Summers' comments are abominably stupid.
There is no evidence that any differential in innate ability "trumps" socialization or discrimination at the highest levels of math of physics. He presented that as true and described tenured female physics/math hires as "marginal" -- marginal! Only 4 of the 55 tenured faculty members in math and physics at Harvard are women, and even then they get to be called marginal?
Conservatives should be for equality of opportunity. We're not talking about affirmative action here, we're talking about equality of opportunity. The controversial part of Summers speech -- and it's rightfully controversial -- isn't the mere suggestion that there may be a gender-based innate differential (there's surely some science to suggest that for math and physics and fields that use spacial imagery), but his further suggestion that socialization / discrimination weren't much factors in the academy at the top tenure level!!
2.4 percent of all Asian American women score about 750 on the SAT
1.2 percent of all white males do
There is *no* -- repeat *no* -- science to suggest that Asian Americans have an innate differential ability in math. They are socialized/brought up to study and focus on such things. That socialization "trumps" gender when comparing Asian women to white guys -- indicating that socialization remains a potent force in lagging female math performance.
In fact, to reach the conclusion Summers did, he had to walk on and ignore some very basic science. Women were 4 percent of all Math/Physics PhDs in 1970 and they are 18 percent now. Does nature change that fast? Or are women in the process -- in this great country, which advocates equality of opportunity -- of overcoming historically discriminatory attitudes in these fields? How exactly does Larry Summers explain this 14 percent shift in 30 years? Surely nature/evolution doesn't work that fast? How is he so certain there's no more discrimination in math and physics at places at Harvard -- for there surely is, both when it comes to women and race.
I'm ashamed at the many comments I've read about this at this website, labelling all who criticize Summers as radical feminists. You only have to be for equality of opportunity to pick the right side on this one, and it's not Summers.
My boyfriend says that conservatives are better for women's rights than democrats because we don't treat people as "groups" but as individuals.
Prove it. Give a moment's thought for the individuals who are female in the scenario and stop labelling them all radical feminists. I've got news for you: women who do graduate-level work in math and physics are more likely to be Republicans. Y'all are just hanging them out to dry -- and in defense of a Clintonista -- and it's really, really disappointing to me.
I do worry about the attitude of many here towards women. Especially, frankly, talented women.
Sigh.
cc: Some talented women
P.S. Tolerance Does Not Suck Rocks. Tolerance for people who are different from you and just as smart is a good indicator of civilized behavior. Really people.
The comments made by Summers were neither stupid nor outrageous. He didn't present anything as facts, but merely tossed some legitimate ideas on the floor to be discussed.
Only 4 of the 55 tenured faculty members in math and physics at Harvard are women, and even then they get to be called marginal?
A misunderstanding on your part. 4 out of 55 is a marginal "number", given the gender breakdown of the country.
I am sure you're smart and all that. Please don't assume that those who disagree with you aren't smart.
The point you are missing is that Summers isn't being excoriated because his statements were wrong, ill-reasoned, intentionally provocative or flat out stupid. Summers is being hounded because he violated PC Orthodoxy. Summer's statements aren't being intellectually engaged and rejected for lack of merit. They are being dismissed as heresy.
Churchill is being defended by the same people because HIS wrong, ill-reasoned, intentionally provocative and flat out stupid statements endorse PC Orthodoxy. He is a supporter of the Canon, so the Church of PC is rallying around their martyr.