Math ability correlates with the difference in length between the middle finger and pointer finger.

Has any one done the measurement on the various samples?

"...people love any excuse to make sweeping generalizations...."

Heh.

D'oh!

You got me there, Gary.

(I just wanted to make sure I have evidence to back up my assertion, see.)

. The "Nature" people are stuck with the uncomfortable fact of an order of magnitude increase in the number of professional women physicists in one generation. YOU are the one that is overgeneralizing, simply describing those that are pushing innate differences with the binary label "the nature people;" absolutists.

In fact, many of those that are pushing the "innate" theme are pushing it as a COMPONENT of a multifactorial explanation of why the gap between men and women is so wide in these sciences, a theory that includes socialization.

The increase in women in the upper echelons of academia CAN be explained by modifications in our culture and the educational system, but that alone does NOT explain the disparate divide in the upper reaches of standardized test scores that are 4 standard deviations from the mean. Stats do not lie, nor do tests that control for socialization and rely on innate cues.

Which again, was Larry Summers point, along with the presentation of theories of socialization and discrimination. Which in turn is the point of many taht are editorializing on his behalf.

Look. All I'm asking is that you extend your stated desire to allow reasoned, intellectual discorse to *also* include the possibility that we DON'T KNOW YET what innate differences exist between the male and female brain. Of course. But it also seems that you may be asking for more. I don't think that most people that cite that research are making claims to know the human brain, but most people that are up on the research are also aware of the fact that serious personality differences and modes of thinking - beyond passivity and aggression - are directly dependent on the presence of certain hormones that are associated with the sexes.

For example, testosterone is associated with things like mathematical reasoning, skills which decline in the absence or suppression of this hormone in an individual, and there is perhaps no more obvious difference between the sexes than the proportion of certain male and female hormones in each sex.

so, even before we've mapped out the amazing complexity of the brain, and the various influences of nature vs. nurture in gender behavior, it IS eminently reasonable and correct to make the "generalization" that there are innate factors that make MORE men better than women at certain things (and vice versa), though CERTAIN women will outperform MOST men in these same areas.

"it IS eminently reasonable and correct to make the "generalization" that there are innate factors that make MORE men better than women at certain things (and vice versa), though CERTAIN women will outperform MOST men in these same areas."

I don't think anyone is denying that. But the women and men who don't fit the generalizations number in the millions. That's an awful lot of people who are going to be put in the wrong pigeonholes if public policy is designed around studies like this.

I don't think myself or any of these commenters, or even most of those disturbed by Summers' comments, object to scientific research. We object to complicated nuanced partial results being taken as proof of simplistic gender distinctions.

I don't think anyone is denying that. But the women and men who don't fit the generalizations number in the millions. That's an awful lot of people who are going to be put in the wrong pigeonholes if public policy is designed around studies like this.Ha! But no one is advocating public policy designed around studies like this. The only public policy that reflects a studies like this is meritocracy, in which case the number of men in advanced academia in hard math and science will continue to outnumber women by a large ratio, based on innate factors alone.

We object to complicated nuanced partial results being taken as proof of simplistic gender distinctions.In legitimate statistical analysis, nuanced partial results ARE simplistic gender ditinctions; ie: "men are more likely to have skill at math and science than women," or "MORE men will be scientific geniuses than women, though certain women will excel far beyond the average man."

You are constructing strawmen for your argument. Some bloggers and commenters may be making overly simplistic observations, but I haven't seen anyone assert that it's not possible for a woman to achieve exceptional achievement in math or science, or assert that there aren't individuals in both sexes that reside many standard deviations from the norm.

So your choice to take this argument, in the face of those that are primarily supporting Summers' eminently supportable arguments, seems to reflect a personal need to assert something that doesn't beg assertation: that women like you can be good at map reading.

We believe you. I got nearly a perfect score on my SAT Verbal, even though I'm a man. My math score was significantly lower, yet I accept that I am different from the average patterns within sexes.

And while I may be exceptionally good at verbal skills within both overall populations, and may be as good as some of the best women, there will be more women that have exceptional verbal skill than my male brothers in arms.

And I'm ok with that.

Incidentally, since my ratio of posting when I disagree to when I agree tends to be about or at least one hundred to one, I'll mention that I pretty much agree with your take on both the Summers brouhaha (you already used "kerfuffle," and one hates to repeat) and the scientific issue, as well as the social dynamics.

Oh, and if you're interested, you might take a look at the recent addition to the Blogger configuration pages, which allows for checking the option for making comments javascript comment boxes, if you have any interest in that. Also, we can now change the format for when comments are time-stamped, so, for instance, the date will be clear as well as the time of day.