<p>Hey I thought this was important. I don't know whether I believe it but I wanted to see what the people on the board think. If this offends anyone sorry (I never know with some of the women on this board) but remember a woman did the research. I think it is heading in the right direction but there are other factors and it needs refinement. Also remember it doesn't allocate any inborn differences but maybe societal differences in learning. I think a sociologist or anthropologist should get on the societal part right away. <a href="http://www.news.uiuc.edu/news/06/0220mathdivide.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.news.uiuc.edu/news/06/0220mathdivide.html</a></p>
<p>It's complete crap.</p>
<p>Ever heard of Iceland? Girls outperform boys there on standardized math tests. Perhaps it's more of a societal thing.</p>
<p>Yes, there are fewer women in engineering than men, but these studies were designed by the intellectually near-sighted who are trying to "prove" what they are setting out to prove. Social science is a complete oxymoron. You can design a study to find out whatever you want it to reveal - and this is exactly what is going on here. </p>
<p>Anyone with an IOTA of brains would understand that the number of women in the sciences is continually increasing. Not as fast as other fields, but the numbers go up every year. If we are theorizing that numbers of people in a certain group is directly correlated to their relative intelligence in that arena, we would be forced to conclude a few things:
1. The x-chromosome has undergone a drastic, fundamental change in the past 20 years, which has enabled women to enter the sciences in record numbers. The chromosome change continues, as women continue to enter the sciences (now, women make up more than half of med school applicants) every year. This has never been seen in the history of the human race; the fact that its contemporaneous with women's rights is a complete coincidence.
2. African-Americans are much, much less intelligent than whites. Obviously - look at that standardized test score gap! </p>
<p>Or, you could use your inborn intelligence and understand that the two groups in this country which had been considered property of white men are, every year, working to overcome discrimination. </p>
<p>I just think that anyone who tries to measure the "reason" for a changing phenomenon (women in science) based on a non-changing phenomenon (intelligence and behaviour patterns) is an utter moron. Like Summers. I think we all learned in high school math that there are these things called equations which have variables and constants. You should know the difference between the two, and understand that a variable is not a function of a constant!</p>
<p>I don't think you've quite gotten the point. I think she was pointing out societal differences but mainly their affect on behavioral changes. As our AMERICAN (Icelandic? Bjork?) society values confidence and quick thinking in men (war) and rational thought and careful consideration in women. Neither is always true (Emerson and Ann Coulter are obvious exceptions) but I think that is the general principle.</p>
<p>This societal pattern causes girls to choose more rational, pondering subjects rather than on-your-toes, calculating subjects. Girls simply dont receive enough consideration for their natural intelligence in these subjects due to societal expectations and by the time they get out of high school, they would rather study anything but engineering.</p>
<p>Due to your over-reaction to anything's seemingly downplaying (this article I thought showed differences and actually favored the women's side of learning when showing the difficulty of the boys learning style) the role of women, you seem to be taking on the male's learning style. Instead of thinking it over rationally and seeing that she wasn't blaming it on NON-CHANGING phenomena.</p>
<p>Style of learning is not in the least non-changing. They are culturally different (why do my Asian TAs have a different way of teaching than my American TAs?), historically different (working in law you should know that in the last few decades, ecnomics has taken a strong root in the studies of law), and societal differences. Instead of brushing off the differences in influence there should be studies (that aren't motively focused) showing why there are these differences in learning style are influenced by society to show that these differences (# of women in science vs # of men in science) are caused by society and how that can be changed rather than blaming on these "inate differences" you speak of that don't exist. These studies will never be done due to outrage by people like you that don't understand the difference between finding a societal cause and finding an inborn trait.</p>
<p>BTW I'm proving your retort wrong twice. There hasn't been as drastic of changes to the X-chromosone as there has been to the Y-chromosone which has been wasting away for a good amount of time now.</p>
<p>Also the lady in the study if you ACTUALLY READ which I don't think you did said two things. The number of women in sciences and math is continually going UP but not as fast as other areas (oops did I jsut quote you?!). Also she contradicts herself by saying that girls perform better on standardized tests and then saying they are even (neither of which is bad). So as I said this study needs refinement but it is an interesting take on it.</p>
<p>"2. African-Americans are much, much less intelligent than whites. Obviously - look at that standardized test score gap!" - ariesathena</p>
<p>Let me just say that I am appalled with you for saying this. Whether or not you agree or disagree with this study, it is not your place (or anyone's place) to say one race is less intelligent than another race! </p>
<p>From a social view, African Americans' lesser peformance may come from the fact that they face a completely different set of criterion of issues in this world. If you put yourself in their shoes, you will see that they (with other groups) are still struggling with daily persecution and people like you make it no better. For all the AA's that read this, use ariesathena to invoke vigor [for academics] and prove his/her sorry ass wrong.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Let me just say that I am appalled with you for saying this. Whether or not you agree or disagree with this study, it is not your place (or anyone's place) to say one race is less intelligent than another race!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Dude, read the whole post. Ariesathena was making a satirical point.</p>
<p>Blacks score lower than Whites who score lower than Asians because of upbringing, home environment, and studying habits.</p>
<p>Ariesathena was making a bad satirical point at that.</p>
<p>This is a perfect opportunity to rant against affirmative action (based on the principle that fairness is more important than equality).
