Watch what you say
- Thread starter Gonz
- Start date
SouthernN'Proud
Southern Discomfort
They have access to grades. Teir opinions are squat, but they see grades all day long. Doesn't take a gebius to interpret that data.
I agree, though. My own HS counselor was a moron of Biblical intensity.
I agree, though. My own HS counselor was a moron of Biblical intensity.
abooja said:
No, I do not think it was a politically stupid comment. I think it was a politically incorrect statement. I think it was, in fact, a brutally honest assesment of evidence.
Again, as I pointed out, he did not infer that women are incapable of science & math. He pointed out that women tend to be less inclined to follow the hard sciences. They, as a group, not you, the individual, have less innate interest in those subjects. There are lots of women in the hard sciences. There are multi-fold more men. There is a reason for that & it's not sexism.
Thulsa Doom
New Member
what was that about men are from penis and women are from.... err....
of course theres hard wiring differences. what a shock. theres also different reproductive organs too! ask a girl to show you sometime. and the hormones are a kicker. BUT we still dont know exactly how much is inate and how much is environment and the million other micro factors that go into a life time of how someone develops various apptitudes. The range probably over laps quite a bit and for that reason constantly pointing out that women are less capable then men probably does them no good service really.
Take this pink ribbon off my eyes
I'm exposed
And it's no big surprise...
of course theres hard wiring differences. what a shock. theres also different reproductive organs too! ask a girl to show you sometime. and the hormones are a kicker. BUT we still dont know exactly how much is inate and how much is environment and the million other micro factors that go into a life time of how someone develops various apptitudes. The range probably over laps quite a bit and for that reason constantly pointing out that women are less capable then men probably does them no good service really.
Take this pink ribbon off my eyes
I'm exposed
And it's no big surprise...
abooja
Well-Known Member
If something a president of a university says gets him in hot water with students and faculty alike and could potentially risk his career, I'd say that is the height of stupidity. We're just arguing semantics at this point. I won't bother trying to convince you of anything else. I can see it's pointless.Gonz said:
Thulsa Doom said:
Observation. We are hardwired to be different. With exceptions, boys will break shit & girls will coddle shit. That is genetics. The feminism crowd tried to tell us we're the same if you remove the stereotypical stuff. Know what? They were flat out WRONG.
Persoanlly, I'm damned happy we're different.
abooja
Well-Known Member
These people seem to agree with me.
Harvard president’s remarks creating stir
By ABRAM KATZ, Journal Register News Service
01/19/2005
Harvard University President Lawrence H. Summers tied himself to an intellectual pillory last week when he suggested that men may hold a genetic advantage over women in science and math.
Female physicists and male mathematicians were lobbing rotten tomatoes at Harvard’s leader Tuesday. The question now is whether Summers has a foot-in-mouth gene.
Robert J. Sternberg, professor of psychology and education at Yale, said he found the statements offensive.
"The same thing was said about Jews, blacks, Irish and Italians. I was very disappointed," he said.
Summers later said he posed the question as a rhetorical device designed to provoke discussion.
"A ‘rhetorical question’ is derogatory if it’s not based on evidence," Sternberg said. "Being provocative is not helpful. The university should be embarrassed," he said.
Meg Urry, director of the Yale Center for Astronomy and Astrophysics, said Summers should stick to subjects with which he has some familiarity.
"It’s one thing to raise interesting research questions, but when you do that in the face of studies that show the opposite is ignorant," Urry said.
McGuinness said she is familiar with the stereotype of women being poor in science.
"When I say that I’m majoring in physics, with minors in chemistry and math, people look at me like I have two heads," she said.
History and environment account for the difference between men and women’s math scores, said Robert Vaden-Goad, associate professor of mathematics at Southern Connecticut State University.
"No boy or girl can be treated other than as a boy or a girl. That necessarily leads to differences," he said.
"Girls are told early that they’re not good at math and science. They end up making different choices," Vaden-Goad said.
This negative message is not getting through to students at the University of Connecticut School of Medicine.
Every year the school selects 80 out of 2,000 to 3,000 applicants, and the entering class is typically 55 to 65 percent female, said Dr. Bruce Koeppen, dean for academic affairs and education at the UConn medical school.
"I don’t see any difference between the abilities of the men and women. All of them are incredibly bright," Koeppen said.
To even stand a chance, applicants to the medical school, including women, must excel as undergraduates in calculus, biology, organic chemistry, and physics.
In a word, Koeppen said, Summers is "silly."
Harvard president’s remarks creating stir
By ABRAM KATZ, Journal Register News Service
01/19/2005
Harvard University President Lawrence H. Summers tied himself to an intellectual pillory last week when he suggested that men may hold a genetic advantage over women in science and math.
Female physicists and male mathematicians were lobbing rotten tomatoes at Harvard’s leader Tuesday. The question now is whether Summers has a foot-in-mouth gene.
