Nature On Nature And Nurture

Yo, Larry Summers! Pay Attention!

The recent issue of Newsweek International reports on some important findings just published in Nature:

… in recent years, scientists have been finding that the biological rift between men and women is larger than previously thought. To an extent few would have believed a few years ago, the center of gravity of scientific opinion on gender has begun to shift

Say What? (11)

  1. Chetly Zarko April 6, 2005 at 6:26 pm | | Reply

    The difference between races is almost infinitesmal compared to this difference.

    However, I really dislike the chimpanzee comparison, because it implies a lack of brain power to either sex (I’ll let go the debate as to which sex acts more like a chimp) because the differences in genome between chimps and humans is most significantly in brain size and function — I suspect that differences in genome between males and females has far less to do with sections of the code having to do with intellectual capacity. I wonder what the “average” difference in animal kingdom genomes is (for example, are all species roughly 1% variant, or is there variation among the variation across species?)? I’ve seen recent fictional statements on TV saying women are superior because the X chromosome is slightly longer and they have two X’s – the argument being “more is better”.

  2. Mike April 6, 2005 at 7:35 pm | | Reply

    The world will never be on the right track until race is as important as one’s eye color..meaning of no importance.

    Mike

    Cofounder, Anti-Affirmitive Action League

    http://aaaleague.meissenation.com

  3. Mike April 6, 2005 at 7:36 pm | | Reply

    Affirmative. Blah i’m tired.

  4. Richard Nieporent April 6, 2005 at 7:49 pm | | Reply

    As you are well aware of John, equality for the Left has always been a political statement, not a biological statement. And as was pointed out so well by George Orwell, as far as the Left is concerned some are more equal than others.

  5. Laura April 6, 2005 at 8:44 pm | | Reply

    Sloppy language. Would the difference between a male human and a male chimpanzee or a male human and a female chimpanzee still be 1.5%?

  6. actus April 6, 2005 at 10:25 pm | | Reply

    “In light of this startling report, politically correct extremists should at least reconsider their demands for precise gender equity on athletic teams, police forces, ballet companies, pre-schools and science departments”

    Which genes are different? The ones that make us like chimps? or the ones that make us ballet dancers?

  7. notherbob2 April 6, 2005 at 11:09 pm | | Reply

    What intelligent people, of whatever political persuasion, have known for time immemorial: Men and women are different.

    10,000 liberal pinheads dancing on philosophy books cannot change it.

  8. Nels Nelson April 7, 2005 at 4:03 am | | Reply

    Medved writes:

    “[this discovery] suggests that nature, not nurture or sexism, is directly responsible for many if not most of gender-based norms.”

    This is reaching, as the study didn’t look at the function of the genes. Obviously some portion must relate to well-accepted physical and hormonal differences. Others may be leftovers from an earlier time, as seems to be the case with many of our genes, and serve no current purpose. Some might produce differences unrelated to or even at odds with “gender-based norms.” Or perhaps the genes conform to results, and will neatly explain why men dominate engineering and astronomy and women will soon dominate law and medicine. It seems to me the only safe thing to draw from this study is that further study is needed.

  9. Rich April 7, 2005 at 10:50 am | | Reply

    >>>Michael Medved has a non-scientific response to this new data:

    >>> In light of this startling report, politically correct extremists should at least reconsider their demands for precise gender equity on athletic teams, police forces, ballet companies, pre-schools and science departments

  10. Rich April 7, 2005 at 10:56 am | | Reply

    >>>The world will never be on the right track until race is as important as one’s eye color..meaning of no importance.

    >>>Mike

    Cofounder, Anti-Affirmitive Action League

    http://aaaleague.meissenation.com

    ========

    Is race unimportant? Odd, it seems to be the only important thing for blacks.

    It’s a clear case of ‘do what they say’, not what they do, as what they do is the diametric opposite of what they demand of whites.

    Is race unimportant? That’s a good question all by itself. I suggest you ask the poster “Cobra” if race is important. Also ask any of the myriad Affirmative Action and Diversity orginizations.

    Whatever the rules, we need to all be playing by the same ones. I cannot accept that race ‘must be’ unimportant to whites while blacks and immigrants see nothing else. It’s a formula for disaster (although that seems inevitable at this point).

    Rich

  11. Kirk Parker April 11, 2005 at 1:18 am | | Reply

    and it’s making everybody uncomfortable.

    What complete idiots! The new research is certainly not making me uncomfortable, since I had absolutely no stake in the previous Conventional Wisdom on the issue. I suspect I am far from alone in this regard.

Say What?