Question:
Thought this article was interesting, at least.
http://www.local6.com/education/4090001/detail.html
Apparently the Harvard President Lawrence Summers said that women lack "natural ability" in fields such as science and mathematics, when discussing with other academia about why women succeed less in math related fields than men do. Summers later said that he was merely throwing out suggestions, and that the "natural ability" view was not necessarily his own.
As a female science major I personally didn't find his remarks very offensive...I think it was taken out of context. But I was curious as to what other CGRers thought
noelle
Answer:
My thoughts are this: finally. Finally someone in a liberal circle of thought acknowledged that women are different than men (and vice versa). The problem is that people are taking what he said to mean that women cannot be successful in those areas. He. Did. Not. Say. That.
He also did not say that that was the case in all instances of men vs. women. People are throwing up so many strawmans with what he said that it is completely ridiculous.
Next thing you know they'll come out with a study that shows that women are better counselors than men. Who knew?
Answer:
I agree with you exo---as a girl with ambitions to go into science and engineering, I've noticed that guys seem to be more naturally inclined towards this field than women. Not to say we can't do it, just that I have to work harder at the math than they do. I don't "see" solutions that they might instantly find. But then I can explain myself better than they can most of the time.
Though I could see how you could take his remarks offensively, I wouldn't.
Answer:
Originally Posted by SCCHarpGirl I agree with you exo---as a girl with ambitions to go into science and engineering, I've noticed that guys seem to be more naturally inclined towards this field than women. Not to say we can't do it, just that I have to work harder at the math than they do. I don't "see" solutions that they might instantly find. But then I can explain myself better than they can most of the time.
Though I could see how you could take his remarks offensively, I wouldn't.
People that take his remarks offensively are living in another world. They live in a world where men and women are completely, and utterly equal without compromise. This world also enjoys portraying men as large neanderthal-like creatures, but I digress.
I am glad that you have the sense to not be offended by his statements. My wife is an engineer as well, and while she struggles more than I do, she is still successful at her job. But in some ways, I'm sure she is more 'successful' in her job than I am.
Answer:
it doesn't have to be this way, but often times women do have a harder time understanding math and sciences. I think it has something to do with the way women think verses the way men think. Logically verses emotionally. Math and science are generally rigid, and factual, with no room for interpretation or change.
It is funny though how our society today forces men and women to be exactly the same in every area. Yet, women still get offended if a man doesn't hold the door for them...
Answer:
My music marketing / music finance professor made a great comment in last week's music finance class concerning the relationship between men and women. It was something to the effect of, "Who traditionally dies first in a relationship? The man. Why? Stress, mostly from work. However, recent trends show that women are beginning to die just as early as men. Why? Because they've tried to become men, and have therefore taken on men's stress."
In His love,
Nate
Answer:
Originally Posted by SCCHarpGirl As a female science major I personally didn't find his remarks very offensive...I think it was taken out of context. But I was curious as to what other CGRers thought
We were just talking about that in my Bible study this evening (two of the members of this Bible study are Harvard grad students). Apparently, 1. he was specifically instructed to make his remarks as provocative as possible, to stir up interesting discussion, and 2. the media hyped it up into something a lot more than what he actually said.
I think it's a rather well-established fact that men have, in general, better spatial skills than women - and a lot of math and science comes down to spatial reasoning. But that's only on average; a lot of women _are_ better than the average man in science and math.
This kind of debate wouldn't happen if our culture stopped equating _equality_ with _sameness._ Men and women can be _equal_ even if we don't have the same roles or abilities.
Answer:
Originally Posted by Nate My music marketing / music finance professor made a great comment in last week's music finance class concerning the relationship between men and women. It was something to the effect of, "Who traditionally dies first in a relationship? The man. Why? Stress, mostly from work. However, recent trends show that women are beginning to die just as early as men. Why? Because they've tried to become men, and have therefore taken on men's stress."
In His love,
Nate Just wondering: Do you think that this is a bad thing? I mean, obviously we don't women to become men, but I don't think I'm trying to be a man when I want an equal opportunity in the workforce.
Answer:
Originally Posted by Kaley Just wondering: Do you think that this is a bad thing?
I think it depends on the form it takes. I definitely don't agree with my prof's quote if it's just applied generically. If there's a job that men (for whatever reason) are naturally more suited for (and there are jobs like this, just as there are certainly jobs that women are more naturally suited for), and women for the sake of "equality" try to take over that job, I think there's something wrong with that.
I don't know exactly what those jobs are, but it seems as if each person should simply do what he/she is best at, and allow others who are better than themselves to compete them out of the market. It seems like "equal opportunity" (not just in the case of women/men relationships, either) often puts the less-qualified individual in the position for the sake of making the position "equally" available to all. That's wrong.
In His love,
Nate