Robert J. Sternberg, professor of psychology and education at Yale, said he found the statements offensive.
"The same thing was said about Jews, blacks, Irish and Italians. I was very disappointed," he said.
Summers later said he posed the question as a rhetorical device designed to provoke discussion.
"A ‘rhetorical question’ is derogatory if it’s not based on evidence," Sternberg said. "Being provocative is not helpful. The university should be embarrassed," he said.
Meg Urry, director of the Yale Center for Astronomy and Astrophysics, said Summers should stick to subjects with which he has some familiarity.
"It’s one thing to raise interesting research questions, but when you do that in the face of studies that show the opposite is ignorant," Urry said.
McGuinness said she is familiar with the stereotype of women being poor in science.
"When I say that I’m majoring in physics, with minors in chemistry and math, people look at me like I have two heads," she said.
History and environment account for the difference between men and women’s math scores, said Robert Vaden-Goad, associate professor of mathematics at Southern Connecticut State University.
"No boy or girl can be treated other than as a boy or a girl. That necessarily leads to differences," he said.
"Girls are told early that they’re not good at math and science. They end up making different choices," Vaden-Goad said.
This negative message is not getting through to students at the University of Connecticut School of Medicine.
Every year the school selects 80 out of 2,000 to 3,000 applicants, and the entering class is typically 55 to 65 percent female, said Dr. Bruce Koeppen, dean for academic affairs and education at the UConn medical school.
"I don’t see any difference between the abilities of the men and women. All of them are incredibly bright," Koeppen said.
To even stand a chance, applicants to the medical school, including women, must excel as undergraduates in calculus, biology, organic chemistry, and physics.
In a word, Koeppen said, Summers is "silly."
abooja said:I think I've expressed my opinions vociferously enough around here for you to know better than that.
P.S. I'm hardly a feminist. Thought that was plain as the nose on your face.
Which is why I'm calling you on it. Your next post shows how many people are ofended & may litigate the whole process because somebody dared speak an observable truth. Of course, with all the hoopla, few, if any, will venture out & say what evidence has pointed to for years. The evidence doesn't exclude women from these studies. It does shows a huge decline in the number of women interested, and in cases, less capable. What's wrong with that? Why is it so offensive to call a spade a spade?
abooja
Well-Known Member
I've never had a problem calling a spade a spade. I am well aware of the differences between men and women. Hormones, for instance, sometimes cause me to get overly emotional and teary-eyed when a guy, under similar circumstances, would not. I, like many women, would prefer to find one good man to settle down with rather than planting my seed all over the eastern seaboard, like many men are inclined. (Or, as Jerry Seinfeld would put it, men hunt and women nest.) These, to me, are clear, verifiable facts, as opposed to what you put forth.
Does the statistic cited about the majority of students at the University of Connecticut School of Medicine mean nothing to you? The fact is, it is only relatively recently that women have been actively encouraged to pursue studies in math and science. Fifty-some years ago, when my father was a chemical engineering student, far fewer women even attended universities, and many of those who did were encouraged to pursue dopey subjects like home economics (like my ex-boyfriend's mother). Did that mean that men were inherently smarter than women? That would be the next logical conclusion if one agreed with your way of thinking. I refuse to accept that. In my opinion, most people -- male or female -- are stupid. I'm an equal opportunity discriminator.
Does the statistic cited about the majority of students at the University of Connecticut School of Medicine mean nothing to you? The fact is, it is only relatively recently that women have been actively encouraged to pursue studies in math and science. Fifty-some years ago, when my father was a chemical engineering student, far fewer women even attended universities, and many of those who did were encouraged to pursue dopey subjects like home economics (like my ex-boyfriend's mother). Did that mean that men were inherently smarter than women? That would be the next logical conclusion if one agreed with your way of thinking. I refuse to accept that. In my opinion, most people -- male or female -- are stupid. I'm an equal opportunity discriminator.
abooja said:
Science is very ambiguous, it contains almost everything. Phylosphy, literature, biology, math, physics, chemistry, psychology, etc etc are all sciences.
On my previous post I was refering only to exact sciences. Medicine is not an exact science.
The hardvard guy did say sciences, which seems retarded to me, unless that science has another meaning in english.
Thulsa Doom
New Member
abooja said:
Well dont forget a whole bunch of people still believe that about those groups. They just no longer say it in mixed company anymore. Its essentially gone underground but it sure hasn’t gone away. Thats why its hard to tease discrimination from true difference and why we need to be awfully careful when we try to. Not bumble forth and pound the earth with generalizations and in so doing verify the secret beliefs of 100,000 bigots.
And remember boys and girls, blacks are less buoyant then whites.
I heard about an interesting study today. It seems when you take a bunch of school age females and give them an aptitude test and tell HALF of them that this test is to see if you as a female can score as well as a male does then the ones who ARENT told this score JUST as well as the males. the ones who ARE told this score significantly worse. Now what does that tell us... Go on conspirators lets have your thoughts...