Posted on 02/20/2005 3:32:14 PM PST by neverdem
GENDER STUDIES
In Victorian times, scientists argued that women's brains were too small to be fully human. On the intelligence scale, researchers recommended classifying human females with gorillas.
The great 19th century neuroanatomist Paul Broca didn't see the situation as quite so dire, but he warned his colleagues that women were not capable of being as smart as men, "a difference that we should not exaggerate, but which is nonetheless real."
The president of Harvard University suggested that a lack of "innate ability" might help explain why women couldn't keep up with men in fields like math and science … oh, wait, that one happened just last month.
Hold for a minute — OK — while I dig out my corset and bustle.
If that sounds snotty, I mean it to be.
I, for one, am ready to leave the 19th century behind. Harvard President Lawrence H. Summers can apologize all he wants, but the fact is that — from a position of power — he felt comfortable speculating about women's inadequate intelligence and ignoring years worth of science that proved him wrong.
I don't find that excusable. Period.
And I wonder why we women are so willing to tolerate this kind of behavior.
Summers raised the issue of women's lesser capabilities in an economic conference in Cambridge, Mass., in mid-January. And the most consistent response from women — the one still resonating across the country — is defensiveness.
A litany of female scholars quote studies proving that, yes, we girls can do long division, actually understand a chemical formula, comprehend a physical law or two and not only become professional scientists but do good work.
In fact, when allowed, women have done excellent science for decades, even since the corset-and-bustle days. The physicist Marie Curie won....
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Don't worry, LLB, I'm going back through your posts right now. I am of the same opinion as gogeo.
I think you're a disruptor.
Now you are attacking my age. That's petty. If you disagree with me, then provide an arguement.
You said that men were more intelligent than women.
You had better hurry up...you'll be late for your "Cultural Values of Non-Indigenous Peoples" class (or some other such tripe)...or are you late for "The Civil War - How the Yugoslavians Are the Real Root Cause of the War between the States". Make sure you pay particular attention to the revisionist chapter entitled "Abe was a Poofter"...
I found PLENTY of contradictory statements of yours, just on this thread. And no, I'm not going to grab them and cut and paste them here.
I won't attack you for your "age"--not that I believe your stated age--but I will for your inconsistency, your argumentativeness, and your general immaturity, whatever your ACTUAL age is.
By the way, all, has anyone ever seen Torties and LLB on the same thread at the same time? Just curious...
No dear, the word you are searching for is "pertinent".
Your age is the problem with your "arguments"...
I had the same thought a few posts back...
I took the position that
1) Women do not go to college to meet husbands
2) It is wrong to go to college for the sole purpose of meeting a husband.
The author has all that additional cortical complexity from a mightier corpus callosum and what does she do with it? Tears off on another "Men Are The Root Of All My Problems" rant. Nice . . .
Pity the poor schmuck that gets involved with her . . .
You are just too young to have enough experience to have any idea what you are talking about. Yet you make huge sweeping pronouncements as though they were the last word, only to change your mind a few threads later, or even on the same thread.
Now, that is either a disruptor, or an incredibly ignorant person who doesn't want to admit ignorance. You can keep doing it, I'll keep watching and laughing.
Actually, what was said...is that some do. Undeniably true, yes?
That was very well said...and thought.
Anknowledging the innate differences between men and women is for explanation not limitation.
From http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050202/news_1c02gender.html
""Summers drew on one, perhaps discomforting, scientific observation: According to IQ tests and national science and math exams, more men than women get the lowest scores – and the highest.
"More geniuses, more idiots," said Steven Pinker, a Harvard psychologist whose book, "The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature," helped inform Summers' comments at a Jan. 14 conference on diversity in the scientific workforce. ""
Oh, really? Where's your proof?
2) It is wrong to go to college for the sole purpose of meeting a husband.
Yes, you said that before. But you didn't give any reason beyond saying it was frivolous or a waste of the parents' money or some such. What I want to know, where do you get the idea that people can't do what they want with their money? Who made YOU the motive police? Who put you in charge of deciding that every single college person MUST be dead serious about an education? Some just go to get credentialed, some go because they don't know what to do with their lives, some go to meet a husband, some go to pursue a career and THEN CHANGE THEIR MINDS.
I have enough money to quit working, go back to school, and just ENJOY MYSELF--meet people, be entertained, audit or take classes for credit, just enjoy the atmosphere, whatever I want. And I may do it, or I may not.
This is still a free country, Lauralee. And I'm free to assess YOU as an immature disruptive inconsistent newbie.
By the same token, Who are you to say that it's alright?
POST 608
It is a free country. People are free to do whatever they want, whether moral amoral or immoral. Just because it's legal doesn't make it right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.