"If you put yourself in their shoes, you will see that they (with other groups) are still struggling with daily persecution and people like you make it no better."
I disagree that minorities are persecuted (at least to a measurable extent) by other people [I am a minority]. They are struggling because of their own habits, if they consider education/careers less important than other things than it is their fault and not anyones else's. They need to take education seriously and not take affirmative action for granted. AA allocates educational resourses unfairly and not at optimal efficiency becuase a smart/hard working student will get much more out of harvard than someone who is dumb and lazy. And all AA does is keep capable students from getting a great education and giving it to someone who will just waste it.</p>
<p>I agree noob if minorities worked and learned they do just as well as others. Lamenting about slavery doesn't get anyone anywhere. Shame on "black leaders" like Sharpton and Jackson. Real black heroes should be the likes of Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams.</p>
<p>This threadi wasn't meant foro races sorry.</p>
<p>Getting back to what the original poster was asking about, I think it does affect what fields we go in to. Yes there is a rise in women scientists/engineers, but that is also because they are in high demand. Not that I wouldn't love to go into business or something because it would be way easier (From what I've heard) than eng, but colleges are looking for women to go into math and science fields and they are recruiting us.</p>
<p>I think the study said that women lean towards Liberal Arts and Social Science degrees, probably from the learning patterns we've shown (not that there are not breaks to the patterns) but I think from looking at numbers then yes, these gender learning differences affect what majors and future careers we have.</p>
<p>Yeah but what I was wondering was if these natural tendencies are societally-induced (cultural, societal). I mean the under-average proportion for men in LAS isn't the same as women in engineering. I'm wondering why this is. This isn't biased in any way just meant to create discussion, which is what this thread is for not arguments. Thanks brickbreeze.</p>
<p>Also Noob any more race comments here and I'm report you and your buddy. This isn't the "perfect" forum for that stuff. I couldn't respond properly before because I was intoxicated in the previous post.</p>
<p>Hm...I wouldn't be surprised if they are societal tendencies. Like someone said, Icelandic women and such. Perhaps it has to do with our history. It's interesting to think about.</p>
<p>It would nice if someone could bring the subject up without being attacked....That poor Summers was pulled through the craphouse for bringing it up in an off-record meeting.</p>
<p>I also think that it's culturally-induced. Old sterotypes die hard and I think that in general many expect their kids to follow the crowd with girls majoring in humanities and guys in math/science. </p>
<p>Perhaps, it is the way we are raised. From the time when we are little, the girls are expected to play with the dolls while the guys get the cooler toys (imo, of course) like legos and blocks. </p>
<p>However, I think the sterotype really grows much stronger in high school. In high school, nearly everybody just wants to fit in. Most girls don't want to be labeled "weird" or "odd." Thus, they follow the crowd and take the courses that many expect them to. I think it really takes a strong person to sit in a class full of boys as "the girl." I've noticed in my math and physics classes, it's okay when a guy gets the right answer. But when * I * get the highest score, it turns into a huge unwanted competition. In general, it's culturally okay for them to get higher scores than me, but not vice versa. Almost like an invisible double standard.</p>
<p>Another factor turning girls away from engineering and scientific careers is that even if they are good at math, they are encouraged to follow a different career path. Where as a guy may be encouraged to become an engineer by his family and friends, oftentimes people encourage girls to go into education instead and become teachers.</p>
<p>Anyway, I'm not exactly sure why so few girls choose to go into engineering but it is an interesting topic to think about...</p>
<p>zpmqxonw, is sounds like you read "Count Down" by Steve Olson. </p>
<p>btw, i really like the type-set pattern you have chozen for your name. LL TR LR TL LL TR LR TL</p>
<p>Well, I look around, and by far, the vast majority of girls just plain old like humanities more. I go to an all-girls high school, and it's definitely weird to be one of about five people in my grade who love math (probably an exaggeration, but whatever). But I don't think it's really a societal thing - I think girls are just more inclined to like english and history better than math and science. They are not genetically better at humanities, but as they grow up, they want to focus more and more on writing and such instead of math, just because they like words more. So they get more practice at it, and then wa-pam, now they're excellent at writing but they can't do algebra. And guys, the same is true with math/science/whatever. (Or maybe just football. :P) There is just too much correlation to ignore, in my opinion.</p>
<p>haha, rocketDA, you are the first one to recognize the pattern! Everybody else just seems to think it's random letters:(...</p>
<p>But the problem with Summers is that he based it off of genetics (DON'T GO THERE) whereas society I think qmasx(-whatever, I don't get the pattern) sees it. I do feel that tension when a girl says an answer. I am personally happy to see girls in engineering. I love it. Seriously when a girl says she's in an engineering or science, she get's hotter. I don't know about other guys but although I do feel that twinge of <em>smart girl</em> whenever one speaks out I don't know if it's because I'm glad she felt courageous enough (it's bad enough to speak in a lecture hall but being one of the only ones of your type [minority] takes guts) to do so or because it's that pang of society saying that shouldn't be allowed so get the next one right or something. I'd like to think it's the former; it at least turns into that regardless.</p>
<p>Pinker vs. Spelke</p>
<p>A thorough debate between two top Harvard professors on this issue that occured in the last year.</p>