How odd. My post disappeared.

As I said previously, I think I’ll use this rhetorical tactic. Any time a feminist is shown to use bad math or science, I’ll simply point to some other group (say, the Promise Keepers) and excuse it by saying at least WE aren’t THAT bad.

I guess the proper PC view goes: It’s okay to believe there is SOME role of genetics, but you must NOT cross the line by guessing that there might be more of a genetic role than XXX.

The proper “politically incorrect” counterpart being, you can say that socialization plays some role in behavior, but you must never, ever suggest that it comes anything close to the destiny embodied in our genes.

I tend to agree with the evolutionary biologist who said that people believe if it’s genetic it’s immutable and if it’s socialization you can change it overnight–neither of which is true.

It may be that our gender influences our behavior. What’s sad is how often that simple notion is turned into weird generalizations like “boys are good at math, girls are good at language,” or as excuses to ignore socializatione–because, y’know, genetics would have had the same result anyway.

Sorry for the delay in responding.

I tend to agree with you - that there are genetic factors at work, impacting gender roles. To what extent these factors impact gender balance in the hard sciences, if at all, I really don’t know. Speculation in this area is very dangerous, as some have discovered.

You said: ” A bigot for believing that there is at least some bit of genetic influence to gender roles? Wouldn’t that be like being a bigot for believing that there is a genetic factor (which there is) for obesity? Or for sickle cell anemia?”

Well, yes, it’s sort of like that. I guess the proper PC view goes: It’s okay to believe there is SOME role of genetics, but you must NOT cross the line by guessing that there might be more of a genetic role than XXX. You will know if you have reached the XXX line, because there are enforcers (who likewise do not know the precise genetic role) waiting in the wings to inform you of the fact, and to impose the appropriate punishment. But they will not identify point XXX in advance, because they don’t know what it is. They just know it when they see you cross it. If you WANT to know in advance, then you are under suspicion.

This sounds like parody, to me, but is it exaggerated?

I have heard many reports from teachers and psycho-therapists about girls being afraid to excel, so I assume that this does happen. Still, I don’t recall this being overt at my high school (during the Harding administration) or at my kids’ schools (Clinton era grads). In each case, girls comprised half or more of the top ten in class rank, and the majority of NHS members - and this included some cheerleaders, so popularity was not fully surrendered. Where you taught, did you have significantly more boys than girls in NHS?

I will check out your blog entry later tonight.

To me, the interesting question concerns the reasons for the separation, which is found in just about every society, past or present, that we know of:

- Are these differences due exclusively to socialization and/or sexism?

If these gender role differences were exclusively due to socialization and/or sexism, then why would they be in nearly *every* culture, no matter what the cultural differences?

- Might there be an innate gender factor at play, with innate feminine or masculine human qualities that influence these tendencies?

As different as cultures are, I think it would be good the commonalities in gender roles between cultures, to see where there *may* be a more genetic influence among the cultural influences.

- If someone is of the belief that the second question probably an affirmative answer, is that person necessarily a bigot?

A bigot for believing that there is at least some bit of genetic influence to gender roles? Wouldn’t that be like being a bigot for believing that there is a genetic factor (which there is) for obesity? Or for sickle cell anemia?

I apologize for that last question, in that it is clearly a setup to get you (via the back door) to weigh in on the Summers flap. If you would rather not go there, that’s fine with me.

I got rather long-winded in my response to that on my blog. The thing is, IMO, there is a strong genetic factor *and* a strong environmental factor. Some people seem to be NATURAL mathematicians, even when they are growing up surrounded by people who are afraid of math. Sometimes that fear of math negatively influences those with a natural ability, sometimes it doesn’t. (As a math teacher, that’s been one of my pet peeves. NOONE should be afraid of math, IMO.)

The biggest thing I’ve seen with math, on the male vs female spectrum, is that, IME, females seem to have a tendency to not want to STAND OUT academically, so they don’t always work up to their potential. It’s harder to fit in, in high schools at least, when you think others might feel badly if you’re ahead of them academically. This is reinforced by the number of “popular” and “accepted” students who are average to a bit above average, vs the number of students who excel who are on the outskirts of the school “society.”

Hugo, I don’t think the maintenance worked well with your page. :-/

At the moment, I’m running late getting errands done for tomorrow’s farmers market. I’ve been spending my time this morning trying to find halaal standards so that I can make sure our farm is following them so that our Muslim customers can feel secure in the quality of the meat they buy. *And* I’ve been helping the 18yo, via IM. He’s got a written final today and he’s understandably tense.

- Are these differences due exclusively to socialization and/or sexism?

- Might there be an innate gender factor at play, with innate feminine or masculine human qualities that influence these tendencies?

- If someone is of the belief that the second question probably an affirmative answer, is that person necessarily a bigot?

I apologize for that last question, in that it is clearly a setup to get you (via the back door) to weigh in on the Summers flap. If you would rather not go there, that’s fine with me.

Caitrona: I would still love to hear your opinion on the “innate differences” question. Do you believe that there are some areas where women, in general, have a natural advantage over men, and vice versa? If not, do you believe that it would be bigoted of anyone to hold this opinion?

Stanton, this is a hard thing to put into words. :-) (Doesn’t help that I’m listening to my weekly conference call while typing.)

I think that *in general*, there are physical and emotional differences in what men and women can do and in how they deal with things. Not everyone fits the generalizations.

I’ve known a few women who do very heavy “men’s work” jobs, but most women I know don’t have the physical makeup (or the want-to) to work in a saw mill or to walk through train cars of rice (*extremely* difficult to move through) in order to inspect it. I’ve known a few men who do secretarial and daycare type work, but most men I know are in either more physical work or in higher level white collar work.

I know a couple of stay-at-home dads, but most stay-at-home parents I know are moms. As much as dads love their families, there aren’t a lot who would make good stay-at-home parents, just as not all moms make good stay-at-home parents. In most families I know, the moms are the ones more focused on the emotional well-being, the dads are more focused on the family’s physical well-being.

Places where that generalization line gets crossed, IME:

1) When children are felt to be in danger, women can be just as aggressive (if not more so) as the men.
2) When children are involved in sports, either parent can be difficult.

An interesting book about women, cultural influences on their behavior, and their behavior’s influence on culture is Laurel Thatcher Ulrich’s _Good_Wives:_Image and Reality in Northern New England 1650-1750_.

Need to focus more on my conference call. I’ll try to put more thought into this later.

Anywho, back to how women are actually oppressed…

Both men made a staggering generalization about women as a whole. This is the #1 thing I hate about feminists. They will marginalize things that other women have to deal with if it furthers their agenda!

That aside, I predicted Danica would shrug it off the minute I heard the comment was made. Right from the jump she won my respect for being I’m-here-to-win, instead of I’m-here-to-make-a-statement. Congratulations to her for being as dedicated and focused as I predicted her to be.

Now if only women in Harvard would follow her lead…

Both men made a staggering generalization about women as a whole. This is the #1 thing I hate about feminists. They will marginalize things that other women have to deal with if it furthers their agenda!

That aside, I predicted Danica would shrug it off the minute I heard the comment was made. Right from the jump she won my respect for being I’m-here-to-win, instead of I’m-here-to-make-a-statement. Congratulations to her for being as dedicated and focused as I predicted her to be.

Now if only women in Harvard would follow her lead…