A few days ago the UK released statistics that once again girls were outperforming boys in high school to which a Financial Times female journalist quipped: "Whenever women outperform men it's a problem that requires national attention. The other way around, no one cares."
This has been going on for decades; girls outperform boys in school and the numbers decline as they enter graduate schools particularly in the STEM sector. The reasons in conducted research is always the same socialization, better behavior, more discipline, more risk adverse behavior etc.
Recently I came across an article in which a 17 year old Hannah Cairo had disproven a math theorem. It reminded me of the fact that DNA was not discovered by Watson and Crick, but their graduate student Rosalind Franklin. Recent groundbreakers include physicist Lisa Randall (superstrings and hyperspace/extra dimensions), Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer Doudna (Nobel prize for CRISPR) and Ilaria Capua (Virologist). All of whom encountered misogyny and discussed in interviews how it slowed down their careers. Randall was already famous, invited as keynote speaker to a conference in Italy where someone assumed she was "Professor Lisa's assistant."
But what if that repetitive research is partially wrong? If no one is researching IQ in longterm studies between men and women, how could we prove that the IQ of women remains high? What if millenia of resourcefulness and finding solutions actually changed brain development? What if and this is what I'm getting at, women arent just as intelligent as men but more intelligent and, therefore, make smarter choices early on?
Something to think about.
No comments:
Post a Comment