great in English, History and was a Journalism Major.
The kid's Dad is an electronic engineer and excellent in math and science.
I am louzy and like my youngest don't particularly care for math and science. I am much, much better at the Arts side of Arts and Science.
Looks like my family is an example of the un-PC this guy is discussing.
His critics sound juvenile and annoying.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.