Don't mention the gender.
Wednesday, January 19th, 2005
The whole kerfuffle about the president of Harvard mentioning innate differences between women and men has really raised my hackles - not as a feminist, mind you, but as a defender of free speech and open debate, both of which have been shot down by people who should really know better.
In a private conference on economic research, Summers apparently touched on the topic of why fewer women succeed in top science and math jobs, and he mentioned that there were several possible reasons that could be explored so that the imbalance could be addressed. He suggested that maybe fewer women were willing to sacrifice having a family and children in order to devote themselves to the (male-biased) 80-hour work week demanded by top science jobs, or that there was discrimination in the fields of science and mathematics (well, yeah…), or that maybe there were innate differences between men and women that led fewer women into the sciences.
Now, there’s no transcript of Summers’ speech, so no one really knows exactly what he said or how he said it except for the people who were there and Lawrence Summers himself. But nothing I’ve read in the aftermath of the speech has indicated to me that Summers thinks women just aren’t capable of being brilliant scientists or mathematicians. He said he was going to be provocative in his speech, and he accordingly put forward provocative hypotheses (which are not necessarily completely off the mark) to get people talking about the issue.
And O, how they’ve been talking. From the MIT biologist who walked out of Summers’ speech because she was "physically ill", to the people who’ve said they’re suspending their donations to Harvard, to the Harvard sociologist who thinks women scientists aren’t going to go for jobs at Harvard now because "the president of Harvard [doesn’t] think that women scientists [are] as good as men".
Huh? I’m sorry, where exactly did Summers say that? Where did he put that forward as the definitive explanation for the gender imbalance in the sciences? I thought he was talking about the need to find an answer, not that he’d found the answer, and the answer is that women think "math is hard". And since when have scientists become so fragile that they can’t stomach listening to controversial hypotheses or views which oppose their own? Isn’t that the point of science - to put forward hypotheses and then test them for validity?
You know, as a feminist, I naturally balk at explanations for gender inequality that center around the idea that "women just aren’t any good at doing X" - I mean, level the playing field first, for real, and then we’ll see who’s good at doing what. But as someone who supports open, honest debate, I’m appalled at the histrionics surrounding Summers’ speech. Men and women are innately different - it’s biology, get over it. Whether this is the reason there are fewer women in the sciences is highly, highly debatable - but the key word here is debate. If we can’t even discuss controversial issues like gender without everyone getting all in a huff, how are we going to understand and solve problems related to these issues? I’m with Harvard psychology professor Daniel Gilbert (yes, a man…), who said, "The saddest thing about this incident is that it puts a chill on the open exchange of ideas about a solution."
12:19pm
Comments
1
Hell, I think math is hard!!! I do remember one thing which always impressed me was the concepts of equality and equivalency in mathematics. Not all things are equal and many more things are equivalent to each other. Just so with men and women. They are not equal on a one for one basis (thankfully) but their individual talents and abilities make them quite equivalent of each other! (although, I sometimes give the edge to women …)
On another note, nothing is free … not speech nor the million dollar payoff in the lottery. Having the courage to take a stand or make a statement doesn’t mean you get off scot-free. In America, as in most democratic societies, we simply have the choice to speak up even when there is a "chill" in the air.
Posted by Michael
2
Yeah, actually, Barbie is right - math *is* hard - for most everyone! I used to be quite good at math, and science too, for that matter - but a couple of dreadful teachers in high school pretty much drummed out any enthusiasm I had for the subjects, and now I’m pretty hopeless with the whole thing - hence my *not* working for NASA or ESA… (maybe I could get a job as an ESA translator, though - hmm…).
You’re right, "having the courage to take a stand or make a statement doesn’t mean you get off scot-free". I guess I’m just disappointed that so many people - so many fellow feminists - have chosen such a - dare I say it - hysterical attitude towards this whole issue. Just because a guy mentions differences between men and women doesn’t make him the Antichrist or a promoter of gender inequality or something. (And as a side note, why is it that so many feminists are quite willing to accept the idea that men may be biologically prone to negative traits like aggression, but refuse to accept the idea that women may be biologically prone to negative traits as well? I don’t get it.) Anyway, I personally think the main problem in the sciences is discrimination, but I am willing to entertain other reasonable possibilities without getting my panties in a bunch, so to speak… :-)
Posted by Jessica
3
I would venture a guess that your aunt, Dr. Sylvia Jean would agree that discrimination and a "male-dominated" field (at the moment) are really the problems that need to be over-come. Women were not encouraged to enter the sciences and math fields…just as they were not thought to be able to be MD’s and dentists, etc. (dare I say even gettting into law school was a bit of a problem!). Look at the advancement of woman in medicine (more women getting into vet schools then men). It’s only a matter of time…and we need the debate…and getting-up and huffing out doesn’t do a thing but get your name in the news. It certainly doesn’t move the debate forward - but it sure is PC (and that’s NOT "portion control")…instead let’s just shoot the messenger.
Posted by Mutti
4
Cheers, Jessica!
Right on the money.
A lovely rant…
Posted by Jamie
Sorry. Comments are closed.